Whitby - Being Destroyed by 2nd Home Owners

There are 2 bedroom cottages in Richmond on the market at £350k, 3 bedroom cottage suitable for very small people at £485k.
There is a 1 bedroom folly just been put up for offers over £500k.
These will only be holiday homes/lets.
It's crackers.
 
It's not just Whitby and that area of course, the same thing started happening in places like Hebden Bridge in 90s and where I live now in Glossop. Biggest trend now is people from down sarf selling up and moving north and with their equity booty buying 2 houses - 1 smart one to live in and one basic one to rent off - thus reducing the number of properties for local first time buyers
 
locomansimon said:
cant afford the houses on the outskirts either on a minimum wage ! you would be surprised how many are second homes or are bought then privately rented at huge expense
Click to expand...
This is a different problem and common to just about everywhere in the UK. Buy to let is attractive when interest rates are low (may not be so much as interest rates soar). I don't imagine that many of the 30s and later semis on the outskirts of Whitby are holiday lets? Maybe some that have sea views?

We need affordable housing and lots of it and more than that it needs to be properly insulated to reduce our reliance on oil and gas, our housing stock is not only over priced but under-built. Triple glazing, internal and external insulation and perhaps micro generation from solar panels. It can be done and building them would create a sustainable economic boom. We could use the magic money tree that the Tories found to pay for the PPE they are currently destroying or for a Track and Trace program that never worked.
 
The same happened in Devon when I lived there.
Private landlords were converting ordinary houses to holiday accommodation and investors from the South East were buying houses along the North Coast. When lockdown happened many took up residence in the area to escape from the major cities.
This resulted in the locals being pushed out with major implications for employment.
I was renting, the landlord wanted his house back, I couldnt find another property locally. So I shut my business and had to lay off my staff. I then moved back to be closer to my family.
 
Trug said:
My daughter and son in law live in Whitby. They are renting a house owned as a second home by their landlord. The landlord told my daughter she has six weeks to move as she was going to sell the house. Trying to find a house to buy was very difficult. Most houses in the estates that Mutley speaks off are actually owned as second homes. Prices quoted in the estate agents are minimum offers- My daughter offered the full asking price for one. The sellers solicitor contacted her a week later and informed that she still had time to place a final offer as others had already bid over the asking price. She declined- She has now found somewhere but has paid £10000 over the asking price. ( Only affordable due to Bank of mams and dads ). Both her and her partners have jobs in Whitby so moving outside the town is not an option.
Click to expand...
Landlord can't evict with 6 weeks notice, it takes ages
 
We all know the solution is fairly straightforward but it will never get implemented. Loads of MPs are landlords, on both sides of the house, so there isn't the political will to do it. If we heavily tax the buying of 2nd properties, including by Ltd companies, then the prospect of multiple homes becomes much less appealing. There also needs to be more protection for renters, rent caps and required maintenance (including decorating). Too many of them get away with terrible but safe conditions because people have no other choices.

Same_as_before said:
Lots of people are being left lots of cash, it all comes from house inflation. Its simple, ban family trusts, and put a £250,000 tax free inheritance, then 60% tax in the rest.
Click to expand...
Couldn't agree more, except I'd go higher than 60% at higher values. It is always very unpopular when it gets mentioned, so we'll both get dissenting replies, but inherited wealth is the biggest driver of inequality. People always complain about being able to leave their hard-earned money, they've already been taxed etc which is fair enough but it isn't true. The inheritor has done nothing to earn it so why shouldn't it be taxed? People are free to spend it while they are alive which would be better for the economy anyway. It's also a bit nonsensical to wait until death to pass money on. Average life expectancy is over 80 so people are inheriting in their 60s when they don't need the money. There needs to be a better solution for distributing wealth both from rich to poor and from older generations to younger ones.

Unfortunately, the way it is going to go is that they will make us pay for care and there will be a cap so the people with a small amount to leave in poor areas or northern regions with a £200k house will have nothing left to leave and the rich will be able to leave £800k of their £1m which will just further decrease social mobility and leave the low cost areas lagging further behind.
 
Abel Tasman said:
Thought provoking take in Yorkshire Pist today.

Post covid boom in coastal property homes is having a profound effect on local communities. I noticed this here in NZ too.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1516686801028661254
Click to expand...
I heard a really good interview with someone facing eviction from a flat in Keswick and with no options to rent or buy locally. She said the rest of her building was now second homes and they only visit once a year so they are no help whatsoever to the economy. In contrast the number of BnB and holiday rents are really important for Keswick shops, pubs, restaurants etc. So, she was making a real distinction between 2nd homes standing empty and blighting the community to holiday lets that are a real salvation.
 
Muttley said:
This is a different problem and common to just about everywhere in the UK. Buy to let is attractive when interest rates are low (may not be so much as interest rates soar). I don't imagine that many of the 30s and later semis on the outskirts of Whitby are holiday lets? Maybe some that have sea views?

