Don’t believe in ghosts? You will believe after you’ve met a real-life jinni. You will believe after you have been taken to a rooftop seance at an hour past midnight and seen a glass fly into the air and smash into the face of a sleeping child. You will believe when a young man, who was a champion swimmer, tells you how he was drowned in the waters of Hawkesbay and his body was washed towards the rocks at Sandspit. And all because it rained and he forgot the sadhu’s warning. You will believe!
This week, we read in the newspapers that planning applications have fallen to a 16-year low. According to reports, only 2,456 projects were granted planning permission during the second quarter of this year. Can it really be that low? The Home Builders Federation has warned that if this trend continues it will lead to a reduction in housing delivery of 44,000 homes a year, which would see supply for England fall to levels not seen for a decade. So what is it all about? If we want to get Britain building, shouldn’t we be issuing planning permissions like confetti?
According to Stewart Baseley, HBF Executive Chairman, the opposite has been happening, with the policy environment becoming increasingly anti-development and anti-business, resulting in a sharp fall in the number of homes being built. He added, “Fewer homes being built during an acute housing crisis has clear social implications, in particular for young people, and we’ll end up reducing the economic activity and cost jobs”.
So why is government policy skewed so much towards the ‘no’ lobby. Why at this critical time, has Michael Gove abolished the requirements for councils to have a five-year land supply for housing development? We’ve seen the same attitude towards green energy in which the ‘no’ lobby has been given a veto to block on-shore wind farms and the electricity pylons needed to transport green energy.
If you don’t believe there’s a housing crisis, look around you. Young people sleeping in shop doorways. Thirty-somethings still living with their mums because they can’t afford to get something of their own. Desperate renters in a bidding war with each other, just to find somewhere to live
It’s not just about supply and demand. The housing market itself has become distorted. Young couples cannot get on the property ladder because they are being priced out by a cash-rich buy-to-let market which is subsidized by the housing benefit system. Councils are having to rent back properties on their own estates just to meet their statutory housing obligations. The creation of a new class of middle-people plugging the gap in the provision of social housing, whilst at the same time taking their cut from the housing benefit system.
What has caused crazy state of affairs? What are the solutions? We start with the causes.
The causes of Britain’s 2023 housing crisis
There is no single cause of today’s housing crisis. There is a multiplicity of causes which, over the course of several decades, have converged together to create that crisis. Here they are.
The statutory right to buy
Remember that when statutory right to buy was introduced in 1981, there was no buy-to-let market. Most homes sold under right-to buy remained in owner-occupation until the private rental market opened up in the 1990s. We now have a situation in which, in some areas, up to one half of ex right-to buy properties are owned by private landlords and in many cases rented back to the same local authorities which originally sold them. There is also an intrinsic unfairness in the State gifting massive subsidies to a select group of people whom, by chance, are already in subsidised housing, at the expense of everyone else. Yet the government appears wedded to it. And why should any local authority invest public money in the provision of new social housing if, in three years’ time, they might be forced to sell it off at a discount.
Not enough new homes being built
I suspect that one of the reasons why fewer new homes are being built today than in previous decades, is that housebuilding is no longer as profitable as it once was. There are too many things getting in the way: one of them being shopping-list planning policies which are not only administratively slow but can also reduce the viability of a proposed housing development. It is quite right that any housing development must stand the cost of upgrading the public infrastructure required to serve the new development, including education and social facilities. It is also fair that someone who benefits financially from the grant of a large residential planning permission should contribute to the cost of providing affordable housing to those who cannot afford to buy privately on their estates. The issue is that the process of securing on-site affordable housing through the planning system is too cumbersome. Many housebuilders would quite willingly make a financial contribution towards the provision of off-site affordable housing, just to get the development of the ground, and which the local housing authority could then spend as it thinks appropriate in providing new affordable housing. And wouldn’t many cash-strapped housing authorities prefer a simple cash-injection?
