38 degreees petition to introduce rent cap in London

Not signed, what a ridiculous set of figures. Next thing will be saying that no 4 bedroom house should be sold for more than 200k in london.
The rent is based on the amount it costs to own the property not some whimsical figure, if that amount gets too high the property remains empty. Rents are high in london because of the jobs that go with living in the area, same in the whole of the uk.

/me goes off to look for a petition to sign that lets me buy 50" TV's for less than £100 because I don't think its fair that only people with more money can afford them.
 
Last edited:
Wow. Rent is as much as that here.

Who will pay for this?

peige said:
/me goes off to look for a petition to sign that lets me buy 50" TV's for less than £100 because I don't think its fair that only people with more money can afford them.
Click to expand...

Pretty much.

At least be realistic. They've got no chance.
 
Landlords receive more benefits off the tax payer than the claimants, imho the fair rents act shouldn't have been repealed, it only led to bubbles and financial chaos.
 
rofl

I live in zone 1 and pay about £360 per week, which is pretty much the going rate for a decent 1 bed flat in the area.. and that's the low end of the market... (you can pay £800-1200 a week, or more if you like)

The cap seems delusional to me,
 
Houses should be for living in - not for making money on.

Every UK adult citizen should be entitled to own one property as their home address. Own two or more and massive charges/taxation should kick in. These extra costs should automatically apply to foreign buyers as (by default) they must already have a home abroad.

The petition in question may not be realistic, however Buy to Let needs to made much less attractive by rent controls/taxation or some other means. Otherwise (with ongoing artificially low interest rates and the relaxation in the requirement to buy pension annuities) there is going to be relentless pressure driving housing prices up and up and becoming ever more unaffordable for those ordinary working folk that need to enter the market. You know - to buy a home to live in.
 
Jez said:
I knew it was low, but not that low :p
Click to expand...

That should be considered as a minimum figure, as it classes gardens, and other tiny "green" spaces as non-urban.

What we should be looking at is the amount of land we have, close to major urban centers, reasonably close to transport and energy links, not on flood plains, not designated as green space.
Oh and then the land has to be for sale, and the council has to give permission to build. Such land is like gold dust.
 
[TW]Fox;27445303 said:
Sure there is - next time you take a flight look out of the window. There is LOADS of room. It's all currently owned by people, though, which is an issue, but there is vast swathes of room to build entire cities if we wanted or had the will.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-18623096

More of the UK is forest than urban!
Click to expand...

Isn't that what we're doing, building new garden cities? That takes ages though and to re-iterate and clarify my point there is no room for much home building in prosperous cities like London - unless you want to build on all the park and common land?
 
I pay more than the figure for a 4 bedroom house for a studio in Dalston. So yeah. Hilarious.
Who proposed this fairytale, Russell Brand?
 
"London should not only be affordable to the rich or to those who are lucky enough to own homes."

I think having a free or subsidised housing is pretty ****ing lucky for the nations Capital! People have never had it so good.
 
All this talk of building new houses...can't help but think that perhaps we should inhabit more of the estimated 500,000 in 2010 alone that were empty!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom