/Tory-Labour-400x310.jpg)
A Conservative MP is suggesting that there could be a ’25 mile limit’ imposed around certain rental properties to ensure they are occupied only be individuals with local connections or work commitments.
Simon Jupp, elected for the first time in 2019 to represent East Devon, says the rule could apply to some new-build housing stock.
“For example, the purchaser or tenant could have to meet one of the following conditions: they currently live or work within 25 miles of the property; they were born within 25 miles of the property; or they can demonstrate a ‘care network’ within 25 miles of the property” he writes on the Devon Live news website.
“It would permanently protect a percentage of any new housing stock from second-home ownership, giving local families an opportunity to own or rent a home in places where prices are increasingly out of reach and often being sold to cash-buyers from elsewhere” he continues.
The rest of Jupp’s article is a defence of existing government policies on second homes and housing.
“The solution is not simply to build more houses. The government must also look at the rise of second home ownership and the increasing numbers of holiday cottages” he writes.
The government has already announced that from April next year holiday let owners must provide evidence that their properties are available for short periods adding up to at least 140 days annually, if they are to qualify for cheaper business rates rather than increasingly expensive council tax.
The government also wants to give local authorities discretionary powers to increase council tax by 100 per cent on second homes that are neither used nor let out by their owners for at least 70 days per year.
However, Jupp writes that the government could be much bolder and urges it to reserve a proportion of any new build properties for those with established local connections to an area.
He says: “I have no issue with people moving here, but I do want to level the playing field to help local people have a home of their own. “
%20-%20IMAGE%20Client%20Accounting%20%E2%80%93%20what%20are%20your%20options.jpg)
%20(002).png)
.png)
.png)
%20(002).jpg)
Join the conversation
Jump to latest comment and add your reply
Apart from still needing to fix the planning approval problems what Jupp suggests seems pretty good. It still doesn’t resolve the whole housing market price malfunction however. To do that would need the comprehensive review of market practices which I am proposing in The House Price Solution findable by searching online.
It's not pretty good. It's idiotic, think of sticking a plaster on a gangrenous arm... that is what he's proposing as a solution, better than nothing but woefully short.
And yes, the answer IS to simply build more homes.
That's s type of racial discrimination ,! You will find of you complain to these MPs they will not correspond, saying you aren't a constituent. I read the press in this area, their is a huge problem with drink and drugs, meaning that such people are unemployable, so drawing in others to work. Exarcabating the problem.
So, if I wanted to move to East Devon from 250 miles away, I’d be prevented from buying a new build to do it… right? Are they saying new movers to the area can only buy an existing house first, live in it a few years, THEN they’d qualify for a new build? It’s almost as if the Tories aren’t the free-market Conservatives we originally thought… (lol).
It's a pretty low bar James, it's SOME of the NEW housing, leaving you the option to buy any of the vast majority of houses available. And all you have to do is get job first if you want to buy one of the restricted houses.
This will stop builders in their tracks. If they can't sell to whomever they please and only have a small pool of potential buyers, this will bring the value of their properties down. So fewer homes would be built. The opposite of what the Government says it wants to do. I still wouldn't put it past them to follow up on this stupid, and very unconservative, idea.
Exactly what happened in St Ives! Their special bye-law preventing second homers stopped new build in its tracks, so no new housing at all entering the supply.
Just when you think the Conservatives cannot stray any further from Conservative principles, along comes this numpty to bring a whole new meaning to NIMBY.
I fundamentally disagree with Jupp. The solution IS simply to build more houses. More choice, greater availability will see developers and landlords alike complete on rent and condition.
...............another socialist trying to interfere with peoples freedom........ this is going to end very badly for the 'government'................
He is supposed to be a Tory, but I am not sure there are any of those left. They have all gone green and red.
Success would probably depend on whether this is in a addition to, or replaces, the requirement for affordable housing at the current thresholds.
If it is an additional requirement, then most developments over 10 houses would simply not happen. Leading to more shortages of housing as developers focus on more profitable areas.
Please login to comment