The number of empty homes
According to official statistics, during 2022, the number of long-term empty homes in the UK stood at 248,633, up 5% on the previous year and which has increased annually since 2011 (excepting only the covid years). But it can’t be right that someone can choose to keep a residential property empty and unused whilst other people do not have a permanent home. In many of these cases, there are reasons why the property has remained empty for many years instead of being brought into beneficial occupation and use. An owner may have died or moved abroad or into residential care. Their whereabouts may have become untraceable. Perhaps no one has taken out probate in relation to a deceased’s estate. Maybe a property has remained empty for so long that it has become dilapidated and uninhabitable. But that doesn’t help Britain’s Housing crisis.
What about re-introducing rent controls? Wouldn’t that solve the crisis in rental accommodation?
Sadly no. Statutory rent controls never worked in the quarter century they were in force until their abolition by the Housing Act 1988. And there is no reason to suppose that they would work any better now. Until statutory rent controls were abolished at the beginning of 1990, safe legal advice to anyone thinking of renting out their home was “don’t”. Letting out a residential property carried too much risk. It wasn’t just that you might never get your property back. The rents you received for your property were not in your control. A rent tribunal could reduce it to a derisory level. Not only would you be accommodating another family. You would also be subsidising their living costs, even if they had more disposable income than you did. No one is going to volunteer to do that. It’s why someone working temporarily abroad might have been advised simply to leave their home empty, instead of renting it out to someone else.
What about the proposed abolition of section 21 no fault evictions?
Abolishing section 21 will give existing residential tenants a little more peace of mind, provided they keep to the terms of their tenancy. But it’s not going to make private renting more affordable. When section 21 was originally introduced by the Housing Act 1988, it was to give prospective residential landlords the confidence to let out their properties safe in the knowledge that they could get back vacant possession when needed. Back in 1988, no-fault eviction was not problematic for residential tenants because it was a new market and there were so many alternative properties to move into. Contrast that with the position today, where someone evicted from their existing rent the property might have nowhere else to go.
What about stamp duty holidays? Would that help first time buyers?
The problem with stamp duty holidays is that it leads to a stampede as desperate homebuyers try to get their purchases completed before the holiday ends. It’s great for Sellers, who can soak up the value of the tax-break by increasing property prices.
Here are the solutions which will work
Now the big question.
Will these ideas work in solving Britain’s Housing crisis? You can bet they will!
V. Charles Ward Solicitor and LARTPI
September 2023
Last Sunday I copped a parking ticket. It was a complete surprise to me. I had parked in the same car park on and off for more than 30 years without problem. And isn’t parking supposed to be free on Sundays and public holidays? But not this Sunday.
It was only after I had arrived home that I noticed the little yellow package tucked behind my windscreen wiper. I opened it up to find that I was being punished for not having paid for my parking. That can’t be right? It’s Sunday? Perhaps the traffic attendant made a mistake? Perhaps he had forgotten what day it was? Perhaps he had woken up in the morning thinking it was Monday?
So, I drove back to the car park and looked around to see if there is any obvious sign about charges being introduced for Sunday parking. But there was nothing obvious except in the small print on the machine itself: which had recently been closed down because it was no longer taking cash. And there were no tickets being issued. It is now all pay by phone. Which brings me to another question. If there are no tickets to display, how does a parking attendant know whether someone has paid or not?
When I returned home again with my parking ticket, I searched online to try to find out when the rules for this particular car park had changed, as regards the introduction of Sunday charging, and what signage had been displayed to alert motorists that the rules have changed. But nothing came up. So, I posted a question to an AI platform and got back some Goan food recipes.
As I was not prepared to give up, I bowled in a statutory freedom of information request to the council which had issued the notice, asking the same questions. Now I don’t know how much it costs to answer a freedom of information request. But by the time it has been bounced around between different council departments and someone has spent half a day digging out this obscure piece of information and sending it back to me, I would not have thought that there would be much change out of £500.
