I just cannot get my head around the fact that Claire Kober is so brazenly promising tenants will be looked after in the HDV yet won't put that in writing. It is either the ultimate in double speak or stupid.
Or is it?
By the time the HDV has rebuilt the first new block ready for occupation by tenants decamped to other places, I think they are counting on the law having changed to means test tenants. So Councillor Kober will look like the most amazing socialist ever when she announces that perhaps as many as 500 families that were on the waiting list are to be given tenancies in the new developments. How will they be able to do this? I suspect that there won't be too many tears shed by Londoners when they put a ceiling on the income you can have whilst occupying a council flat. It's the next logical step in the war against social housing and our HDV toting councillors know it.
Am I bid a combined income of sixty thousand pounds to start with? £70K?
What, you mean a wheeze like thousands of self entitled private landlords (including many politicians) getting paid housing benefit from our taxes rather than that money (£9.3bn) being used to build new council homes so people are protected from those greedy private landlords?
Oh that's just another aspect of the whole residential property letting wheeze.
I can see why someone might call them greedy but the problem is that it's just become so natural for this to be. I mean one day I might come into some capital and want to become a landlord and live off the income of the property I own so perhaps I should keep quiet about questioning this, like everyone else.
So that's £910pcm. If you can sublet your 3 bed council flat and not get caught, that's £1000pcm you pocket and no maintenance cost risks. I'm just pointing out that it is natural for market disparities like that to be arbitraged.
Anyway, depending on how you see your glass that's either a great deal for council tenants or a complete shafting for private renters.
There has to be a formula for fair renting rates that still allows landlords to be paid fair rental as well but I suspect it will have to take into account the incredible capital appreciation (often more per year than the achievable rent) that they also participate in. I suspect this means "no borrowing to let" which the aspirational amongst us are going to see as perhaps affecting them one day. It's hard to hit just the buy-to-let (not yet rich) landlords and not the already-own (rich) landlords. By definition that would be unfair.
But our MPs are residential property landlords, not high street businessmen. If we accept that they will operate primarily in their own interests without so much as a whimper then what honestly can we expect?
We have many first time buyers supporting the London Market, it just so happens that they reside in China.