Also with new builds buyers are paying a premium price and the homes may lose value the moment someone moves in.
2 Likes
When you buy a new house youâre able to customise your new home - if you then sell the house without those benefits AND selling against the developer (who are great at this stuff with schemes like Part Exchange, Assisted move & help to buy) youâre in a more competitive market place.
1 Like
I can speak to this, itâs my industry.
Nope! Builders are incredibly conservative and have to plan 3-20 years ahead when buying land and planning houses. They need to make sure what they build sells well and important is mortgage able.
They need to adapt to timber frame and off site manufacturing first before we get into 3D printing.
1 Like
Could be
Wow. 20 years of planning?! Regulatory burden?!
I donât think 3D printing for housing technology is ripe for mass adoption. But it will be. Soon 
. It will allow for different business models, will increase competition to a certain extent cuz it can only build houses with a couple of stories, ie as far as I can understand the technology canât be used to build a 10 stories building. Yet. Maybe it will never get there. It will not necessarily drive prices down. But could become a valid alternative in time I think
1 Like
Long term projects are often classed a âstratlandâ or Strategic Land, buying up a large area that isnât including in the current master plan and then hoping / schmoozing the MP & councillors until it is included.
Most Ftse350 builders have land plans for 3 years ahead with pencil plans for a few more after that.
Banks are also very conservative as theyâre lending against something for 30/35 years often so donât want to risk the property being uninhabitable. Of site pre fab makes more sense. Making a wall panel with the wiring inside and on-site they install the wall and then do the connection is far faster and saves wastage.
1 Like
Iâd like to see more ICF builds and greater mortgagability before the 3d printer ones personally.
Midas Construction gone into administration
Have you guys noticed nobody is building the âBritish dreamâ. Like, Iâm not seeing home builders build beautifully detached properties for the long term vibe of the country,
âŠin fact, the past 5 years Iâve seen a SIGNIFICANT and disturbing amount of high rises sprawled across absolutely anywhere they can be granted.
Pretty concerned by the direction of this. A small box with no garden, no space, 30 floors up and no real ownership of anything, really.
Where is the British dream?
Redrow are the closet at building what I think youâve described. Their heritage collection are all 1930âs inspired, majority detached family homes.
1 Like
Own nothing and be happy!
That seems to be the way for future generations
3 Likes
The thing is IMO thatâs a flow on effect from other policies not a deliberate move by home builders. They only care about food returns, not social engineering or whatever.
The problem is for lots of us that isnât really a choice. The reason so many apartments etc are being built is because if weâre lucky thatâs all lots of us might one day be able to afford! That said my friend has recently ish brought a new build detached house and garden near Birmingham. But sheâs a partner in a corporate law firm so 
.
The really fancy shit isnât being built by the big developers anyway itâs being built bespoke on individual plots of land.
Re detached houses being the âBritish dreamâ - Personally I grew up in a terrace house then we moved to a detached house in my teens. There were pros and cons to both.
1 Like
I feel that the property developers/builders are not building what the British population want.
You can see people buying new properties, for only 5 years later building extensions or moving to a bigger house.
Its pretty clear that a 3 bedroom house itâs a two bedroom house with a nursery and gardens are smaller by the day. Also, new houses are not having under floor heating installed or any other super efficient technology, making the purchase a terrible investment. Super expensive extras, bad finishings and unregulated maintenance fees, that could stay with the property forever, are not what the customer want.
Also, people are demanding space to WFH and itâs impossible to get a proper workspace when the size of living area is reduced to the minimum possible.
Everything to squeeze as much profit from the least capital employed.
I just feel sorry for the next generation, that have to pay so much for a living space that is not enough for they needs, if theyâre lucky enough to save the deposit.
Maybe this is just temporary until a bubble burst in the U.K. housing market, but the demand is here the supply is not increasing.
I might be wrong, but I moved from Europe, and my parents humble working class family home was much bigger than any of the higher priced houses being sold as new here in the U.K. and unless you are fortunate enough to borrow a lot of money or have a lot of money, you wonât have the property that you have dreamed in the U.K. Maybe abroadâŠEurope, U.S. and Australia have generally much bigger houses (not comparing pricing, just size).
1 Like
Iâm just going to push back on a few points here.
Your argument makes no sense to me. In one paragraph youâre saying that house are too small and lack the amenities people want. On the other youâre saying theyâre too expensive already, how do you propose having bigger gardens, renewable tech etc without the price changing?
Developers are largely price takers, they can maximise their opportunities but they donât set the market. For every 1 new house sold around 9 existing homes will be sold.
Iâve just moved into a 1961 home, it was extended 10 years after by the same buyers. It will be extended in 2023 by me, homes change inline with the needs of their occupants. Towns and cities also do this.
I do agree the system doesnât work well, the vast majority of new homes are built by just a few companies but this is a new development.
If you want competition for different designs then all new build developments should have a percentage set aside to be bid on in single and small lots. This would enable self building to put money directly into the local economy, many trades donât live anywhere near the sites they work on, and boost smaller regional builders.
To compare the UK to Europe isnât really helpful. Land costs, labour costs and materials all vary widely.
4 Likes
Or maybe itâs the fact itâs bought for 170k and 5 years later itâs worth ÂŁ320k nothing to do with That? New houses are always warmer and donât need heating on as much so Iâm told 
1 Like
I mean, we were all there in Feb/Mar â20 ready to enter, but not all of us already had houses and a spare ÂŁ150k to deploy.
Such a simple game when positioned correctly on a larger scale.
9 Likes
For some context from my own experience:
I bought my first house in 1998 with my ex - the house (a 3 bed semi in the north west) cost ÂŁ56k.
My salary at the time was ÂŁ12k, his not much more.
We got a 90% mortgage.
However, the mortgage interest rate was 8%.
Thankfully, it didnât ever go higher than this but I remember not a lot of money left after making mortgage payments each month.
3 Likes
I was the same, paid 36950 for a 2 bed terrace in York in 1996. I was on about 10k and my ex worked in a departmet store for about 6. Our payments were 320 a month Mortgage and Endownment policy. Same as you, not a great deal left for living after paying the bills.
1 Like
First house (3 bed terraced) in 1989, ÂŁ65k. ÂŁ18k salary. Purchased on my own. Mortgage plus endowment was ÂŁ702.11per month (cannot remember interest rate but payment amount etched into memory). Take home was somewhere between ÂŁ1000 and ÂŁ1200 i think. I remember thinking âi just need to endure this for 24 months then things can start to improveâ, early 1990s saw negative equity etc, BUT, its now mortgage free. We didnt move and buy bigger etc as never wanted to âkeep up with the Jonsesâ and consider ourselves fortunate to have a very midest small low cost mortgage free home to live in. Many do not have the same in life.
6 Likes