We need affordable housing and lots of it and more than that it needs to be properly insulated to reduce our reliance on oil and gas, our housing stock is not only over priced but under-built. Triple glazing, internal and external insulation and perhaps micro generation from solar panels. It can be done and building them would create a sustainable economic boom. We could use the magic money tree that the Tories found to pay for the PPE they are currently destroying or for a Track and Trace program that never worked.
Click to expand...
I completely agree, we need a massive building programme of low carbon affordable homes, a bit like the government did after ww2 it would boost the construction industry, reduce reliance on carbon fuels, improve the lives of so many, and would have a positive impact on crime, mental health. Yes it would cost a lot of money but there would endless benefits. you can trace almost all of this centuries social ills, down to the selling of council house stock and the emergence of the buy to let industry - Thatchers legacy. In my opinion private landlords are just above pimps in the pecking order of exploitation of the poor and vulnerable.
 
Nano said:
We all know the solution is fairly straightforward but it will never get implemented. Loads of MPs are landlords, on both sides of the house, so there isn't the political will to do it. If we heavily tax the buying of 2nd properties, including by Ltd companies, then the prospect of multiple homes becomes much less appealing. There also needs to be more protection for renters, rent caps and required maintenance (including decorating). Too many of them get away with terrible but safe conditions because people have no other choices.


Couldn't agree more, except I'd go higher than 60% at higher values. It is always very unpopular when it gets mentioned, so we'll both get dissenting replies, but inherited wealth is the biggest driver of inequality. People always complain about being able to leave their hard-earned money, they've already been taxed etc which is fair enough but it isn't true. The inheritor has done nothing to earn it so why shouldn't it be taxed? People are free to spend it while they are alive which would be better for the economy anyway. It's also a bit nonsensical to wait until death to pass money on. Average life expectancy is over 80 so people are inheriting in their 60s when they don't need the money. There needs to be a better solution for distributing wealth both from rich to poor and from older generations to younger ones.

Unfortunately, the way it is going to go is that they will make us pay for care and there will be a cap so the people with a small amount to leave in poor areas or northern regions with a £200k house will have nothing left to leave and the rich will be able to leave £800k of their £1m which will just further decrease social mobility and leave the low cost areas lagging further behind.
Click to expand...
Exactly. You will get I worked hard to own my home, no they worked hard to pay for a small part of its value, then I want to leave it to my kids, who will be in their 60's, and people who pay rent work hard too.
 
Last edited:
Redwurzel said:
Its amazing how people people can pay £200k for a second home, but can't afford their gas bill.

Locals in Whitby can't afford £200k for a 2 bed home - a couple in their late 20s working full time will be earning £30k gross. There are supposed to be only 5 houses left in Robin Hoods Bay that are not holiday homes (below Victoria Hotel).

When I was at Whitby School - a lot of children came in on a coach, I bet its a mini bus now.
Click to expand...
If they are buy-to-lets they'll only be paying a 25% deposit, which in turn generates an income?
 
ThatFragranceGuy said:
Must be lush to be in your 60s and not need money.
Click to expand...
You know what I mean. If you are in your 60s and waiting for an inheritance then you would've been in a better position if you'd had the money in your 20s or 30s when you needed to buy a house, pay for childcare etc.

All the big essential things we buy in our lifetime tend to come early and we all pay banks and lenders for the privilege even when there is money in the family.

We'd all be able to afford things a bit easier though if there wasn't such wealth inequality/disparity.
 
ThatFragranceGuy said:
Must be lush to be in your 60s and not need money.
Click to expand...
Oddly you don't, not until illness sets in. We don't get the pension for a few years, my kids are better off than we are, it's quite odd. I feel for those living off the pension it must be hard.

Are wecflush, no. Do we need anything, no but saying that they cost of heating is noticeable.
 
ThatFragranceGuy said:
Must be lush to be in your 60s and not need money.
Click to expand...
Oddly you don't, not until illness sets in. We don't get the pension for a few years, my kids are better off than we are, it's quite odd. I feel for those living off the pension it must be hard.

I will never understand why an OAP ticket is cheaper.
 
Same_as_before said:
Oddly you don't, not until illness sets in. We don't get the pension for a few years, my kids are better off than we are, it's quite odd. I feel for those living off the pension it must be hard.

Am I flush, no. Do we need anything, no but saying that they cost if heating is noticeable.
Click to expand...
So you're struggling for cost of heating but advocating taxing the life off those getting a share of an inheritance that might lift them off the poverty line, from a property paid for with taxed wages?

I can't imagine not thinking about money in my 60's, I imagine the youth of today will be in a worse situation. Alright for those with nice fat final salary pensions I imagine, but if inheriting their parents life work helps someone retire a few years earlier rather than work to 68 I'm all for it.

Build affordable homes instead of taxing people for daring to do well. These aren't millionaires we are talking about here.
 
The more modern housing in Whitby is sometimes rented out for holiday lets too. I could not believe it when it started 30 years ago, but now it is not uncommon. A lady in her 80s I know in Sandsend that was brought up in Sandsend says she does not know anyone left in the village that she considers local and it used to be half of the village, 30 years ago. She has a son who used to live in the vilage with a house. He sold it a few years ago and now rents as he can't find anything in the Whitby area to buy. Its almost impossible to build new around Whitby because its National Park once you move 3 miles out. Within Whitby developments are not easy because exisiting property owners on the whole don't want much development and in some cases none at all, because it increases supply and might make their area more crowded. Where my family used to live in the Whitby area there has not been a new house for around 25 years (to my knowledge) and its not in the National Park.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top