House bought for £1.00 now looks like this..

[Cherie]

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/homeandproperty/a-family-bought-this-house-from-the-council-for-%C2%A31-now-it-looks-amazing/ar-BBEORaV?li=AAmiR2Z&ocid=spartandhp


A couple who bought a dilapidated Liverpool house for £1 a year ago have proudly displayed the stunning transformation it has gone through.
Sam and Rachael Kamau’s property in Webster Road, Wavertree had “a waterfall coming down the staircase” and a “bathroom with no floor” when it was handed to them by the city council as part of the Homes for a Pound Plus scheme

Love stories like this!


Would you take on one of these homes?

[Cal.]

Love it!

[Wizard.]

I would've done a better job

[DemolitionRed]

That is amazing. Shame they don't do this in London :(

[Eddie.]

love that they rent homes for that price...really helps families get a home when they have a lack of money in their bank accounts...

[smudgie]

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/homeandproperty/a-family-bought-this-house-from-the-council-for-%C2%A31-now-it-looks-amazing/ar-BBEORaV?li=AAmiR2Z&ocid=spartandhp


A couple who bought a dilapidated Liverpool house for £1 a year ago have proudly displayed the stunning transformation it has gone through.
Sam and Rachael Kamau’s property in Webster Road, Wavertree had “a waterfall coming down the staircase” and a “bathroom with no floor” when it was handed to them by the city council as part of the Homes for a Pound Plus scheme

Love stories like this!


Would you take on one of these homes?

Fantastic idea.
I have read about these schemes before, shame it isn't more widespread.

[Crimson Dynamo]

How much did they spend on it?

[Brillopad]

How much did they spend on it?

You can’t help but wonder if they had the money to do the extensive work needed they they could have afforded a mortgage via the normal route. They got a house on the cheap.

I wonder what the eligibility for being sold such cheap houses ie - the land alone would be worth in the tens of thousands.

[Kazanne]

There are some of these in Stoke on Trent, if you have the money to refurbish it,it's a good idea,but it still doesn't help poor people as they wouldn't have the money to do it up.

[bots]

its a good idea, it increases the pool of habitable housing, without laying that burden on the councils, but it does take either a lot of knowledge to do the refurb, or knowing good builders who can do it. After the 5 years its possible to sell them and make a profit, but you really need to know what you are doing for it to be cost effective

[Wizard.]

There are some of these in Stoke on Trent, if you have the money to refurbish it,it's a good idea,but it still doesn't help poor people as they wouldn't have the money to do it up.

Getting a loan of 30/40k is surely easier than a mortgage of 150k+?

[bots]

Getting a loan of 30/40k is surely easier than a mortgage of 150k+?

it will likely be a much shorter loan term with higher interests rates, so, not necessarily.

[Brillopad]

There are some of these in Stoke on Trent, if you have the money to refurbish it,it's a good idea,but it still doesn't help poor people as they wouldn't have the money to do it up.

When you hear all the fuss on here about tenants buying their council houses for a hell of a lot more than a pound and the associated criticism of the Tories it sounds very hypocritical if the same people approve of this.

[Brillopad]

Getting a loan of 30/40k is surely easier than a mortgage of 150k+?

Why do people get a their knickers in a twist about council tenants buying their houses then - the council could do it up and replenish their hosing stock - cheaper than selling it for a pound, especially to people who have the money to do it up and therefore have other options. How does that help the housing crisis for council tenants.

[DemolitionRed]

You can’t help but wonder if they had the money to do the extensive work needed they they could have afforded a mortgage via the normal route. They got a house on the cheap.

I wonder what the eligibility for being sold such cheap houses ie - the land alone would be worth in the tens of thousands.

I remember them doing a similar thing in Lancashire. People were only allowed to purchase those houses for next to nothing if they could prove they had the money or the resources to do them up and they also had to prove they were doing them up to reside in them and not make a tidy profit by renting them out.

[DemolitionRed]

When you hear all the fuss on here about tenants buying their council houses for a hell of a lot more than a pound and the associated criticism of the Tories it sounds very hypocritical if the same people approve of this.

The problem with council house buying is, new ones don't get re-built. I'm not against anyone buying their council house for a knockdown price but I question where the new build of council houses are. Council houses were specifically built for working class people who couldn't get on the housing ladder. If there are no new council houses being built to compensate for the ones being sold, where do the working class people who can't afford to get on the housing ladder go?

[Cherie]

How much did they spend on it?

