Plans to increase housing in CSP |
Post Reply | Page <1 34567 37> |
Author | |||||
Pants 2 Tight
Chalfontonian Joined: 11 April 2007 Status: Offline Points: 520 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||||
No, China did it at source restricting each couple to only one child. That doesn't sort out the problem we'd then have with an ageing population.
I want a CULL. Blood on the streets. Death of the first born. Book of Exodus style. Edited by Pants 2 Tight - 27 August 2009 at 3:04pm |
|||||
Sponsored Links | |||||
Annoying Jamie
Villager Joined: 26 April 2005 Status: Offline Points: 471 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||||
Death of first born?No they were first they have the most right, lets Cull those families of 8 who all claim benefits and have never and will never work
|
|||||
Pants 2 Tight
Chalfontonian Joined: 11 April 2007 Status: Offline Points: 520 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||||
Yeah, sorry, I hadn't thought that through properly. Thanks for correcting me.
|
|||||
Malc London
Chalfont Snapper Joined: 11 January 2005 Status: Offline Points: 8490 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||||
"The ONS figures show that nearly a quarter of babies in England and Wales in 2008 were born to mothers who came from outside the UK, most commonly women from Pakistan, Poland and India"
That's an extra 197,750 school places needed each year. Then if say 50% are girls and have babies, that's another 247,000 every year once they reach adulthood, from each years figures. That's just from Pakistan, Poland and India.
Perhaps the impact of immigration is higher than first thought.
Edited by Malc London - 28 August 2009 at 12:52pm |
|||||
Annoying Jamie
Villager Joined: 26 April 2005 Status: Offline Points: 471 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||||
Malc you must nt say that! You ll be accused of being racist! |
|||||
Flyboy
Villager Joined: 27 June 2009 Status: Offline Points: 346 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||||
No it didn't. They're what....thirty properties (or less) and I think it was more than two years ago. They were taken up by, mostly, younger Chalfont Saint Peter residents and was nowhere near enough. I suppose if they had laid empty, there would be the customary "what a waste of time" complaints. However, that doesn't address your earlier point. How can this be homeowners moving up the property ladder? These new houses did not have people moving up to larger properties, did it?
And how will that help?
HIPs are not a waste of time and money. Any vendor can include a full structural survey and add a thousand pounds on to the sale price of the property, without any problem at all. In fact there is room within the rules to charge for this separately anyway, to avoid it being included in the stamp duty. It negates the purchaser's need to conduct a search etc., which only helps with the buying process. Yes it does increase the paperwork and switches the burden on to the vendor, but anything that helps purchasers to conduct the process more efficiently, can only be an advantage, can't it?
Well...that's their problem, isn't it. If they want to waste everybody's time and money; estate agents, solicitors and purchasers, it is only right that they shoulder the costs.
And be taxed another way? What are you willing to pay more tax on, to fill the gap?
Edited by Flyboy - 28 August 2009 at 4:12pm |
|||||
Flyboy
Villager Joined: 27 June 2009 Status: Offline Points: 346 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||||
A link would be useful. Also an explanation as to the demographical calculation, wouldn't go amiss either.
|
|||||
Malc London
Chalfont Snapper Joined: 11 January 2005 Status: Offline Points: 8490 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||||
It's all in the original link
|
|||||
ArtB
Chalfont Snapper Joined: 24 April 2005 Location: United Kingdom Status: Offline Points: 3484 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||||
Regretably it doesn't all of the time. If a house is on the market for over 6 months, and that isn't unusual in todays environment, lenders et al will not accept the search data in the HIP. This means it has to be done all over again, however, it becomes the responsibility of the purchaser to get it done and pay for it, not for the vendor to supply it and pay for it.
As long as the house remains on the market the vendor has met the obligation to provide the HIP.
Needless to say this is just something else the has been extremely badly managed.
Art Edited by ArtB - 28 August 2009 at 4:44pm |
|||||
*** If you're not part of the solution, you may be part of the problem!
|
|||||
Malc London
Chalfont Snapper Joined: 11 January 2005 Status: Offline Points: 8490 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||||
It was Xmas 2006 that the notices went up, I think purchases went through during 2007. They are not moving yet, but hopefully they will and these flats will become available again.
An Election will hopefully see a new Government who can manage the economy better and lead us out of recession. Consumer confidence will then lead to more movement in the housing sector.
I am pretty certain the mortgage companies will want an independant survey and not rely on the HIP. I certainly would want my own survey and search. It's just an added cost to the housing market. Why pay for a report that tells you how many energy saving lightbulbs are in the property?
Testing the market is an important part of moving. If you don't know how much your house is really worth then how do you know what you can afford? Not sure how long HIP's are valid, but do you really want to spend hundreds of pounds only to find no-one wants to buy your house or that it's not worth as much as you thought? Houses can be on the market for years before you get a bite.
Perhaps it needs a fairer method of taxation or at least only tax properties over £1m.
Edited by Malc London - 28 August 2009 at 4:58pm |
|||||
Post Reply | Page <1 34567 37> |
Tweet |
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |