Live data from Hacker News

Battersea Power Station in London unveils the newly restored Control Room A

batterseapowerstation.co.uk

121–130 of 133 posts

Re: Battersea Power Station in London unveils the newly restored Control Room A

#121
post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nothing has changed since Thatcher, I was describing a scenario where the UK completes its westernisation process and abolishes S21.

Not quite true, they changed it a few years ago so agencies had to stop scamming both tenants and landlords out of massive fees (often charging both for the same thing) every time the contracts were renewed. That and the tenancy deposit scheme overall has made renting a lot less stressful than it was a decade or two ago.

These are all very minor changes. Yes, agencies can’t steal 100£ from you for each renewal, but they replaced it with commissions.

The tenancy deposit scheme is again a fake solution. Landlords can still block your money for months and force you to accept some deductions (because a fork is missing or the flat hasn’t been “professionally cleaned”). If you are money constrained and don’t have enough money to pay 2.5 months of rent (first month plus deposit), you are forced to give accept your landlord’s deductions in order to move to the next flat.

Re: Battersea Power Station in London unveils the newly restored Control Room A

#122
post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The other side of S21 is for example Germany where you can't easily evict people from your apartment even if you want to live in it. So yeah, while 2 months is a short time in some circumstances, allowing the contract to be terminated by both parties is an important aspect Let's not do it like in Canada where you're pretty much forced to leave at the end of the contract or you renew it for a whole year (and in some c…

The German system is exactly what I would be aiming for. We should refuse the notion that renting flats is a business, especially as it’s intended in the UK, where it’s the less taxed than work. In addition, we should tax properties and use that money to cut NI.

"It's not a business" sure, then wonder why companies are managing ever more properties and private renters prefer renting it through AirBnb

I think there are points in protection but not being able to evict a tenant because you want an apartment for yourself (and no, in practice it can take even as high as 5 years) is simply ridiculous

Re: Battersea Power Station in London unveils the newly restored Control Room A

#124
post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They get priced out because it's so hard to build anything anywhere else. The restricted places where development can happen, end up with all the pent up demand flooding into them. The solution is not to prevent building from happening, it's to loosen restrictions everywhere else. The planning system is in serious need of reform.

If you want to see what happens if you let people build what they want, have a look at Auckland, New Zealand. Low quality building on large sections spread over a vast area. High infrastructure requirements with low population density. It's not good.

> Low quality building on large sections spread over a vast area. High infrastructure requirements with low population density. It's not good.

This describes perfectly everything built in the UK before 2010.

Re: Battersea Power Station in London unveils the newly restored Control Room A

#125
post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The German system is exactly what I would be aiming for. We should refuse the notion that renting flats is a business, especially as it’s intended in the UK, where it’s the less taxed than work. In addition, we should tax properties and use that money to cut NI.

"It's not a business" sure, then wonder why companies are managing ever more properties and private renters prefer renting it through AirBnb I think there are points in protection but not being able to evict a tenant because you want an apartment for yourself (and no, in practice it can take even as high as 5 years) is simply ridiculous

> "It's not a business" sure, then wonder why companies are managing ever more properties and private renters prefer renting it through AirBnb

Managing an Airbnb is a business, it requires the flat to be cleaned and functioning and you are practically out of business after N bad reviews. Besides, I’d be surprised if you could make any money with an Airbnb in the UK more than 20 minutes away from Westminster.

> I think there are points in protection but not being able to evict a tenant because you want an apartment for yourself (and no, in practice it can take even as high as 5 years) is simply ridiculous

What is ridiculous, and I’m saying this as somebody who owns their home, is that families with children can be evicted with just 2 months of notice because they asked for repairs or because the landlord wants to test the market. This happens every day in the UK and the situation is so bad that even the current government had to acknowledge it.

It is just civilised that evicting somebody may require a lengthy process, depending on who this person is. Can a family with a disabled child find a new home in 6 weeks?

Re: Battersea Power Station in London unveils the newly restored Control Room A

#126
post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you want to see what happens if you let people build what they want, have a look at Auckland, New Zealand. Low quality building on large sections spread over a vast area. High infrastructure requirements with low population density. It's not good.

When you say "low quality building on large sections in a vast area" that makes me think of American style restrictive single-family zoning. And hey, looks like they had something similar until last year: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/dec/15/new-zealand-ha... >Planning law has long been criticised for being restrictive, unwieldy and slow. It is blamed in part for slowing down housing development, entrenching…

My brief search leads me to think Tokyo has strict building regulations - mainly due to earthquakes and tsunami risks. Am I missing something?

Re: Battersea Power Station in London unveils the newly restored Control Room A

#127
post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When you say "low quality building on large sections in a vast area" that makes me think of American style restrictive single-family zoning. And hey, looks like they had something similar until last year: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/dec/15/new-zealand-ha... >Planning law has long been criticised for being restrictive, unwieldy and slow. It is blamed in part for slowing down housing development, entrenching…

My brief search leads me to think Tokyo has strict building regulations - mainly due to earthquakes and tsunami risks. Am I missing something?