As I had nothing to lose, I made representations to the local authority, explaining that I had made an honest mistake. As I expected, the council were quick to reject my representation. Though again, someone would have had to be paid to consider my representation and respond formally to it. If I wanted to take my appeal further, I would have to go to the parking adjudicator.
Appealing to a parking adjudicator is a double or nothing game because, by the time you make your appeal, you would already have lost your 50% discount for early payment. But my personal view is that if you think that a penalty charge notice is unfair and that you have grounds to appeal, you should appeal.
I went back to my AI platform and asked whether lack of adequate signage alerting me to the changes, provided grounds for appeal to a parking adjudicator. This time, instead of Goan recipes, it directed me to a government website, “Key Cases-London Tribunals”.
The first thing I noticed about this government website was that there are so few key decisions. I had been expecting thousands. When I typed ‘Sunday’ into the search- bar, nothing came up. I then browsed the section headed, “Adequacy of Signs and Lines”. There were only six key decisions, most of them dating back to 1990s. Really? So, it did not take me long to browse through the list. The key decision which most closely resembled my predicament was Mary Fairburn’s appeal against a notice issued by the London borough of Bexley, again where there had been a sudden change to the charging regime, to which she had not been alerted, except for the small print on the machine. In that 1997 case, Parking Adjudicator G.R. Hickinbottom expressed surprise that Bexley Council had not cancelled the notice on the basis of a genuine mistake but felt that he had no power to cancel the notice because an infringement had occurred.
So on the basis of Mary Fairburn’s decision, I will not waste time and further public expense pursuing an appeal to the parking adjudicator and will pay the PCN at the discounted 50% rate whilst I still have a few days to do so. Which brings me to a final thought.
I don’t understand the mentality of town centre parking policy. If you really wanted to help struggling local businesses, wouldn’t you want to make it as easy as possible for motorists to park their cars and get on with their shopping? No wonder town centre retail and entertainment chains like Wilco; Debenhams and Cineworld have gone to the wall.
One of the most successful campaigns of the 1970s was the Campaign For Real Ale (CAMRA).
At the beginning of the 1970s, the traditional hand pump and pint of traditionally brewed bitter had all but disappeared from Britain’s pubs. In its place, drinkers were directed to Watney’s Red Barrel or the new lager alternatives. At that time, the only national pub chain still serving in that way in its older establishments was Bass Charrington. There were also some smaller local breweries still serving beer ‘from the wood’ such as Young’s brewery in Wandsworth. In fact, it would have taken only one more legislative step to abolish the traditional pint in its entirety. Bottled and canned beers had already been repackaged in alternative metric sizes, commonly now in sizes of 500 millilitres.
No one is forced to drink real ale. You might not even like it. But the important thing is that CAMRA has given you a choice. If you buy it draught, you can still buy it in traditional imperial units but sadly not if you buy it bottled or canned.
Maybe, like me, you dislike having anything forced upon you as part of anyone’s agenda. Whether it’s lockdowns. Or if it is someone is telling you in what units you can market goods and services. Speaking for myself, I don’t eat magic mushrooms. But if you want to get high on magic mushrooms, that’s fine with me. It’s not for me to tell you what you can or can’t do with your own body. So if I love our traditional system of weights and measures, why should someone else tell me that I can’t use them? I can buy a 454 gramme jar of honey from my local supermarket but I am not allowed to call it a pound of honey. What nonsense is that?
In modern Britain, we value diversity. We value the many different cultures, languages, accents and dialects which we encounter everyday of our lives. We would not dream of asking someone who is born and bred in Yorkshire to change the way they speak. So why do we ‘tut tut’ when someone chooses to talk in terms of feet and inches, pounds and ounces, Fahrenheit instead of centigrade (sorry Celsius)? No-one in history has ever legislated to force the use of traditional British measurements? It is something which grew out of trade and custom. And over many centuries.
Don’t get me wrong. I am not calling for any legislative change. I just object to the fact that 1000 years of history has been airbrushed out of the information which is fed to us daily through our televisions or other media outlets. As though it has been removed as part of a corporate policy. As though our traditional measurements had never existed.
