Saving Swanage from second homes
I've just bought a house here which was a second home and want to put some sort of covenant on it so that if I decide to sell it can't be used as a second home again.
How do you go about it? And what's the best way to define who can buy it? Are there always loopholes?
Thank you
Posted by Anonymous to swanageview at 7:48 PM
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
45 comments:
Probably best to brick up all the windows with sea views and pray for the economic collapse of the economy.
It seems sad to me when bigoted individuals seek to impose their wishes on future generations in perpetuity. If I lived in Wolverhampton or the like I can imagine me aspiring and striving for a second home in Purbeck and woe betide anyone wishing to stop me.
http://www.purbeckhousing.co.uk/
Use covenants, or a similar legal thingy, mebbie they could advise you.
When I think about it, some of the most influential, interesting and most supportive of Swanage, people I have met, were second home owners.
The economic collapse of Britain is already upon us. Once this government stop masking the debt crisis' effects on the economy, through borrowing against our future, you will see the housing bubble finally begin to collapse, even in Purbeck, one of the last areas in Britain to see its effects.
Your idea, to covenant and restrict the future resale price of your home in perpetuity, is worthy, but how would it work? Perhaps if Thatcher had capped (as you propose to do) the future value of every council house it sold off to private owners, we wouldn't be in half the housing mess we are in today? After all, these homes were built with subsidies from the taxpayers, in order to provide affordable housing, so such a cap would have been morally justified. Rail against Maggie for it, but I do not remember much successful objection coming from Kinnock et al.
Good luck. Should you find a means to do this, why not pressure PDC to impose a similar covenant on any of the affordable homes it will license to be built as part of the Purbeck Housing Scheme? It seems to me, if you or your estate are prepared to take a massive loss on your home, PDC should follow your example.
'It seems sad to me when bigoted individuals seek to impose their wishes on future generations in perpetuity. If I lived in Wolverhampton or the like I can imagine me aspiring and striving for a second home in Purbeck and woe betide anyone wishing to stop me.'
If I lived in Wolverhampton, perhaps I would rather live here permanently!
So previous poster,9.24 you do not consider your own views as being bigoted ? funny that!
Those influential and interesting people would be even more supportive of Swanage if they rented a holiday home rather than buying one.
Like any environmental problem, individuals never see themselves as being to blame. No, it's the fact too many other people are doing it.
It's not being bigoted, it's being greedy. Greed, brought to us by Thatcherism; taken to new heights by New Labour. There's plenty of blame to go around.
Look at what's happened to property values in Dubai, Florida, California, Costa del Sol to see what is coming here once this government's economic shell game runs out of shells.
If you are interested in only yourself, then sell your property now, rent, and wait till after the plunge to get back in, just as smart investors did when Northern Rock collapsed.
Cant people do what they wish with their homes? its up to them unless this rancid Govt: has all ready bullied its way in that aspect of our lives. Surely its not greed by this poster if they wish to leave it to locals only then, I think they are putting morals before profit well done!
One of my familly members put a convenant on their house NOT to let the NT buy it so it can be done.
I have also removed the NT from my list of charitable giving and from my list of bequests (I was a great supporter) due to the antics they allow to happen on part of Studland Beach.
Talking of the NT and covenants. I believe someone left land in the village green at Studland to the National Trust. What did they do? Sell it for building.
Sounds like an empty gesture to me or worse. There are lots more properties for second home buyers to choose from so it achieves nothing as they can simply buy one along the road and there is no change to the supply available for local buyers.
It could in fact turn into a way of rewarding the behaviour you are trying to discourage. If it is to have an effect it has to make "locals only" homes cheaper and so those who do not make such a covenant can sell for more than those who do.
whoopee..I didn't start this post, pleased to see someone else has!
It cannot be right, moral, what ever we want to call it that eg 70% of houses in Worth are not homes. They are empty for much of the time. At the same time there is a plan to build hundreds if not thousands of new houses in the Purbeck area. No more unaffordable housing should be built. There are many many of these houses already vacant, and up for sale. Land is precious. Do not waste it. I am assuming that PDC does look on this blog.