They have strict building regulations but lax zoning regulations. I.e. you have to make sure that whatever you build conforms to an exacting set of regulations to ensure its physical resiliency in the face of disaster. But you are not so restricted in terms of use and form. So, you can tear down a house and put up a three-storey set of apartments. You can have the ground floor be a small business. You can build an extra housing unit in place of a yard, you can subdivide, you can add an extra floor, a mansard, and so on and so on. All of this is by-right -- you don't have to ask the council if you can do it, you just do it.

https://nitter.net/AntBreach/status/1121362679367598080

Contrast that with many Western countries: USA, Canada, New Zealand, the UK to an extent (although the situation is somewhat different here). Generally, landowners are not allowed to do these things by right. There is a strict set of rules governing precisely what may and may not be built in each zone, with emphasis on "may not". Whole areas where you are only allowed to build detached single family houses, and even something as trivial as a corner store is effectively illegal. To deviate from the zoning rules, you have to apply for a variance from the city government or local authority, which is in most cases onerous and time-consuming for the applicant, and discretionary on the part of a bureaucrat, which inhibits housebuilding, small business formation and is a vehicle for corruption. It retards the natural forces that result in improvements to land, and encourages zero-sum rent-seeking behaviour.

So, in Japan, cities and neighbourhoods can respond rapidly to changing housing demand. But in Anglosphere countries, places stay legally trapped in the development form established decades ago, unable to build more or build different as the world changes around them. Hence the housing affordability crises: more and more people try to rent in a relatively fixed housing stock, causing prices to skyrocket. Incumbent landlords benefit in a zero-sum fashion from price speculation, while everyone else suffers high rents and reduced labour productivity.

There is a pervasive misconception that abolishing zoning rules means getting rid of building codes. They have almost nothing in common. I recommend reading the book Arbitrary Lines by Nolan Gray on the topic.

Re: Battersea Power Station in London unveils the newly restored Control Room A

#128
post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For HN readers, section 21 eviction means a landlord can send a "no fault" eviction notice to their tenant at (almost) any time, and the tenant must leave fairly quickly (2 months), which is not long enough to plan around. As a result, no tenant is secure where they live. I would guess most people who do not own property have had to move several times with little notice, usually to another area of town because it's n…

I don't think many people would have strong objections to increasing notice to 3 months or something. But actually 2 months has never been a huge issue when i've been renting, and the idea that renting out a property for a non infinite period of time should be impossible is ??? to me. I think one should absolutely be able rent out a flat for a year whilst working abroad. Or to rent out a house whilst saving up to ren…

> the idea that renting out a property for a non infinite period of time should be impossible is ??? to me

Nobody proposed that, especially for individual landlords with one property. However they do propose that a tenant can stay if there's literally no reason why not. Protecting tenants from unreasonable treatment, just like you have to make sure the electricity is safe, mould won't give them lung damage, roof doesn't leak, windows aren't broken etc.

> I think one should absolutely be able rent out a flat for a year whilst working abroad. Or to rent out a house whilst saving up to renovate and move in.

Under proposals I'm aware of, nothing would stop you renting out your flat for a year, or while saving to renovate. You aren't running a long-term housing business. You have a good reason.

Section 21 is when there's no justifiable reason. "The landlord doesn't like men who wear earrings / how you position the sofa / that you bring a girlfriend over at night / that you put up a shelf / you don't dust twice a week" type reasons, obviously not said or written.

Some landlords kick people out who ask for essential repairs (despite those being covered by the tenancy), as a sibling commenter said. Some corporate landlords want a certain "look" for the type of people in the property. Credit rating dropped? Getting old? Goodbye.

Try to think of older people who are settled and would buy if they could, forced to move every few years, have few choices locally, and daren't decorate and repair as they would like.

For some it means moving children to a different school where they lose friends and perhaps can't continue a key subject. Or moving far from their elderly parent's home, as I said. They can't lay "roots" in the community. And for the lower paid, moving costs months of discretionary income. That sort of thing is a huge issue and stressor.

Those burdens should only be imposed when there's a good enough reason.

> But actually 2 months has never been a huge issue when i've been renting,

It's not about the notice period. It's about being made to move, yet again, for no good reason. Summed up as "security of tenure".

(That said, in my experience it can take longer than 3 months to find a suitable new place. Once I was technically homeless (couch surfing) for a couple of months while hunting. I had the benefit of being single; imagine that with a family. In one town it took 35 viewings to find somewhere, and a lot of time off work. Many times I accepted a place, only to see it go to someone else who beat me to it.)

AirBnB is fine, if you can handle the work (it's hard work). Your wealthy guests will happily choose somewhere else if you run it badly. However if you want to run a business providing long-term housing to people who need it, there are standards.

Re: Battersea Power Station in London unveils the newly restored Control Room A

#129
post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"It's not a business" sure, then wonder why companies are managing ever more properties and private renters prefer renting it through AirBnb I think there are points in protection but not being able to evict a tenant because you want an apartment for yourself (and no, in practice it can take even as high as 5 years) is simply ridiculous

> "It's not a business" sure, then wonder why companies are managing ever more properties and private renters prefer renting it through AirBnb Managing an Airbnb is a business, it requires the flat to be cleaned and functioning and you are practically out of business after N bad reviews. Besides, I’d be surprised if you could make any money with an Airbnb in the UK more than 20 minutes away from Westminster. > I thin…

Yes, 2 months is a short time. A lot of places make the notice contingent on time already spent there

Re: Battersea Power Station in London unveils the newly restored Control Room A

#130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m reminded of the (fantastic) documentary about a building I once lived in: Aragon Tower in Surrey Quays [1]. Since it was built in the 1960s, it was one of the tallest council estate buildings in all of London, but ~twenty years ago private developers bought it out and converted it into “luxury” flats. At the base of these flats however, is the notorious Pepys council estate, of which Aragon Tower was once a part…

Reminds of another documentary where something similar happened in Greenwich. Or maybe it was this one...

Very possibly! This is the Thames side of Deptford, so very close to Greenwich.
Post reply on HN