CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » General Edinburgh

"Holiday Flats Edinburgh's Ruin"

(195 posts)

No tags yet.


  1. acsimpson
    Member

    :-O

    Posted 5 months ago #
  2. unhurt
    Member

    Oh god. Imagine living downstairs from that...

    Posted 5 months ago #
  3. Snowy
    Member

    Ground floor, and I think I know the people over the road...

    Posted 5 months ago #
  4. HankChief
    Member

    Only 2 bathrooms would be my worry

    Posted 5 months ago #
  5. There are no "Self Catering Units" on the Valuation Roll for Strathearn Road, so it would seem they are avoiding significant local taxes.

    Posted 5 months ago #
  6. bill
    Member

    I hope they give them just one set of keys to the property:D

    @unhurt We are doing some viewings in Shandon area now. Because of my Livingston commute we want to stay in South West but still not too far from the city.

    Posted 5 months ago #
  7. Min
    Member

    Unhurt "The fact that basically anyone renting is on a short assured tenancy and can be turfed out with two months notice even if it's beeen their home for years is one of the many things wrong with housing in the UK. (The expression on my friend in Bonn's face when I explained why I was so keen to buy not keep renting was a picture. A picture of "but that is RIDICULOUS. Here we have protections! I will probably always rent!")"

    That is very interesting. The last few years the media has been full of people who sound too posh to have ever rented, sneering at people like me who found themselves desperate to buy our own house after a few years of renting. Apparently foreigners do it all the time and we should be more like them. Those crazy foreigners! They are even crazier than I thought!! Imagine living your whole life like that!!! Oh I felt so sorry for them. Didn't even occur to me that perhaps the whole experience was just completely different..

    Posted 5 months ago #
  8. Arellcat
    Moderator

    @Min, from talking with Laid Back over the years I learned that most Dutch people rent their homes rather than own. It always seemed crazy to me: what happens when you retire? What if you can't afford the rent afterwards? Where do you go? But clearly there is a system that works for the population.

    Of course, some of my Dutch friends do have systemic landlord problems, but perhaps it's our system of home ownership that's actually broken. That it can take someone 20 years to afford their first house is just terrible. I have friends who will probably never be able to buy a house.

    Posted 5 months ago #
  9. chdot
    Admin

  10. chdot
    Admin

    “perhaps it's our system of home ownership that's actually broken“

    Yes.

    Various reasons.

    A key one was the VERY political social engineering decision to allow (encourage) the sale of council (and housing association) houses.

    Additionally at a discount - not available to private renters.

    Also without allowing councils to spend money from receipts on new council houses.

    Posted 5 months ago #
  11. Min
    Member

    Hmm, that Guardian article actually makes the situation in Germany sound worse than here. They have to put up three months deposit? I got into a lengthy overdraft/fee loop here just with putting up one and the rent in advance before you ever see a paycheque. (Two actually, one in Oxford and one here) Plus it just glosses over what happens in retirement. Maybe they just don't get badgered about that all the time so don't bother to think about it?

    Also, if the majority of Germans and Dutch rent, who owns all the houses?

    Posted 5 months ago #
  12. neddie
    Member

    34 people in one flat? How is that even legal?

    Posted 5 months ago #
  13. Min
    Member

    Turtles mate.

    Or some sort of dodgy loophole.

    Posted 5 months ago #
  14. kaputnik
    Moderator

    Renting is common in German cities too, but I think it's more akin to a commercial lease, over a period of 10 or 20 years than the "2 months and your out" assurance you get with a tenancy here.

    Posted 5 months ago #
  15. ejstubbs
    Member

    @chdot: A key one was the VERY political social engineering decision to allow (encourage) the sale of council (and housing association) houses.

    Additionally at a discount - not available to private renters.

    Also without allowing councils to spend money from receipts on new council houses.

    Local authorities had always been able to sell council houses to tenants. It was even included as a policy in the Labour manifesto for the 1959 general election (which they lost). No LAs went down that route until Horace Cutler persuaded the then Conservative-controlled GLC to start a scheme in the late 60s. That was shut down by 'Red Ken' in the mid-70s, but was revived when Cutler became leader of the GLC in '77. Then came the 1980 Housing Act.

    I would agree that the really invidious political step in the 1980 act was to prevent re-investment of sale proceeds in new public housing provision. That systematically stripped public capital out of the housing 'ecosystem' and handed assets over to private owners at a discount. Although there were conditions imposed on how soon a property could be sold on, they were laughably short in the context of the lifetime of a habitable property. I don't know what proportion of RtB properties are still owned by the original tenant (though the numbers are probably out there somewhere) but this article in today's Grauniad paints a depressing picture:

    https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/dec/08/right-to-buy-homes-owned-private-landlords

    Public assets sold off cheap and ending up as a cash cow for private individuals. Absolutely in line with the mantra of the 'free' market right wing: privatise the profits, nationalise the losses.

