The recent news that the Yorkshire Dales National Park is to permit only locals to buy housing surely must be flawed.

I can appreciate how difficult it is for first time buyers to purchase in their home village/area but isn't that the same for first time buyers everywhere? Salaries have just not kept up with spiralling house prices.

As a regular visitor to the National Parks the effects of people buying properties for weekend cottages or holiday lets is all too apparent. The school has closed down because there aren't enough children and the local shop has closed because the outsiders shop at supermarkets on the way to their holiday lets. I am as guilty as the next on this one but I also know that tourism brings large amounts of money to the country economy.

Will this strategy been backed by some government subsidy because if not which builder is going to build in an area where his profit will be reduced by lack of market forces?

Anybody's thoughts?

This idea is seriously flawed. If the problem is that people are buying second properties and local people can't buy a first or main home, then the answer is not to disallow people from buying. I would prefer a solution whereby people with second homes have to pay a levy on council tax, making it a disincentive to buy a second home.

More affordable housing.

It's hard enough trying to get on the property ladder these days without all the houses being taken by people buying second homes so I can certainly see the logic behind this idea.

Not sure if it's the best way of doing it, but to be fair I don't think I can think of anything much better.

Sadly, this does not work. There was a documentary several months ago regarding cityfolk purchasing second homes by the beach, and the general consensus was that a council tax bill of £1000 wasn't going to prevent someone spending £150,000 on a second home.

Originally posted by fhain29
If the problem is that people are buying second properties and local people can't buy a first or main home, then the answer is not to disallow people from buying. I would prefer a solution whereby people with second homes have to pay a levy on council tax, making it a disincentive to buy a second home.

I think it's a good idea if only locals are allowed the buy the properties - I don't want village life to end.

But what I do find strange is that it must be the country bumpkin folk who are selling these properties to townies...surely they should be more selective in who they sell to, or are they happy to make a profit by selling on to rich townfolk before bleating on about how their village is dying on its feet?

To come back to the point of the thread if only locals are allowed to buy, then:

(a) they aren't allowed to own more than one property each

(b) they are only allowed to resell to another local family, at a suitably reduced rate.

To be honest surely the most serious flaw in the policy is that it only pertains to new homes. Won't this cause the Park Authority to come under increased pressure to allow building where they might otherwise have refused?

In a free market people should be allowed to live where they want. The market dictates the price. And it's a bit rum of young couples complaining they can't buy a house when it was their parents who have sold to Manchester or Leeds yuppie. The mistake was the right to buy. Of course a property owning society is great, but the government should have given loans or tax credits to people to buy private property, not deprive local authorities of their housing stock.

I also believe it would be illegal under the terms of the EU treaties to prevent people buying property or favouring others (free movement of people). Denmark has a special opt out from Maastricht which prevent foreigners buying second homes there. The UK would need to do the same. I think Poland has negotiated a similar thing (to stop ecpelled Germans returning to their formwe homelands).

Affordable housing is all well and good, but you can't build new housing estates in the Dales. The eco-terrorists would trash the building sites or build tree houses in the bracken ;-)

No, taxing second home dwellers can work. It depends on how the tax is. 1,000 pounds won't put off a wealthy businessman, but 10,000 pounds might, or a surcharge on stamp duty for second homes might work.

I think the answer is to restrict the number of properties that can be let in the area, plus charge extra council tax for the 2nd properties that are left vacant when they are used as holiday homes for a few weeks.

I think that will help ease the problem, the current 'solution' is just a bit too much. Only being able to sell to locals who are already cash strapped FTB's?

What would happen I wonder if somebody from outside the area wanted to move into the area (maybe a family) - how would they get past the 'selling to locals' bit - all seems a bit redneck to me, the will be more inbred then the sheep that roam the hills!!

:D

Originally posted by 1Man&hisBMW
What would happen I wonder if somebody from outside the area wanted to move into the area (maybe a family) - how would they get past the 'selling to locals' bit - all seems a bit redneck to me, the will be more inbred then the sheep that roam the hills!!



:hihi:

Certainly smells of 'local houses for local people' syndrome to me.

I believe that certain professions of which teacher was mentioned can by-pass the rule.