10s of thousands so the article says, I would hazard a guess at 60,000, they probably split the short term loan between them and now the house is revamped they can get a mortgage on it and pay off the loand

[arista]

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/homeandproperty/a-family-bought-this-house-from-the-council-for-%C2%A31-now-it-looks-amazing/ar-BBEORaV?li=AAmiR2Z&ocid=spartandhp


A couple who bought a dilapidated Liverpool house for £1 a year ago have proudly displayed the stunning transformation it has gone through.
Sam and Rachael Kamau’s property in Webster Road, Wavertree had “a waterfall coming down the staircase” and a “bathroom with no floor” when it was handed to them by the city council as part of the Homes for a Pound Plus scheme

Love stories like this!


Would you take on one of these homes?


Yes I would buy a row
Fast , back then
this is proof Cherie



When they were sale at one pound
it went Live on UK TV news UK Radio news, that day .

[Kizzy]

I loved this concept and remember the threads on it at the time, they should definitely have kept on with this strategy imo.

[Cherie]

I loved this concept and remember the threads on it at the time, they should definitely have kept on with this strategy imo.

They haven't stopped

“I’m delighted we’ve got lots more properties lined up for other families and we won’t be stopping there. Next month we’ll be launching a new housing company because we’ve got thousands of properties which can be brought back to life and we’re doing that because the demand is there. People want to get on the housing ladder and Liverpool is still regenerating, still growing and very much an attractive place to work and live.

[user104658]

If the structure itself is sound and you can do the bulk of the work yourself / with friends then it's a very good investment. If significant building work is needed or if you'd need to hire people to do most of the work... it probably works out cheaper to just buy a house in better condition.

[Tom4784]

10s of thousands so the article says, I would hazard a guess at 60,000, they probably split the short term loan between them and now the house is revamped they can get a mortgage on it and pay off the loand

Plus it could probably sell, for what?, 150k+? Maybe that's a bit low but if the rest of the area is still derelict that would probably affect house prices.

A ridiculously good deal.

[DemolitionRed]

So where can we find these houses?

[Beso]

Fantastic, it must have been a nightmare, and a lot of hard work. Well worth it now though.

Great story.

[Marsh.]

The kitchen and bathroom. :flutter:

[Kizzy]

They haven't stopped

“I’m delighted we’ve got lots more properties lined up for other families and we won’t be stopping there. Next month we’ll be launching a new housing company because we’ve got thousands of properties which can be brought back to life and we’re doing that because the demand is there. People want to get on the housing ladder and Liverpool is still regenerating, still growing and very much an attractive place to work and live.

http://www.thisisbigbrother.com/forums/showthread.php?t=221329&highlight=one+pound

There doesn't seem to have been much in the media between 2012 and now.

I hope all towns follow Liverpools lead.

[Brillopad]

http://www.thisisbigbrother.com/forums/showthread.php?t=221329&highlight=one+pound

There doesn't seem to have been much in the media between 2012 and now.

I hope all towns follow Liverpools lead.

Wouldn’t that be going against Labour’s so-called policy and desires to preserve council housing stock. Instead they sell them off at a ridiculous price, effectively giving them away, to those that can afford to do them up. The council should be doing them up to preserve council house stock shouldn’t the they!

If it’s a less expensive way of buying a home then it’s a less expensive way for the council to preserve their stock. Just giving them away is a prime example of labour saying one thing and doing another.

[Cherie]

so an update on this as there was a news item on it this morning, Stoke are releasing 12 more houses today, in addition to buying the house for a £1.00 the council give a grant of 30K to get the house back into living condition, they give it to a contractor to complete the work and the homeowner can choose the fixtures and fitting, taps, kitchen etc. All the homeowner has to do is paint it...and put in any carpets/curtains and obviously furniture and the homeowner only moves in when the property is finished.

The 30K is then paid back in the form of a mortgage on the property, so the person interviewed was paying 400.00 a month in rent, is now paying 200.00 for their mortgage...and has their own home.

When asked about the area she said they knew they were buying in a run down area the the council work with the police the ensure the residents are safe

[Cherie]

Wouldn’t that be going against Labour’s so-called policy and desires to preserve council housing stock. Instead they sell them off at a rediculous price, effectively giving them away, to those that can afford to do them up. The council should be doing them up to preserve council house stock shouldn’t the they!

