Rules for non UK citizens buying houses in the UK?

[RogerS]

Why do so many posts remind me of ...

There are lots of things that I would like to do, things I would like to buy, places to see but I can't afford it. But I don't bang on about it. Nor do lots of other people.

As Frank Zappa said..."Communism doesn't work because people like to own stuff"

So take all the money from all the rich people in the world and redistribute it to everyone on the planet ? I'll go and buy a box of matches with my money.

Life's a *****. And then you die.

 

[Jacob]

.....
So take all the money from all the rich people in the world and redistribute it to everyone on the planet ? I'll go and buy a box of matches with my money.
...

It's difficult to pin down but a rough estimate of the per capita wealth of the UK is about £100,000.
More than a box of matches. A very small number of people "own" a lot of our stuff.

 

[Stu_2]

100 grand each, you say. I'm coming round to this idea, comrade. Paypal gift only, mind.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

 

[Cheshirechappie]

.....
So take all the money from all the rich people in the world and redistribute it to everyone on the planet ? I'll go and buy a box of matches with my money.
...

It's difficult to pin down but a rough estimate of the per capita wealth of the UK is about £100,000.
More than a box of matches. A very small number of people "own" a lot of our stuff.

Some people earn a modest wage, but contrive to scrimp and save, and end up with a decent house - perhaps a redundant chapel they convert into a house themselves. Some people earn much the same wage, and spend it all on booze, **** and the nags. They end up skint, living in 'social housing', paid for by 'the taxpayer'. Some people start businesses, work hard all their lives, pass on their business to their children, who also work hard and grow the business, creating employment opportunities for other people.

If the 'wealth' of all three were pooled and evenly distributed, the businessman would build another business, the chapel-converter would look for another property opportunity, and the drunk would end up even more drunk. Such is human nature, and no political 'ism' will ever change it.

 

[Benchwayze]

I'm off from this thread. Too much politics.

 

[Cheshirechappie]

I'm off from this thread. Too much politics.

There's been 'too much politics' on this thread since about a third of the way down page 1......

 

[Jacob]

.....
So take all the money from all the rich people in the world and redistribute it to everyone on the planet ? I'll go and buy a box of matches with my money.
...

It's difficult to pin down but a rough estimate of the per capita wealth of the UK is about £100,000.
More than a box of matches. A very small number of people "own" a lot of our stuff.

Some people earn a modest wage, but contrive to scrimp and save, and end up with a decent house - perhaps a redundant chapel they convert into a house themselves. Some people earn much the same wage, and spend it all on booze, **** and the nags. They end up skint, living in 'social housing', paid for by 'the taxpayer'. Some people start businesses, work hard all their lives, pass on their business to their children, who also work hard and grow the business, creating employment opportunities for other people.

If the 'wealth' of all three were pooled and evenly distributed, the businessman would build another business, the chapel-converter would look for another property opportunity, and the drunk would end up even more drunk. Such is human nature, and no political 'ism' will ever change it.

Nobody suggests sharing it out equally. It wouldn't be possible - wealth exists in so many forms and as you say it wouldn't stay shared out equally.
But neither should it remain unshared. It's like the Monopoly board game - too much wealth in too few hands and the game stops.
To keep an economy going the wealth has to go around. Taxation and public spending drive the economy and provide services for the common good.
So yes we need austerity, bedroom tax etc but applied to the well off - those with extra bedrooms (property in general) and surplus wealth. Trying to do it to the poor, unemployed etc is unbelievably stupid and as we see - a complete failure. Instead we should be taxing at the top end and increasing benefits, minimum wages at the bottom end, and public spending in general.
UK not so bad - there are places with far worse imbalance of wealth - Nigeria, Russia etc though Scottish land ownership is positively medieval. C'mon Scottsh people - retake the land reverse the clearances what are you waiting for?

 

[MMUK]

I suppose Tory white collar crime largely goes unpunished. Few exceptions of course: Ducks, Brown paper bags, Archer.

Why pick on the Tories? They're all as bad as each other - looking after #1 and the rich while the poor get poorer.

Lets not forget a certain recent government who sold off most of our gold reserve and contrived with the largest "democracy" in the world to start a war they had no right to. But those certain people in charge of that government now have cushy jobs and are effectively above the law. :roll:

 

[MIGNAL]

:roll: :roll: :roll: Yes, Yes Yes. We know all that. But it's especially gratifying when the Tories get caught with the brown paper bags. After all, they took the moral high ground on crime for decades - Blue rinse lot, short sharp shock, Tebbit. I was going to include Roger but he obviously doesn't see a lot wrong in wholesale fraud!

