Chesterfield Online Forum
General Category => Chesterfield Discussion => Topic started by: Pete on August 05, 2012, 06:21:39 PM
-
Saw this on Chesterfield Post - "An innovative scheme, which aims to help first time buyers in Chesterfield to get onto the property ladder, is up for approval by the Council tomorrow (Tuesday 31st)."
Anyone heard anything about this? Slacker?
-
If you read the article it involves the council standing guarantor on loans that will allow first time buyers to effectively get 95% mortgages.
Allegedly the council stands to make money on the deal because it can borrow money at a very cheap rate and then loan it out at better terms.
Everyone seems to think it's a good idea though it's only been recently piloted so presumably the pitfalls of re-possesion have yet to be explored.
-
Yes, I read the article, but it says "...up for approval by the Council tomorrow."
Just wondered how it fared - approved or not approved?
-
The minutes aren't on the website yet but I think you can take it as Red (sic) that if the Leader of the Majority party is on a public website saying we are going to do this then the lobby fodder like Slacker voted in favour.
-
Thanks Jon.
>> lobby fodder like Slacker voted in favour
Behave... ;)
-
Behave... ;)
Why?
In 2015 Slacker (and a number of his colleagues) will want to be re-elected. For that he (they) needs the nomination and organisational backing of his party. Do you REALLY think they are going to vote against one of their leader's pet projects?
Local politicians vote along party lines just the same as national ones do. It's what is wrong with politics.
-
>> Why?
Oh, alright then, don't behave... ::)
-
Why?
In 2015 Slacker (and a number of his colleagues) will want to be re-elected. For that he (they) needs the nomination and organisational backing of his party. Do you REALLY think they are going to vote against one of their leader's pet projects?
Local politicians vote along party lines just the same as national ones do. It's what is wrong with politics.
I thought it was a national initative, one of these schemes the Govt keep announcing where they let local councils decide if they want to opt in or not. Similar schemes exist for waste collection and so on. In this case, the rules have been changed by cental Govt to allow it to happen, but the local Govt run the scheme.
Sounds like a good idea but on its own, won't have a massive impact on the houing market.
-
I don't know enough detail to pass comment which is why I haven't.
I do know that various grants and schemes come from government (eg external insulation cladding, solar panels) but the goalposts keep getting moved. Sometimes you can increase your popularity by not taking them up as the postcode lottery leads to part of an estate getting done and part not (as where I live.)
-
I don't know enough detail to pass comment which is why I haven't.
Did you vote in favour?
-
Not aware of it going to full council, may have only gone to cabinet so far
-
My aunt who is trying to sell her house mentioned this only yesterday - she has everything crossed that it gets the market moving as for me I'm hoping it's not going to plunder people into debt in the future.
-
POST DELETED AT USER'S REQUEST
-
True, but theres nothing wrong with owing 95% or even 100% as long as you can afford to repay it, and thats the real problem. Whether its banks or the tax payer thats lending the money, the people borrowing it need to be checked to make sure they are capable of the repayments, which wasn't always the case before.
Its important because without schemes like this, the housing market stalls and its unreasonable to expect a young adult to save £25000 for a deposit, even more so if they are repaying student loans, etc, unless of course we have a massive collapse in the housing market to make them more affordable.
I think growth in the housing market is important though. Not only do house builders benefit, but there are the associated trades....gardeners, decorators, furniture sales, carpet suppliers, removal firms, etc, etc, and of course ME. Add to that, the fact that people use their property as part of the pension plans, or they buy and let second properties because they don't want a pension fund. So much of the economy is linked to the housing market, so a collapse would be a disaster.
But yes, the whole credit crunch started with poor control of mortgages in the US, so needs to be avoided. (Though as a sole trader who previously self-certified his mortgage, it makes it more difficult for me.)
-
The proposal was passed by Cabinet on 31/7.
-
Cheers Jon
-
POST DELETED AT USER'S REQUEST
-
The latest idea being pedalled to help the housing crisis, is for councils to be made to sell all their more expensive properties meaning they could afford to build more cheaper ones.
The figures in the report do seem a little optimistic in my opinion, I wonder, Slacker, do you know or could you find out, the average value of the housing stock held by the council.
Also, who's going to buy all these "more expensive", ex council houses.
-
POST DELETED AT USER'S REQUEST
-
I stand to be corrected but I think the idea was that a council like Westminster (plucking the names out of the air here) sold their 'expensive' council houses and give the money to Tower Hamlets who could build cheap ones and re-house some of Westminsters poorer tenants. Critics say it amounts to 'economic cleansing'.