'Social Housing' .. and Rip Off Landlords

Uncle-Greenie said:

blackpool72 said:

Siv_in_Norfolk said:

blackpool72 said:

Siv_in_Norfolk said:

blackpool72 said:

Siv_in_Norfolk said:

blackpool72 said:

Siv_in_Norfolk said:

blackpool72 said:

I think I may have posted this a while back, but I think it's worth repeating. 

About 7 or 8 years ago a block of 8 flats were being built near where one of my mates lives. 
( Maidstone area ).
When he enquired about the cost of the flats he was told that all 8 had been bought by a Chinese man off plan.
He was told that this is common practice and that a good % of new builds are being sold to foreign businessmen. 
I also keep seeing on the news about how many places in London are now owned by people from abroad that purely buy as an investment. 

Now I have no idea what % of properties in and around London are being bought up like this but to me it's wrong. 
All this achieves is driving up the price of property over here and putting money in the hands of rich overseas buyers. 

I would like Starmer to put something in the next Labour manifesto putting a stop to foreign ownership. 
Fair enough if the property is being bought to live in but not when they are being bought purely for profit. 

Should that last point be extended to everyone, regardless of nationality? 

Definitely a limit as to how many properties you can own.yes.

Yeah... I think that is your key point - not the targeting of foreign ownership. Blaming the mess on Johnny Foreigner is a distraction. 

Not putting the blame on johny Foreigner at all.
They are just taking advantage of a situation that allows them to buy up properties in the UK. 

I put the blame squarely on the shoulders of British politicians that allows for this to happen. 

Sure...and your key point is that nobody (foreign or local) should be allowed to own property that they won't/don't live in, right?

Stop talking rubbish 
I'm not saying that at all.
There should be a limit to how many homes a person can own.
I think you understand what I'm saying but for some reason you want to misconscew my meaning 

Hi. I was being genuine. Maybe I have misunderstood you. Will try to unpick.

You said:

"I would like Starmer to put something in the next Labour manifesto putting a stop to foreign ownership. 
Fair enough if the property is being bought to live in but not when they are being bought purely for profit. "

I asked if that was just for foreigners and you said it wasn't. So I sought to clarify (on your behalf, lol) that you weren't just blaming Johnny Foreigner and that your core point was about people- in general, regardless of nationality - owning property that they don't live in I.e. that this was wrong and should be legislated against. 

Now it seems I have upset you, so must have got this wrong. Although, you have just said pretty much that, no? 

Maybe you are saying thay foreigners must live in properties they buy (as per first point you said re: Starmer), but Brits just need a limit (as per you last post)?

I'm neither agreeing or disagreeing, btw. Just trying to figure out what you are saying. 

Fair enough. 
I'll try and clarify what I meant. 

Firstly I would like to see the government put in some legislation to stop overseas millionaire/ Bullionaire  from buying up thousands of properties in the UK .
As things stand they can buy as many properties as they like,  including buying off plan.
This does not sit right with me when we have such a housing shortage in the UK.

Secondly I would limit how many properties any one person can own.
A perfect example of this is the ex Liverpool and England striker who owns well in excess of 100 properties. 
As the law stands he is doing nothing wrong but again I'm not comfortable with this.

People buying up this amount of properties creates a shortage for people looking to buy and drives up the price. 

I have nothing against someone who wants to own a second property,  possibly as a holiday home or something,  but with supposedly 200k people in the UK without a permanent home I would rather people not be allowed to buy up as many properties as they like. 

blackpool72 said:

Siv_in_Norfolk said:

blackpool72 said:

Siv_in_Norfolk said:

blackpool72 said:

Siv_in_Norfolk said:

blackpool72 said:

Siv_in_Norfolk said:

blackpool72 said:

I think I may have posted this a while back, but I think it's worth repeating. 

About 7 or 8 years ago a block of 8 flats were being built near where one of my mates lives. 
( Maidstone area ).
When he enquired about the cost of the flats he was told that all 8 had been bought by a Chinese man off plan.
He was told that this is common practice and that a good % of new builds are being sold to foreign businessmen. 
I also keep seeing on the news about how many places in London are now owned by people from abroad that purely buy as an investment. 

Now I have no idea what % of properties in and around London are being bought up like this but to me it's wrong. 
All this achieves is driving up the price of property over here and putting money in the hands of rich overseas buyers. 

