Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
Haringey 3rd highest loss of houses from conversion to flats over last four years
Whilst my interpretation of this data needs checking, the Focus on London report, appears to show that Haringey is experiencing some of the highest levels of conversions of houses to flats in the capital. (See Table 11 on page 161 of the chapter on Housing from the Focus on London report).
As some of us are beginning to look more deeply at conversions in Harringay, it raises the question in my mind of why this is happening in our borough. Are there good social or economic reasons or is something else driving these stats?
As some of us are beginning to look more deeply at conversions in Harringay, it raises the question in my mind of why this is happening in our borough. Are there good social or economic reasons or is something else driving these stats?
Tags for Forum Posts: hmo, hmos, housing, illegal conversion
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Nicola Key on
-
I live in a 1 bed flat that is converted from a house. I'd love to have a house with a garden but finances stop this. If people who own houses are prepared to sell them at prices that are affordable to the average buyer then there wouldn't be the drive to make flats. It's not just "greedy developers", it's the fact that larger properties are priced out of the reach of average people.
The reason for the high conversion rates is that it is one of the few areas that this hasn't already been done to.
-
Permalink Reply by StephenBln on
-
One of the absurdities of the housing system in the U.K. is that instead of being seen as a necessity (something that should be available to the majority), a home is only seen as a commodity and an 'easy way' or in fact the only way for some, of producing wealth.
This is IMO one of the main failures of British Society today.. The endless cycle of people moving up and down the so-called housing ladder which inflates prices, ruins city life, is not good for the environment and in the end has caused the financial problems currently seen.
I would gladly explain my views if anyone is interested, but I do get accused of being on 'my soap box'.. - so haven't done so yet..
-
Permalink Reply by Danzigger on
-
I'm actually quite interested. I see your point, and agree with it to an extent, but then what are we supposed to do about it? I didn't buy my house as an investment, but I'll certainly not sell it for anything less than the best price I can get. And while I will try to buy my next house for the lowest price, I will pay a premium for a nice area/bigger garden/helicopter landing pad or whatever. That's just how it works.
How could any housing market be otherwise?
-
-
Thanks for answering - that's exactly my point - why do you need to keep moving..?
Imagine buying a home in which you could bring up your children or give a home to your dogs and cats and actually staying there.. If everybody tried staying where they lived instead of moving every five-ten years, the 'housing market' as you call it would cool-down. It would also be better for neighbourhoods, make it easier to find affordable homes.
Most of my friends here who have bought houses/apartments, bought them for good - to pass them on to their kids.. or to enjoy living in and not use them as pure speculation or to try and make as much money in the shortest possible time... that's what we do.. not this - dab a bit of paint on here and there then add a hundred thousand on to the price - It's a receipe for disaster and now the s has hit the fan ...
The bad quality of what some in the U.K. pay hundreds of thousands for just amazes me..
Go to a dinner party with Brits and they always get on to the subject of 'how much 'their property' (actually the Bank's) is worth' .. some have nothing else to talk about.. A real obsession
-
Permalink Reply by John McMullan on
-
They do not! I've said this to you before. They get absolutely smashed, diss their boss, talk about sex and play cards. No English person I know is so gauche as to talk about house prices.
-
-
@John - lol .. then perhaps they only do it abroad...
-
-
I don't keep moving to make money, nor for improved social status. My first, rented flat in London was a nasty dump above a shop on a main road in Walthamstow: at the time it was all I could afford. As life has gone on and improved, I have been able to afford to live in nicer places. Who wouldn't want to live in the best home they could afford? A stagnant housing market wouldn't improve conditions for first time buyers and low-income families who would likely be stuck in rented accommodation probably in worse conditions than they get in an active market.
-
-
Strange - a stagnant housing market works elsewhere.. I wonder why?
Probably because people are not forced to buy flats over shops because that's all they can find.. What a lousy way of doing things..
-
Permalink Reply by Liz on
-
I suspect that the reason renting in Europe is a better option is that the law protects tenants much more than it does here.
Have a look at the Shelter site and see how tenants are at the mercy of landlords with very little come back; from witholding deposits to getting evicted with virtually no warning because your landlord failed to pay the mortgate.
You cannot deplore the attitude of British people to property because you are not comparing like for like. The laws that undoubtedly protect renters in Europe simply do not exist here, making for a market skewed towards the interests of the landlords. The explosion of grotty bedsits is because a landlord can make a lot of money, charging what they like after the disappearance of fair renting.
It is a scandal and many of us campaign against it but it is government policy to support the developers and landlords over the people. I would dearly love to see systems of tenant protection and social housing that are more in line with European norms but no political party that I know of is committed to changing the status quo.
There's a lot more to it than dinner party conversations and social snobbery.
-
Permalink Reply by Alan Stanton on
-
I wonder, are we thinking about a "stagnant" or a "stable" housing market?
A stagnant market presumably means that owners are delaying selling their homes. This could be for a variety of reasons ranging from negative equity to property speculators 'land-banking' i.e. hoarding land to raise the price artificially.
A stable market presumably means that - taking inflation into account - prices remain relatively stable. So the existing housing stock is bought and sold without huge profits being made; and individuals' decisions about borrowing and future repayments rest on a reasonably sound basis. Including by first-time buyers.
My worry is that the "active" and "rising" housing market people are hoping for is a return to what they'd come to expect before the Credit Crunch. In other words, constant house-price inflation which priced-out an increasing proportion of Londoners from ever having decent homes. It encouraged poorly managed buy-to-let schemes; and the slumlord millionaires who turn homes into sub-standard hutches.
It also fed a fantasy that everyone can get rich by buying property which costs little or nothing to maintain; and will always rise in price and sell for a handsome profit. Or which can be used without risk as collateral for large loans - so-called "releasing the equity".
Of course, this benefited some people and made them a lot of money. As long as other people were prepared to come in on the scheme with new money - either from their savings or new borrowing. Does the name Charles Ponzi come to mind?
It also helped create the fiction that we were seeing "economic growth"; when what we were really experiencing was a debt mountain and speculation in a commodity which is essential to all our lives.
-
-
Thanks for you points Liz and Alan.. you both said what I wanted too.. and I agree wholeheartedly with both of you.. There are always going to be people who can't afford or don't want to buy property - why should they be forced to live in slums.. ?
The UK while continually carping about EU regulation has swallowed the US style of running society, hook, line and sinker without batting an eyelid.. but just because the US has a (similar) language, it doesn't mean that our aspirations are the same as theirs..
The Mayor of London, wants to stop EU regulations on financial markets because it will be in his words 'bad for London' - less jobs for those with often outrageous salaries. Sadly both the two major political parties seem just to want get back to business as usual asap. When will that they realise that to produce real wealth you need 'to make things' and not just push money backwards and forwards across continents with a click of a computer key.. It's time to get back to producing things that people want to buy..
Britains industrial capacity has been neglected so much - IMO it's hard to see how the country will be able to finance even a 2008 standard of living in ten years time..
-
-
1. 70% of my street is now flats.
2. My "house" was converted back from 6 bedsits in the 80s (we found a note in one of the walls we removed from a little girl explaining what a tip it was before her dad got to work).
Yes, the housing economy is responsible for them being converted BUT it's actually excessively high around here. So much so that our MP is involved in tackling the "problem"...
© 2024 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