It's not environmentally or ethically right to allow people to buy second homes. If you want to spend time in Purbeck rent one of the many holiday cottages for the weekend. There are many people in Purbeck, and indeed in the whole country, who cannot afford to buy their own homes. There are also people out on the street without a roof over their heads. And all along more land, and increasingly more precious wildlife areas, are being destroyed to build new homes. To the original poster, if you want to do the right thing, sell the house and be happy with the one you've got.
Sorry, thought that you had bought house as second home. Please dismiss last line!
'When I think about it, some of the most influential, interesting and most supportive of Swanage, people I have met, were second home owners.'
Why not name them ?
due to the antics they allow to happen on part of Studland Beach.
Am I missing something? what antics?
Sorry if Im'm a bit dim.
'Am I missing something? what antics?'
http://www.bournemouthecho.co.uk/news/2167287.the_naked_truth/
'Am I missing something? what antics?
Sorry if Im'm a bit dim'
Perhaps you are new to this area, or a second home owner. The antics are sometimes extremely unpleasant, but more often than not, they can be highly amusing ! Mainly naked blokes rampage the dunes, once a couple were seen dressed as knights with shields and swords,clothed only from the waist up, and leaping from dune to dune. The Studland dune National Trust rule is that men must not be clothed from the waist down. In extreme weather conditions they wear wooly hats! There are strange antics goin' on up on those dunes, and its all true.
Ah I see having sex in the dunes, not so good, but on a lighter note they are having more luck than I am.
If all else fails, dress up as a Viking, take to the dunes, and your luck will return !
"If you want to spend time in Purbeck rent one of the many holiday cottages for the weekend"
.... but what's a holiday cottage if it isn't a second home? Ban second homes and your holiday home market disappears.
Not unless, as some locals do, and let their house out for the summer, and camp in Purbeck. Fantastic idea for local people to earn a bit of extra income. Not for everyone, but good for some.
Bring back B & B, a campsite for Worth and Studland, eco holidays, tipi/yurt camps with workshops that encourage eg Permaculture courses. Wales, Devon, Cornwall are all good at this. The Isle of Purbeck is a perfect situation for taking advantage of this. Encourage visitors, to contribute to our economy.
Support the train link, encourage families to visit..for low carbon footprint holidays, use train and bikes. Promote Purbeck as special, high on the list for ancient history, dinosaur footprints, but low on carbon footprint.
Encourage people to live, work here all year round and recognise the importance of supporting our local economy. Source products and services locally. Encourage and support apprenticeships in sustainable building, solar/photovolteics, low impact building, wind power.
Avoid driving along the A351 to access a loaf of cheap bread.
Spend more quality time in Purbeck.
Support local businesses
Make a list of all the things we need to become a thriving community. If businesses such as choco co can make a success, then others can too.
Think positive !!
Let's not vegetate lets invigorate !!
If all else fails..plant a tree.
That's why I asked for advice about wording. I don't want to hurt the tourist industry, just people leaving houses empty.
A lot of second homes stand empty for most of the year. The ones either side of where I am renting have been used less than two weeks each in two years. Both are family-sized houses and both are falling into disrepair.
High on Dinosaurs, low on carbon!
I like it!
Equally you can walk around London and marvel at the hunks of property worth £M's which look like squats.
Often the second homes in Swanage were used more years ago, but the kids have grown up now (or the like), yet the economic necessity to sell is not there. A tax break for these people could do the trick. There was probably little tax planning when they bought these family homes for say £70 000, now they are worth 5 times that the capital gains even with relief is going to hurt.
People do point out there are a lot of second homes in London. How can we expect anything to be done when MPs set the example? But as a percentage of all homes it it is not in the same league as rural places like ours. There are still a few million other residents to keep post offices and schools open.
Capital gains might hurt but won't inheritance tax be far higher? You'd assume being a second home that the allowance would be used up on the first house. At least that might force them to sell
How exactly would you phrase the legislation forbidding anyone to own two homes? Can you suggest the wording in a way that is not full of loopholes and ways round? How, for example do you stop someone using a company to own it? These things fall apart as soon as the practicalities intervene- regardless of the morality.