I would like Starmer to put something in the next Labour manifesto putting a stop to foreign ownership. 
Fair enough if the property is being bought to live in but not when they are being bought purely for profit. 

Should that last point be extended to everyone, regardless of nationality? 

Definitely a limit as to how many properties you can own.yes.

Yeah... I think that is your key point - not the targeting of foreign ownership. Blaming the mess on Johnny Foreigner is a distraction. 

Not putting the blame on johny Foreigner at all.
They are just taking advantage of a situation that allows them to buy up properties in the UK. 

I put the blame squarely on the shoulders of British politicians that allows for this to happen. 

Sure...and your key point is that nobody (foreign or local) should be allowed to own property that they won't/don't live in, right?

Stop talking rubbish 
I'm not saying that at all.
There should be a limit to how many homes a person can own.
I think you understand what I'm saying but for some reason you want to misconscew my meaning 

Hi. I was being genuine. Maybe I have misunderstood you. Will try to unpick.

You said:

"I would like Starmer to put something in the next Labour manifesto putting a stop to foreign ownership. 
Fair enough if the property is being bought to live in but not when they are being bought purely for profit. "

I asked if that was just for foreigners and you said it wasn't. So I sought to clarify (on your behalf, lol) that you weren't just blaming Johnny Foreigner and that your core point was about people- in general, regardless of nationality - owning property that they don't live in I.e. that this was wrong and should be legislated against. 

Now it seems I have upset you, so must have got this wrong. Although, you have just said pretty much that, no? 

Maybe you are saying thay foreigners must live in properties they buy (as per first point you said re: Starmer), but Brits just need a limit (as per you last post)?

I'm neither agreeing or disagreeing, btw. Just trying to figure out what you are saying. 

Fair enough. 
I'll try and clarify what I meant. 

Firstly I would like to see the government put in some legislation to stop overseas millionaire/ Bullionaire  from buying up thousands of properties in the UK .
As things stand they can buy as many properties as they like,  including buying off plan.
This does not sit right with me when we have such a housing shortage in the UK.

Secondly I would limit how many properties any one person can own.
A perfect example of this is the ex Liverpool and England striker who owns well in excess of 100 properties. 
As the law stands he is doing nothing wrong but again I'm not comfortable with this.

People buying up this amount of properties creates a shortage for people looking to buy and drives up the price. 

I have nothing against someone who wants to own a second property,  possibly as a holiday home or something,  but with supposedly 200k people in the UK without a permanent home I would rather people not be allowed to buy up as many properties as they like. 

Don’t agree with this, I get that investors buying and leaving properties empty is morally wrong, people like Robbie Fowler who bought up streets of unwanted terraced houses in undesirable areas, spent his money to make them liveable and then housed people has done nothing immoral, yes he stands to make money but he has improved the areas where he grew up which is a good thing.
not everyone wants or has the means to buy their own home so private landlords are needed as our councils and HA  are incapable of providing enough quality homes.
so there’s an argument on both sides to be had 

clb74 said:

seth plum said:

The national minimum wage is £10.42 per hour.
40x £10.42 is £416.80 per week.
£1,667.20 per month.
How much of that income ought to be used to pay for a decent place to live?

£500 a month.
As you've said before
If working full time you should be able to put a roof over your head, pay the bills and be able to eat.

Rob7Lee said:

Uncle-Greenie said:

blackpool72 said:

Siv_in_Norfolk said:

blackpool72 said:

Siv_in_Norfolk said:

blackpool72 said:

Siv_in_Norfolk said:

blackpool72 said:

Siv_in_Norfolk said:

blackpool72 said:

I think I may have posted this a while back, but I think it's worth repeating. 

About 7 or 8 years ago a block of 8 flats were being built near where one of my mates lives. 
( Maidstone area ).
When he enquired about the cost of the flats he was told that all 8 had been bought by a Chinese man off plan.
He was told that this is common practice and that a good % of new builds are being sold to foreign businessmen. 
I also keep seeing on the news about how many places in London are now owned by people from abroad that purely buy as an investment. 

Now I have no idea what % of properties in and around London are being bought up like this but to me it's wrong. 
All this achieves is driving up the price of property over here and putting money in the hands of rich overseas buyers. 

I would like Starmer to put something in the next Labour manifesto putting a stop to foreign ownership. 
Fair enough if the property is being bought to live in but not when they are being bought purely for profit. 

Should that last point be extended to everyone, regardless of nationality? 

Definitely a limit as to how many properties you can own.yes.