    Posted 5 months ago #
  16. Ed1
    Member

    More councils houses were sold under new labour than the conservatives although would agree was conservatives 1979 policy, even if the cash had been used to reinvest in housing the houses were undersold to buy votes. The longer someone has had subsided rents the subsidised bigger discount they received, a subsidy to just another in a sense. It could be argued any one should be allocated the value of the discount if lived in a council or not as otherwise an arbitrary subsidy criteria.

    Although the sales of council houses and not being allowed to reinvest in housing builds for new council housing may have damaged the housing “social housing”*
    The private rental market was damaged by thatcher’s 1989 ended the rent panels and short assured tenancies at the time thatcher believed this would reduce rents or some she said this meant that unlike commercial leases tenancy are short term and inherently unstable.

    The government has also used interest rates to manipulate housing private create state insurance, by artificially holding interest rates low its a subsidy of the holder of property at the expense of other investment. Its often ignored but the biggest price control is the BOE interest rate ( and yes it is largely set by the gov still as set parameters and can influence the controler), which does not float in a free market way, so for all the rhetoric about market pushing housing prices and shortages, the price is largely determined by the interest rate and the supply is largely determined by state control. Due to the large rate of home ownership and the political implications of market adjustment the government may manipulate interest rate against productive advised to maintain the house bubble. What has been the lost growth etc due to the problem. The other wider economic problem due to the higher ownership rate is that it makes it harder for people to move to areas of employment as more costs associated with moving from an owned property also get sticky prices when market down, no ones like to self at market rate when price goes down so market slows. The higher rate of home ownership also hinder infrastructure projects as have more landlords to negate with.

    Part of the price of a property is the investment aspect ( in part due to government subsidy and insurance) as well as “use” value, this makes houses expensive and worse for geographic mobility, also environment aspect as people may have to commute further than would do otherwise if was just paying for the “Use” part of the property

    In reducing geographic mobility and housing being subsided investment it lower there “use value” aspect proportion of the price.

    There is also the “social aspect”, adverse treatment related to housing status with no economic foundation for example Edinburgh council will put someone as a high priority if they are evicted from a privately owned property, if evicted from a privately rented property a low priority. The lowest priority in Edinburgh’s councils points by property type is evicted from private rental.

    The high ownership rate of houses in uk is not entirely through free market but also state intervention in prices and land use which may have caused social and economic issues.

    Posted 5 months ago #
  17. Arellcat
    Moderator

    Public assets sold off cheap and ending up as a cash cow for private individuals.

    I see that the more generous council houses in the Inch – built in the 1940s/50s, 3 bedrooms, garage etc. – are easily selling for over £200k now. Nice little earner.

    Posted 5 months ago #
  18. cb
    Member

    Also interestingly found out recently (possibly in the Guardian G2?) that Japan is almost unique in that the value of houses decrease over time.

    So there is a much higher rate of knocking down and rebuilding.

    Edit - here:
    https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2017/nov/16/japan-reusable-housing-revolution

    Posted 5 months ago #
  19. gkgk
    Member

    I see they have one in Hillside too, "suitable for parties", for 10 people, with exposed wooden floors throughout. Ouch!

    Reminds me of that time Robin Cook was opposing an HMO upstairs from him.

    Posted 5 months ago #
  20. chdot
    Admin

    Communities are under attack as properties are sold off to become second homes for the wealthy or short-term lets for groups on a budget. Try getting to know your neighbours when they are never there or change every three days. I don’t live in the Old Town or city centre, but I am concerned about what’s happening there. They should be places where real people live – not just a playground for visitors.

    https://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/opinion/tommy-sheppard-edinburgh-needs-to-get-a-grip-on-its-airbnb-craze-1-4633133

    Posted 5 months ago #
  21. unhurt
    Member

    Seems previous owners of my flat didn't want to admit they'd been Air Bnbing it (was told their daughter had been living in it...), but the key locker in the hall I only noticed yesterday suggests otherwise...

    Posted 5 months ago #
  22. ejstubbs
    Member

    @Ed1: More councils houses were sold under new labour than the conservatives although would agree was conservatives 1979 policy, even if the cash had been used to reinvest in housing the houses were undersold to buy votes.

    New Labour cut the discounts available in council areas where there was severe pressure on housing stock. That it didn't do much to damp down the take-up is probably as much a reflection of the dysfunctional housing market that existed through the '90s and up to at least the start of the credit crunch in 2007. In 2012 the Tories put discount rates up again, to a maximum of 60% for houses, 70% for flats (the '89 act limited had discounts to a maximum of 50%).

    A report published in January 2013 showed that 36% of homes sold under Right to Buy in London (52,000 homes) were being let out by councils from private landlords. From being public assets that were funded from public accounts and with revenues returned to the public purse, those properties have been turned in to privately held assets which channel money from the public purse on an ongoing basis into the revenue streams of private landlords.

    Posted 5 months ago #
  23. chdot
    Admin

    The growth of tourism in Edinburgh is being held back by a lack of ambition, too much complacency and claims that the city is has become over-run by visitors, industry leaders have been warned.