 

[markturner]

I agree with Jacob, it's not non UK residents buying houses that's the problem, it's greedy buy to let landlords. Put a stop to that and there would be plenty of houses to go around.

Most are not greedy - the average return on buy to let is around 5% - 10% .........not much more than you would get from a decently managed portfolio. Sure, the property will go up value, but they are not charging much more in rental than it actually cost them to buy the house....

The problem is the rate of rising prices, its way too high, but really, there no way that it can be controlled, it's a supply and demand market, and completely unmanageable.

The government should start a massive housebuilding program and keep the freehold - rent them out at affordable rates, the asset will increase in value meantime. Would also kickstart the building industry and provide a huge stock of houses for the people.

 

[Random Orbital Bob]

what was that famous quote Maggie once said? Something like,

socialism only works til you run out of other peoples money.

Just thought I'd lob that hand grenade in to the mix....its like the tele this...great fun

 

[markturner]

Never a truer word spoken.....

 

[Phil Pascoe]

Never a truer word spoken.....

Who said it? Cassandra?

 

[Random Orbital Bob]

we should let the unions run the country.......that'd sort the economy out....

 

[Random Orbital Bob]

Or Labour in general......they sure showed Mr Farage who's boss didn't they

 

[MIGNAL]

Let Farage in power and the country will be flooded with German secretaries.
What an absolute classic. Go down in history will that mini interview.

 

[Random Orbital Bob]

Yes...Farage is a joke, I think most people with a functioning intellect acknowledge that. Given what he did to numerous Labour strongholds, particularly in the North, what does that say about the leadership under the "wrong" brother?

I have to say I've met David Milliband and he's a tall, charismatic, sensible thinker and absolutely fabulous orator. In short a totally natural leader. When the party had to choose the leader and they opted for Ed over his brother I realised how unelectable they had become. How can a group of people make such a gargantuan error if their agenda were not driven by the unions. Whether or not you agree with union politics (I happen to like having unions because of the balancing influence they bring to bear) that choice was so unbelievably bad that it will cost the Labour party dearly for many years.

Farage has really struck a chord with his obsession about keeping Britain British. It's thrown all the main stream parties. It's a very unusual time in politics and that's for sure.

 

[rafezetter]

I agree with Jacob, it's not non UK residents buying houses that's the problem, it's greedy buy to let landlords. Put a stop to that and there would be plenty of houses to go around.

Most are not greedy - the average return on buy to let is around 5% - 10% .........not much more than you would get from a decently managed portfolio. Sure, the property will go up value, but they are not charging much more in rental than it actually cost them to buy the house.....

Sorry but having lived and paid rent through all the last 26 years you are wrong. When I was 22 I lived in bedminster, Bristol - not an affluent area and my rent was £35 per week. I was earning just £70 39 hours per week. When I was 18 I lived in Epsom (a more affluent town but in the outskirts) and my rent then was £48 per week.

My rent now is £100 per week not including bills so essentially £130 pw or £520 pm. I earn just over 1k pm. In many places rents have been equal to 40 - 50% of income. If you tell me a 4 bed (6 rented rooms) house costing £249k (that was the sale value last may - I looked it up) has a mortgage of about £1800 pm ...
or a 3bed (4 rented rooms) in Epsom 1988 has a mortgage of £580pm ...
or a 3bed (4 rented rooms) in Bristol circa 1992 has a mortgage of £500pm...

I'll call you a liar to your face.

I can give you figures for all of them and they are average for the local areas.

As I said before, I have privately rented 26 years and have detailed definitive personal knowledge, and 5-10% return is a fallacy.

It might be different in a backwoods, or as said elsewhere jobs are short supply, but in places where there is work / industry / universities - those are the prices you pay.

 

[Random Orbital Bob]

That rental analysis is a little one dimensional. I had to rent my Mum's house after she went into a home with advanced dementia. The family needed the money to help fund the extortionate cost of care. You have to factor in the opportunity cost of rental holidays between tenants (3 months per year was our experience). Also our tenants did an enormous amount of damage to Mum's home for some reason, all which needed to be made good at cost. The agents fees (15% in our case). Various ongoing maintenance bugs that eat into the monthly net. In the end we found it wasn't a clear cut, no brainer line to massive profits by any means and we had no capital costs to acquire the house in the first place. I'm pretty sure there are more efficient ways to invest money.

On the other hand, I'm sure there are plenty of unscrupulous landlords who give a bad name to it all. Much like used car salesmen, tarnishing the ones who are fair and reasonable.

 

[RogerS]

Rafezeteer...you are confusing rent with return on investment. You have no idea what your landlord ...who incidentally is providing YOU with a roof over your head...is paying in the way of mortgage and other expenses. Life's a *****...get over it.