Yeah... I think that is your key point - not the targeting of foreign ownership. Blaming the mess on Johnny Foreigner is a distraction. 

Not putting the blame on johny Foreigner at all.
They are just taking advantage of a situation that allows them to buy up properties in the UK. 

I put the blame squarely on the shoulders of British politicians that allows for this to happen. 

Sure...and your key point is that nobody (foreign or local) should be allowed to own property that they won't/don't live in, right?

Stop talking rubbish 
I'm not saying that at all.
There should be a limit to how many homes a person can own.
I think you understand what I'm saying but for some reason you want to misconscew my meaning 

Hi. I was being genuine. Maybe I have misunderstood you. Will try to unpick.

You said:

"I would like Starmer to put something in the next Labour manifesto putting a stop to foreign ownership. 
Fair enough if the property is being bought to live in but not when they are being bought purely for profit. "

I asked if that was just for foreigners and you said it wasn't. So I sought to clarify (on your behalf, lol) that you weren't just blaming Johnny Foreigner and that your core point was about people- in general, regardless of nationality - owning property that they don't live in I.e. that this was wrong and should be legislated against. 

Now it seems I have upset you, so must have got this wrong. Although, you have just said pretty much that, no? 

Maybe you are saying thay foreigners must live in properties they buy (as per first point you said re: Starmer), but Brits just need a limit (as per you last post)?

I'm neither agreeing or disagreeing, btw. Just trying to figure out what you are saying. 

Fair enough. 
I'll try and clarify what I meant. 

Firstly I would like to see the government put in some legislation to stop overseas millionaire/ Bullionaire  from buying up thousands of properties in the UK .
As things stand they can buy as many properties as they like,  including buying off plan.
This does not sit right with me when we have such a housing shortage in the UK.

Secondly I would limit how many properties any one person can own.
A perfect example of this is the ex Liverpool and England striker who owns well in excess of 100 properties. 
As the law stands he is doing nothing wrong but again I'm not comfortable with this.

People buying up this amount of properties creates a shortage for people looking to buy and drives up the price. 

I have nothing against someone who wants to own a second property,  possibly as a holiday home or something,  but with supposedly 200k people in the UK without a permanent home I would rather people not be allowed to buy up as many properties as they like. 

blackpool72 said:

Siv_in_Norfolk said:

blackpool72 said:

Siv_in_Norfolk said:

blackpool72 said:

Siv_in_Norfolk said:

blackpool72 said:

Siv_in_Norfolk said:

blackpool72 said:

I think I may have posted this a while back, but I think it's worth repeating. 

About 7 or 8 years ago a block of 8 flats were being built near where one of my mates lives. 
( Maidstone area ).
When he enquired about the cost of the flats he was told that all 8 had been bought by a Chinese man off plan.
He was told that this is common practice and that a good % of new builds are being sold to foreign businessmen. 
I also keep seeing on the news about how many places in London are now owned by people from abroad that purely buy as an investment. 

Now I have no idea what % of properties in and around London are being bought up like this but to me it's wrong. 
All this achieves is driving up the price of property over here and putting money in the hands of rich overseas buyers. 

I would like Starmer to put something in the next Labour manifesto putting a stop to foreign ownership. 
Fair enough if the property is being bought to live in but not when they are being bought purely for profit. 

Should that last point be extended to everyone, regardless of nationality? 

Definitely a limit as to how many properties you can own.yes.

Yeah... I think that is your key point - not the targeting of foreign ownership. Blaming the mess on Johnny Foreigner is a distraction. 

Not putting the blame on johny Foreigner at all.
They are just taking advantage of a situation that allows them to buy up properties in the UK. 

I put the blame squarely on the shoulders of British politicians that allows for this to happen. 

Sure...and your key point is that nobody (foreign or local) should be allowed to own property that they won't/don't live in, right?

Stop talking rubbish 
I'm not saying that at all.
There should be a limit to how many homes a person can own.
I think you understand what I'm saying but for some reason you want to misconscew my meaning 

Hi. I was being genuine. Maybe I have misunderstood you. Will try to unpick.

You said:

"I would like Starmer to put something in the next Labour manifesto putting a stop to foreign ownership. 
Fair enough if the property is being bought to live in but not when they are being bought purely for profit. "

I asked if that was just for foreigners and you said it wasn't. So I sought to clarify (on your behalf, lol) that you weren't just blaming Johnny Foreigner and that your core point was about people- in general, regardless of nationality - owning property that they don't live in I.e. that this was wrong and should be legislated against. 