    The city’s main marketing body has admitted the tourism sector is “under-rated and can be unloved” - months after heritage chiefs called for action to halt the “commercial exploitation” of its history.

    https://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/our-region/edinburgh/edinburgh-s-tourism-grown-let-down-by-a-lack-of-ambition-1-4640767

    (One) problem is differentiating between tourists/visitors who might mostly come for ‘more acceptable’ reasons - sightseeing/gallery visiting etc., and those coming for ‘partying’.

    It’s not so much a value judgement as a question of whether complaints about party flats etc. are the noisy end of a small problem, or an indication of change in tourism that may disadvantage ‘Edinburgh’ as a place to live/work/visit.

    Posted 5 months ago #
  24. Min
    Member

    Rant incoming..

    I was talking about this last night on the way through the city. Either you have a historic city or you have Las Vegas. But you can't have both.* They even have the statue of Queen Victoria on the National Gallery lit up with colour-changing disco lights ffs. Made me want to boak.

    Plus, and I have probably already asked this somewhere before, but where exactly is all this tremendous wealth going? The city looks horrible. The roads are falling to bits, there is rubbish everywhere and in the summer, more weeds growing up than I have ever seen. Why does such a supposedly rich city look so terrible? No other UK city I have been to looks this bad.

    It is really no good to bang on about The Economy when there is really no sign of it doing any good, in fact completely the opposite. I wasn't born yesterday and no matter how much you try to indoctrinate me, if you can't even manage basic maintenance, I simply don't believe you.

    The fur coat is a fake and far too short to disguise the lack of knickers.

    Get it sorted. Please.

    *This is probably the same level of thinking that comes up with a three lane gyratory as a brilliant compromise which encourages active travel.

    Posted 5 months ago #
  25. crowriver
    Member

    "where exactly is all this tremendous wealth going?"

    Well the Chair of Marketing Edinburgh is apparently "director of communications at Edinburgh Airport". So we can see how he would want to increase visitor numbers, as he says “Why should we curb our ambition? Why should we cap our success? We know that Edinburgh can go further and that we can generate more wealth, more investment, more inclusion, more jobs, more inclusion, more opportunity, more connectivity, more success."

    Success for whom? Edinburgh airport's owners are Global Infrastructure Partners (GIP) : "an infrastructure investment fund making both equity and selected debt investments. GIP is headquartered in New York City and its equity investments are in infrastructure assets in the energy, transport and water/waste sectors. "

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Infrastructure_Partners

    "Adebayo "Bayo" O. Ogunlesi, JD (born December 20, 1953) is a Nigerian-born lawyer and investment banker. Ogunlesi is currently Chairman and Managing Partner at the private equity firm, Global Infrastructure Partners (GIP). "

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adebayo_Ogunlesi

    "In October 2012, Ogunlesi was appointed to the Board of Directors at Goldman Sachs. On July 24, 2014, he was named Lead Director."

    "In December 2016, it was announced that Ogunlesi, among other business leaders, would be part of Donald Trump's Strategic and Policy Forum, which was disbanded on Aug 16, 2017."

    I'm glad for Mr Ogunlesi that Edinburgh is working hard to "generate more wealth, more investment, more inclusion, more jobs, more inclusion, more opportunity, more connectivity, more success." Must be a great feeling knowing that as he traverses Manhattan in his limo.

    Posted 5 months ago #
  26. Min
    Member

    I'm glad for Mr Ogunlesi that Edinburgh is working hard to "generate more wealth, more investment, more inclusion, more jobs, more inclusion, more opportunity, more connectivity, more success." Must be a great feeling knowing that as he traverses Manhattan in his limo.

    I daresay it is technically true. My development will bring a billion jillion pounds into Edinburgh's Economy! It is just that "Edinburgh's Economy" happens to be the name of a bank account in the Seychelles*.

    Meanwhile we are supposed to just accept that the Emperor has a fabulous new outfit whilst ignoring the fact that we are actually looking at the last chipolata in the shop. Anyone who questions this is a dumb, ill-educated peasant who is deeply ungrateful for all the money being made. By people who probably need an assistant to point to Edinburgh on a map.

    *other tax havens are available.

    Posted 5 months ago #
  27. crowriver
    Member

    Min, I believe you misspoke: it's "more wealth, more investment, more inclusion, more jobs, more inclusion, more opportunity, more connectivity, more success.". Got that? Good. Now shuffle along like a well-behaved peasant, will you? Some Very Important People are arriving at the airport soon.

    Posted 5 months ago #
  28. Min
    Member

    "more inclusion, more jobs, more inclusion"

    "War is Peace"

    Okay got it. Sorry, don't know what came over me there..

    Posted 5 months ago #
  29. LaidBack
    Member

    Basically I hear that some Airbnb 'landlords' own as many as 30 properties. Calling them landlords is maybe too polite / grand though.
    Our city is now just one giant party zone.
    Stair lock here broken again.

    Posted 5 months ago #
  30. Stickman
    Member

    I was chatting to a colleague from London yesterday. His brother was working away so put his flat on AirB&B for a few months. When he got back his neighbours said that it had been used as a brothel.

    Posted 5 months ago #

RSS feed for this topic

Reply »

You must log in to post.


Video embedded using Easy Video Embed plugin