If it’s a less expensive way of buying a home then it’s a less expensive way for the council to preserve their stock. Just giving them away is a prime example of labour saying one thing and doing another.

again from the news item the council buy the stock from people who no longer live in them and want them sold, getting them back into liveable condition does not cost them anything as the 30K grant will be paid back via the mortgage, and in the longer terms helps regenerate the area and also provides council tax and takes the family off the housing list

[Brillopad]

again from the news item the council buy the stock from people who no longer live in them and want them sold, getting them back into liveable condition does not cost them anything as the 30K grant will be paid back via the mortgage, and in the longer terms helps regenerate the area and also provides council tax and takes the family off the housing list

I just feel that the council would be better off doing them up themselves to replenish their stock, as they are so desperate for housing stock, which once sold will be lost to their stock forever, in exactly the same way as council housing purchased by tenants is - something Labour say they will stop because it is is a loss to their housing stock. It makes no sense to me.

How can they stop one whilst supporting another which result in the same effect - a loss of council house stock

Don’t get me wrong I am not against the idea in theory, just as I am not against council tenants buying their council homes - but I am against such blatant hypocrisy from the labour government.

[bots]

so an update on this as there was a news item on it this morning, Stoke are releasing 12 more houses today, in addition to buying the house for a £1.00 the council give a grant of 30K to get the house back into living condition, they give it to a contractor to complete the work and the homeowner can choose the fixtures and fitting, taps, kitchen etc. All the homeowner has to do is paint it...and put in any carpets/curtains and obviously furniture and the homeowner only moves in when the property is finished.

The 30K is then paid back in the form of a mortgage on the property, so the person interviewed was paying 400.00 a month in rent, is now paying 200.00 for their mortgage...and has their own home.

When asked about the area she said they knew they were buying in a run down area the the council work with the police the ensure the residents are safe

that sounds like an ideal solution. To the majority, refurbishing a derelict property is just too daunting a prospect to take on. This method can be taken on by anyone.

[Cherie]

I just feel that the council would be better off doing them up themselves to replenish their stock, as they are so desperate for housing stock, which once sold will be lost to their stock forever, in exactly the same way as council housing purchased by tenants is - something Labour say they will stop because it is is a loss to their housing stock. It makes no sense to me.

How can they stop one whilst supporting another which result in the same effect - a loss of council house stock

Don’t get me wrong I am not against the idea in theory, just as I am not against council tenants buying their council homes - but I am against such blatant hypocrisy from the labour government.


Good point

[Kizzy]

Wouldn’t that be going against Labour’s so-called policy and desires to preserve council housing stock. Instead they sell them off at a ridiculous price, effectively giving them away, to those that can afford to do them up. The council should be doing them up to preserve council house stock shouldn’t the they!

If it’s a less expensive way of buying a home then it’s a less expensive way for the council to preserve their stock. Just giving them away is a prime example of labour saying one thing and doing another.

Where are the councils getting the money from to bring these homes back up to the *decent homes standard? Not central government that's for damn sure. Although this appears perhaps not ideal initially for social housing If the area regenerates more people will want to live there, so they can build new modern energy efficient council properties to meet that demand. Sometimes you have to look at the bigger picture.

It is Liverpool undertaking this initiative but it could be several other boroughs Labour and conservative that have issues with defective housing stock.

* https://england.shelter.org.uk/housing_advice/repairs/what_counts_as_a_decent_home

[user104658]

I just feel that the council would be better off doing them up themselves to replenish their stock, as they are so desperate for housing stock, which once sold will be lost to their stock forever, in exactly the same way as council housing purchased by tenants is - something Labour say they will stop because it is is a loss to their housing stock. It makes no sense to me.

How can they stop one whilst supporting another which result in the same effect - a loss of council house stock

Don’t get me wrong I am not against the idea in theory, just as I am not against council tenants buying their council homes - but I am against such blatant hypocrisy from the labour government.

Most councils don't have £30k per property to spend on houses to keep, though, they're flat broke. The point of this is, the £30k is a mortgage-style loan that the new owner of the house pays back with interest (i.e. the council actually makes a profit).

[thesheriff443]

No such thing as a free lunch!
The reason these houses are derelict is no one wants to live there, there are no jobs either

Why do you think the council themselves would not renovate these houses?
Developers don't want these houses either as there is no money to be made.

[DemolitionRed]

No such thing as a free lunch!
The reason these houses are derelict is no one wants to live there, there are no jobs either

Why do you think the council themselves would not renovate these houses?
Developers don't want these houses either as there is no money to be made.

The houses were due to be demolished and the site used for redevelopment. The people who moved out some time ago had already received more than the sale value so they could buy property elsewhere. When the redevelopers didn't meet the deadline, they decided to sell the site on to people who needed homes.

Housing redevelopers were never given a choice to purchase these properties. They were never on the market.