Obligation of Agent to Disclose inclusion of Part V Housing?

Fedup2011

Hi All,

I wanted to see if anyone can tell me whether an estate agent has an obligation to disclose to buyers whether part of a new development will be allocated to Part V Social/Affordable Housing?

My partner and I are awaiting the completion of our new home (contracts exchanged and full deposit paid) in a new development for which we will pay over 500k, and today we found out that 1-2 units will be allocated to this scheme. We are beyond shocked that this was never revealed to us through the buying process which took 4 months to complete.

What are my rights (if any) here?

Thanks

Caranica

Part V is not optional. There was a time when the developer could give the local authority properties in another development they owned but the law was changed. Every new development will have Part V housing.

jimmycrackcorm

I thought everyone was aware by now that a percentage of new developments will be allocated for social housing. I don't see the problem though if only 1 or 2 are allocated as it's a bit of a generalization to state that all social housing tenants are bad.

Del2005

Fedup2011 wrote: »

Hi All,

I wanted to see if anyone can tell me whether an estate agent has an obligation to disclose to buyers whether part of a new development will be allocated to Part V Social/Affordable Housing?

My partner and I are awaiting the completion of our new home (contracts exchanged and full deposit paid) in a new development for which we will pay over 500k, and today we found out that 1-2 units will be allocated to this scheme. We are beyond shocked that this was never revealed to us through the buying process which took 4 months to complete.

What are my rights (if any) here?

Thanks

Wait till you find out how many have been bought by housing associations. There could be way more than 2 units in the development, but that's the same for every estate now as the associations buy everywhere new/2nd hand doesn't matter.

Fedup2011

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

I thought everyone was aware by now that a percentage of new developments will be allocated for social housing. I don't see the problem though if only 1 or 2 are allocated as it's a bit of a generalization to state that all social housing tenants are bad.

I'm a first time buyer and obviously entered into this very naively...
I do understand the generalization that you are talking about, but for me it's difficult to swallow that I have scrimped and saved for years to give myself the chance to live in this particular area, and have tied myself down to a 30 year mortgage when my neighbours will get similar for nearly nothing.

Caranica

When making the biggest purchase of you life you really need to do your research. Naivety can be very costly.

Part V is an obligation, the Council may purchase more. As someone said above, housing associations may buy some. Investors may buy some and rent to the Councils. Even at your price point, a development is very unlikely to be entirely privately owned.

Diamond_Hands

It's an unfortunate mistake OP but a common one among new buyers. Make sure to be more forceful about the range of council houses in the area before purchasing.

I know many people - if not most - would find it uncomfortable to live beside social housing tenants.

Fedup2011

Caranica wrote: »

When making the biggest purchase of you life you really need to do your research. Naivety can be very costly.

Part V is an obligation, the Council may purchase more. As someone said above, housing associations may buy some. Investors may buy some and rent to the Councils. Even at your price point, a development is very unlikely to be entirely privately owned.

Is there any way to find out whether a housing association has plans to purchase in a particular development or is it luck of the draw?

UrbanFret

How much of a deposit have you paid?

cobhguy28

Diamond_Hands wrote: »

I know many people - if not most - would find it uncomfortable to live beside social housing tenants.

I don't think most people would even know without asking, that their neighbour is a social housing tenant.

cobhguy28

cobhguy28 wrote: »

I don't think most people would even know without asking, that their neighbour is a social housing tenant.

Ah, in most cases you would figure it out fairly quickly. Drive through an estate built even in the last 5 or so years and the social houses already look neglected.

Diamond_Hands

cobhguy28 wrote: »

I don't think most people would even know without asking, that their neighbour is a social housing tenant.

The flying mattresses and sketchy characters would give it away easily.

Bikerman2019

cobhguy28 wrote: »

I don't think most people would even know without asking, that their neighbour is a social housing tenant.

I strongly disagree. I was delivering some leaflets for my wifes job a while back. I saw two houses which were absolutely clearly social housing, was like night and day.
Run down looking, dirty, and like a pimple on the end of your nose, it could not be missed.