Several years ago, one of the mainstream TV channels provided a series of documentaries in which they recreated life within a 1950’s primary school. It was all authentic except for one thing. When the teacher was measuring the height of the schoolchildren, she spoke to them in terms of centimetres instead of feet and inches. Kilograms instead of stones and pounds. Yes-I know that children today would not know how to use imperial measurements. But if you are trying to re-create a 1950s environment, at least please try to make it authentic. Otherwise, what’s the point?
A couple of years ago, the Johnson government announced proposals to relax the rules on mandated Metrication. But it never came to anything. It was too half-hearted. A nod to the Brexiteers. Even though there is nothing anti-Europe in wanting to preserve something more than 1000 years old and which helps to make us what we are. If we are going to abolish traditional measurements, why don’t we go the whole hog and abolish folk music, morris dancing and piano accordions? Yes-the government has legislated to restore crown markings on pint glasses. Big deal! Did you even notice that they had gone?
Whether you like it or not, there are three reasons why imperial measurements, and their American equivalents, will never disappear completely during our lifetimes:
If like me, you want to celebrate this part of our history, here is something you can do to shout it out.
Do you love sunshine? Then get into your car and adjust the dashboard display so that the temperature is expressed in Fahrenheit instead of centigrade (sorry Celsius). Somehow 38°Celsius doesn’t feel quite as hot as 100° F. Phew!
For me, one of the positives to come out of the repeated covid lockdowns were the changes in the way Britain works. It was the opportunity to adopt hybrid working, which, for most people, did not exist before covid. No more traipsing through the rush hour to a crowded workplace. Instead, we can now choose where to work. And get more done as we don’t waste time travelling. It is fortuitous that the lockdown came in the wake of technical developments, such as a ‘Zoom’ or ‘Teams’, which enables us to meet online instead of wasting half a day travelling through London. Before, we only had conference calls. It was also, during these tiresome lockdowns, that I was able to make my own office arrangements by renting pop-up desk-space at any of the dozens of Regus co-working centres which now exist across the UK. It was also a chance to network and meet other people from a range of disciplines. And surprisingly affordable.
At the moment, my workspace is a small box room at my home. It’s cramped, but I am kitted out with everything I would have if I worked and a proper office, including a large monitor screen, a laser printer and scanner. If it’s a sunny day, I can even take my work out into the back garden and set up my equipment. I love sitting under the palm tree. It provides a bit of shade so I can see the screen. I don’t have a secretary. Nor do most property professionals these days. But I don’t care. I still have the ability to dictate my work in volume using Microsoft voice-dictation. It’s why it’s only taken me an hour to write this piece. Some people find that my dictation disturbs them. But when I’m working at home that ain’t a problem.
Do I feel lonely? Nah! I don’t have time to feel lonely. There’s just too much going on in my life. Although I am already well past retirement age, I don’t want to retire. What else would I do? Walk a golf course with other retirees? No thank you. I’d rather do this. Although I’m still at the conveyancing sharp end, I love to write about what I do.
During June 2021, my book, Essential Law for Cemetery and Crematorium Managers became Amazon’s number one best-selling business-law book. Even if it was only for a few days. But although other books, including Legal Profession: is it for you? have also enjoyed significant success, not all my self-publications have sold as well as I would like. Usually, when a book doesn’t sell, it’s because of problems within the book itself. It is why I am currently working on a relaunch of a personal memoir, which I co-wrote with my partner, Farida J Manekshah, back in 2016. It was my first self-publication, and to be quite frank, I can quite understand why no-one wanted to buy it. But maybe things will be different with a comprehensive re-work of the text, a new title and an exciting professionally produced front cover. Yep! It’s all gonna change. Yes sirree. It’s all a learning curve and I’ll let you know as soon as it comes out.
In the meantime, please take a look at Legal Profession: is it for you? You don’t have to be a lawyer to enjoy reading it. Thank you.
BRUCE AND HOLLY 