Now it seems I have upset you, so must have got this wrong. Although, you have just said pretty much that, no? 

Maybe you are saying thay foreigners must live in properties they buy (as per first point you said re: Starmer), but Brits just need a limit (as per you last post)?

I'm neither agreeing or disagreeing, btw. Just trying to figure out what you are saying. 

Fair enough. 
I'll try and clarify what I meant. 

Firstly I would like to see the government put in some legislation to stop overseas millionaire/ Bullionaire  from buying up thousands of properties in the UK .
As things stand they can buy as many properties as they like,  including buying off plan.
This does not sit right with me when we have such a housing shortage in the UK.

Secondly I would limit how many properties any one person can own.
A perfect example of this is the ex Liverpool and England striker who owns well in excess of 100 properties. 
As the law stands he is doing nothing wrong but again I'm not comfortable with this.

People buying up this amount of properties creates a shortage for people looking to buy and drives up the price. 

I have nothing against someone who wants to own a second property,  possibly as a holiday home or something,  but with supposedly 200k people in the UK without a permanent home I would rather people not be allowed to buy up as many properties as they like. 

Don’t agree with this, I get that investors buying and leaving properties empty is morally wrong, people like Robbie Fowler who bought up streets of unwanted terraced houses in undesirable areas, spent his money to make them liveable and then housed people has done nothing immoral, yes he stands to make money but he has improved the areas where he grew up which is a good thing.
not everyone wants or has the means to buy their own home so private landlords are needed as our councils and HA  are incapable of providing enough quality homes.
so there’s an argument on both sides to be had 

There's often an assumption that renters would buy if property was cheaper. Whilst that'll be true for some, it's not for everyone and this country will always need a decent amount of rental stock. There's still a relatively high proportion of renters who receive Housing benefit (or UC equivalent).

As you say Robbie fowler is probably the wrong investor to pick on as a lot of what he bought was boarded up terraced houses so he brought back into use existing property, in my view that's a good thing to have done.

Stu_of_Kunming said:

clb74 said:

seth plum said:

The national minimum wage is £10.42 per hour.
40x £10.42 is £416.80 per week.
£1,667.20 per month.
How much of that income ought to be used to pay for a decent place to live?

£500 a month.
As you've said before
If working full time you should be able to put a roof over your head, pay the bills and be able to eat.

Seems fairly reasonable, 1/3 of income is a good starting point for a ‘roof over your head’ 

blackpool72 said:

Uncle-Greenie said:

blackpool72 said:

Siv_in_Norfolk said:

blackpool72 said:

Siv_in_Norfolk said:

blackpool72 said:

Siv_in_Norfolk said:

blackpool72 said:

Siv_in_Norfolk said:

blackpool72 said:

I think I may have posted this a while back, but I think it's worth repeating. 

About 7 or 8 years ago a block of 8 flats were being built near where one of my mates lives. 
( Maidstone area ).
When he enquired about the cost of the flats he was told that all 8 had been bought by a Chinese man off plan.
He was told that this is common practice and that a good % of new builds are being sold to foreign businessmen. 
I also keep seeing on the news about how many places in London are now owned by people from abroad that purely buy as an investment. 

Now I have no idea what % of properties in and around London are being bought up like this but to me it's wrong. 
All this achieves is driving up the price of property over here and putting money in the hands of rich overseas buyers. 

I would like Starmer to put something in the next Labour manifesto putting a stop to foreign ownership. 
Fair enough if the property is being bought to live in but not when they are being bought purely for profit. 

Should that last point be extended to everyone, regardless of nationality? 

Definitely a limit as to how many properties you can own.yes.

Yeah... I think that is your key point - not the targeting of foreign ownership. Blaming the mess on Johnny Foreigner is a distraction. 

Not putting the blame on johny Foreigner at all.
They are just taking advantage of a situation that allows them to buy up properties in the UK. 

I put the blame squarely on the shoulders of British politicians that allows for this to happen. 

Sure...and your key point is that nobody (foreign or local) should be allowed to own property that they won't/don't live in, right?

Stop talking rubbish 
I'm not saying that at all.
There should be a limit to how many homes a person can own.
I think you understand what I'm saying but for some reason you want to misconscew my meaning 

Hi. I was being genuine. Maybe I have misunderstood you. Will try to unpick.