Claw Hammer

Pigeon lofts out the back are a sure giveaway.

godtabh

Claw Hammer wrote: »

Pigeon lofts out the back are a sure giveaway.

My neighbor has a a pigeon loft. He's on a two acre site with a 4000 sq f house worth about €600k. Didn't realize he was living in a social house.

The housing can be social and affordable. You have no idea who is going to be living in the estate Part V or not.

jrosen

There will always be part V in new developments. That you can be sure of. There is no obligation on anyone to tell you which houses and the EA will be the last one to open his/her mouth because there are buyers who would not go ahead with the purchase of their home if they knew it was to be beside social housing.

Typically the builder will want to allocate the least valuable of his properties to social housing. If you can get your hands on the list of houses that are for sale and have sold and compare it to the site map the houses that the council have should be easy to spot as they wont be listed by the agent.

As for the housing agencies, unfortunately there is no way to know. They are not obligated to announce it, the council wont tell you neither will the builder. There will be a conscious effort made by the builder to keep that under wraps until he has sold all his own houses.

Claw Hammer

godtabh wrote: »

My neighbor has a a pigeon loft. He's on a two acre site with a 4000 sq f house worth about €600k. Didn't realize he was living in a social house.

.

He doesn't live in a housing estate though, does he?

Robbo

Moderation: Can we leave out the ragging on social housing tenants?

Spideoige

The Part V housing is normally easily identifiable on the planning file. Often are labelled as 'House Type A1' of something slightly different. It is also possible that there is information on the public planning file which shows which are the houses to be transferred.

In the case of a Housing Agency aquiring any housing, there is no way of knowing as this often happens well after planning and even towards the end of construction.

ittakestwo

Btw OP, anything that is in the public domain does not have to be disclosed by the vendor. Only things that a buyer could not discover about the property when researching and viewing it. It is buyer beware. Obviously part v can be discovered from the planning grant.


On the subject I dont mind social housing but I do have a problem with people buying there social house for less than its worth. New builds like this should be rented only. In Sweden where people get social family house they are only given them to such a time as their children grow up. Then they have to move out into 1 bed apartments. Makes more sence and is fairer.

rhc2s4lj5p0xu9

Not every social house is run downa nd not all tenants are scum. You think you are too good for the social tenants OP?. Maybe you will be in a social house yourself yet

Diamond_Hands

Alaric Pitiful Permit wrote: »

Not every social house is run downa nd not all tenants are scum. You think you are too good for the social tenants OP?. Maybe you will be in a social house yourself yet

OP is employed so probably not.

rhc2s4lj5p0xu9

Diamond_Hands wrote: »

OP is employed so probably not.

people don't always stay employed. relationships can end. people can get sick. no one knows what can happen. everyone is just two paychecks from homelessness


i know someone who was kicked out of nice house by his wife and drank himself to death in crappy flat.he would have been glad of a social house. some people think they are better than others and alot of them are on boards making insulting comments about people they think they are better than


.The people i know in social houses all work and have nice homes, keet nice gardens and anti social behaviour is not a feature

Mad_maxx

Alaric Pitiful Permit wrote: »

people don't always stay employed. relationships can end. people can get sick. no one knows what can happen. everyone is just two paychecks from homelessness


i know someone who was kicked out of nice house by his wife and drank himself to death in crappy flat.he would have been glad of a social house. some people think they are better than others and alot of them are on boards making insulting comments about people they think they are better than


.The people i know in social houses all work and have nice homes, keet nice gardens and anti social behaviour is not a feature

those people are to be respected , the trouble is the culture which now exists where the local authority is forced to deal with delinquent tenants even they do evict them and so there is very little motive to do so , the political left vehemently oppose any sort of evictions , as do the media so the councils will get it in the neck if they take a tough line with delinquent behaviour

private home owners and buyers know this and thus are rightly fearful