The above post is spot on.
Anyway, wouldn't any such restriction on home ownership, passed by a local authority, be overturned by other UK legislation, and most certainly by Brussels (e.g. Human Rights legislation)?
it's been done in the Lake District, but only on new builds.
Wouldn't the opposite be better, if you want a second home you need to have one built here?
On what land?
Football Club, Middle School, Cricket Club, Ballard Down, Grammar school could all be abandoned or relocated and sold in plots for a lot of money to be used replicate and enhance the same elsewhere. The car parks could be built over to encourage park and ride. Perhaps the many churches could be encouraged to operate out of one building.
While we are at it, why not build on Durlston Country Park? Who needs it?
I am being sarcastic. The last post made me do it.
How is it that when councils or government want to do something they find/adapt the policies to achieve it, even if its something 'we' don't want. But if 'we' ordinary people want to do something for the benefit of our community, ie discourage second homes, we are told that it's impossible and it can't be done. !!
"How is it that when councils or government want to do something they find/adapt the policies to achieve it,"
I am sure that the government want the present economic unpleasantness to be cured, all children to receive a good education, all of us to enjoy good health and everyone to be well housed. That way they could go on getting elected for ever. If governments can do whatever they want to do we would not have problems in these areas would we? They can only do the possible, indeed politics is the art of the possible.
The Welsh Assembly has been given the raise the level of council tax on second homes. I imagine if they had figured out a way to ban them that would have been included in the measure. The document concerned says is what it says:
"The LCO will assist the Welsh Assembly Government to deliver on its ambitions, set out in One Wales, the Welsh Assembly Government’s Programme of Government for 2007-11, of ensuring that housing need is
met and that there is improved access to housing. In particular, One Wales contained three related commitments to:
• suspend the Right to Buy in areas of housing pressure;
• address homelessness;
• provide local authorities with the powers to address the impact of
second homes in areas of housing pressure."
This appears in "MEMORANDUM FROM THE WELSH ASSEMBLY
GOVERNMENT
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW: DEVOLUTION, WALES
The National Assembly for Wales (Legislative
Competence) (Housing and Local Government) Order
2010"
You often see adverts that say a house can only be bought by someone who has worked in the area for three years. But if they move away would they be obliged to sell their home?
The convenant would still mean they can only sell it to someone who has worked in the area for three years but I'd imagine there is nothing to stop them holding on to the house - and I assume passing it on to their children. So the house would still be a holiday home and unavailable to local families for decades.
Does anyone have any experience of this? Does it only work on 'shared ownership' houses
Shared ownership often means that the owner still pays rent on the portion of the home (which is generally more than 50%) owned by the housing association, so hanging onto a shared equity home could become expensive if left vacant - and usually it cannot be let to third parties. The resale price may not be as good as a home on the open market due to the restrictions - as is the case with retirement properties. Shared equity sounds great but it has limitations.
I have read the posts here.
I would never want to live in your close minded town.
I am sure you are happy about that.
'I have read the posts here.
I would never want to live in your close minded town.
I am sure you are happy about that.'
Its a shame you think we are a close minded town, you would be welcome to live here.
How is it close minded to debate both sides of the seconds home argument?
You'd never get that in the local papers because it annoys estate agent advertisers
Local papers?
Ha.
Ha Ha Ha.
I didn't say NEWSpapers
'The convenant would still mean they can only sell it to someone who has worked in the area for three years but I'd imagine there is nothing to stop them holding on to the house - and I assume passing it on to their children. So the house would still be a holiday home and unavailable to local families for decades.
Does anyone have any experience of this? Does it only work on 'shared ownership' houses'.
I know of a current situation in Swanage where an ex-LA house, with covenants, is being sold to someone who meets all the criteria to buy BUT he is not going to be living in it but renting it out!!!
Covenants don't seem to stand up at all.
Good luck!
Post a Comment