You said:

"I would like Starmer to put something in the next Labour manifesto putting a stop to foreign ownership. 
Fair enough if the property is being bought to live in but not when they are being bought purely for profit. "

I asked if that was just for foreigners and you said it wasn't. So I sought to clarify (on your behalf, lol) that you weren't just blaming Johnny Foreigner and that your core point was about people- in general, regardless of nationality - owning property that they don't live in I.e. that this was wrong and should be legislated against. 

Now it seems I have upset you, so must have got this wrong. Although, you have just said pretty much that, no? 

Maybe you are saying thay foreigners must live in properties they buy (as per first point you said re: Starmer), but Brits just need a limit (as per you last post)?

I'm neither agreeing or disagreeing, btw. Just trying to figure out what you are saying. 

Fair enough. 
I'll try and clarify what I meant. 

Firstly I would like to see the government put in some legislation to stop overseas millionaire/ Bullionaire  from buying up thousands of properties in the UK .
As things stand they can buy as many properties as they like,  including buying off plan.
This does not sit right with me when we have such a housing shortage in the UK.

Secondly I would limit how many properties any one person can own.
A perfect example of this is the ex Liverpool and England striker who owns well in excess of 100 properties. 
As the law stands he is doing nothing wrong but again I'm not comfortable with this.

People buying up this amount of properties creates a shortage for people looking to buy and drives up the price. 

I have nothing against someone who wants to own a second property,  possibly as a holiday home or something,  but with supposedly 200k people in the UK without a permanent home I would rather people not be allowed to buy up as many properties as they like. 

blackpool72 said:

Siv_in_Norfolk said:

blackpool72 said:

Siv_in_Norfolk said:

blackpool72 said:

Siv_in_Norfolk said:

blackpool72 said:

Siv_in_Norfolk said:

blackpool72 said:

I think I may have posted this a while back, but I think it's worth repeating. 

About 7 or 8 years ago a block of 8 flats were being built near where one of my mates lives. 
( Maidstone area ).
When he enquired about the cost of the flats he was told that all 8 had been bought by a Chinese man off plan.
He was told that this is common practice and that a good % of new builds are being sold to foreign businessmen. 
I also keep seeing on the news about how many places in London are now owned by people from abroad that purely buy as an investment. 

Now I have no idea what % of properties in and around London are being bought up like this but to me it's wrong. 
All this achieves is driving up the price of property over here and putting money in the hands of rich overseas buyers. 

I would like Starmer to put something in the next Labour manifesto putting a stop to foreign ownership. 
Fair enough if the property is being bought to live in but not when they are being bought purely for profit. 

Should that last point be extended to everyone, regardless of nationality? 

Definitely a limit as to how many properties you can own.yes.

Yeah... I think that is your key point - not the targeting of foreign ownership. Blaming the mess on Johnny Foreigner is a distraction. 

Not putting the blame on johny Foreigner at all.
They are just taking advantage of a situation that allows them to buy up properties in the UK. 

I put the blame squarely on the shoulders of British politicians that allows for this to happen. 

Sure...and your key point is that nobody (foreign or local) should be allowed to own property that they won't/don't live in, right?

Stop talking rubbish 
I'm not saying that at all.
There should be a limit to how many homes a person can own.
I think you understand what I'm saying but for some reason you want to misconscew my meaning 

Hi. I was being genuine. Maybe I have misunderstood you. Will try to unpick.

You said:

"I would like Starmer to put something in the next Labour manifesto putting a stop to foreign ownership. 
Fair enough if the property is being bought to live in but not when they are being bought purely for profit. "

I asked if that was just for foreigners and you said it wasn't. So I sought to clarify (on your behalf, lol) that you weren't just blaming Johnny Foreigner and that your core point was about people- in general, regardless of nationality - owning property that they don't live in I.e. that this was wrong and should be legislated against. 

Now it seems I have upset you, so must have got this wrong. Although, you have just said pretty much that, no? 

Maybe you are saying thay foreigners must live in properties they buy (as per first point you said re: Starmer), but Brits just need a limit (as per you last post)?

I'm neither agreeing or disagreeing, btw. Just trying to figure out what you are saying. 

Fair enough. 
I'll try and clarify what I meant. 

Firstly I would like to see the government put in some legislation to stop overseas millionaire/ Bullionaire  from buying up thousands of properties in the UK .
As things stand they can buy as many properties as they like,  including buying off plan.
This does not sit right with me when we have such a housing shortage in the UK.

Secondly I would limit how many properties any one person can own.
A perfect example of this is the ex Liverpool and England striker who owns well in excess of 100 properties. 
As the law stands he is doing nothing wrong but again I'm not comfortable with this.

People buying up this amount of properties creates a shortage for people looking to buy and drives up the price. 

I have nothing against someone who wants to own a second property,  possibly as a holiday home or something,  but with supposedly 200k people in the UK without a permanent home I would rather people not be allowed to buy up as many properties as they like. 

Don’t agree with this, I get that investors buying and leaving properties empty is morally wrong, people like Robbie Fowler who bought up streets of unwanted terraced houses in undesirable areas, spent his money to make them liveable and then housed people has done nothing immoral, yes he stands to make money but he has improved the areas where he grew up which is a good thing.
not everyone wants or has the means to buy their own home so private landlords are needed as our councils and HA  are incapable of providing enough quality homes.
so there’s an argument on both sides to be had 

Rather than Robbie Fowler buying up hundreds of houses I would prefer if the government done them up and used them as council houses at affordable rent.

letthegoodtimesroll said:

Stu_of_Kunming said:

clb74 said:

seth plum said:

The national minimum wage is £10.42 per hour.
40x £10.42 is £416.80 per week.
£1,667.20 per month.
How much of that income ought to be used to pay for a decent place to live?

£500 a month.
As you've said before
If working full time you should be able to put a roof over your head, pay the bills and be able to eat.

Seems fairly reasonable, 1/3 of income is a good starting point for a ‘roof over your head’ 

Cue every landlord only wanting to rent their property to people with very high incomes…

Rob7Lee said:

Friend Or Defoe said:

Covered End said:

SantaClaus said:

Just to balance out all the older posters and their tales of struggle getting on the housing ladder. My wife bought her first property in 1999. It was a two bedroom flat in a mansion block in Forest Hill and cost less than £60k. She told me she even managed to put the 5% deposit on a credit card. This was all done on an assistant picture framers salary.
When you compare the situation then and now I don't blame those in their 20's and 30's being very, very angry with the hand that they've been dealt.

Agreed, but could you do similar today? 
Buy a 1 bed flat for £200K & put the 5% deposit ( £10K) on a credit card. 

The chances of you getting a mortgage with a 5% deposit on a credit card...

you'd be surprised, 1999 would have been around the time of Egg Money, still was the only credit card you could transfer a credit balance into cash. So take out a 0% balance transfer card with say Barclays, balance transfer to egg and cash into your bank. Of course the mortgage lender would know you had £x on credit card, but people used to do it all the time (granted I didn't know anyone who did it for a mortgage deposit, was mostly used for savings, but was certainly do-able).

Rob7Lee said:

charltonkeston said:

 I thought I'd have a look at what 200K as I was curious  from a post above. There are indeed places around that mark but there are a lot of horror shows, auctions and a good deal of strings attached. Its actually soul destroying looking at what so much money buys so little but that's the world we all live in. 

I think I have seen the future of  social/BTL. (I'm not being serious BTW)

Found this on Rightmove, https://www.rightmove.co.uk/properties/86309940#/?channel=RES_NEW .

Who knew you could buy detached in London for 24K.

To get anything decent on/under £200k you'll need to move out a bit (from Bromley) or be prepared for modernisation work and lease extensions or auctions. You might scrape something in a cheaper postcode like Grove Park for around £200k.

Lots of purpose built one bed flats in places like Dartford for sub £150k, good commuter line. 

Those £24k boxes are truly taking the pee, my summer house is bigger and didn't cost that!

Rob7Lee said:

charltonkeston said:

 I thought I'd have a look at what 200K as I was curious  from a post above. There are indeed places around that mark but there are a lot of horror shows, auctions and a good deal of strings attached. Its actually soul destroying looking at what so much money buys so little but that's the world we all live in. 

I think I have seen the future of  social/BTL. (I'm not being serious BTW)

Found this on Rightmove, https://www.rightmove.co.uk/properties/86309940#/?channel=RES_NEW .

Who knew you could buy detached in London for 24K.

To get anything decent on/under £200k you'll need to move out a bit (from Bromley) or be prepared for modernisation work and lease extensions or auctions. You might scrape something in a cheaper postcode like Grove Park for around £200k.

Lots of purpose built one bed flats in places like Dartford for sub £150k, good commuter line. 

Those £24k boxes are truly taking the pee, my summer house is bigger and didn't cost that!