The Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, wants new powers to impose higher tax on empty homes - and even seize them if he wishes.
Khan is calling it a scandal that there are an estimated 30,000 long-term empty homes across London. The highest concentration are in the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea, where 1,600 empty properties would collectively be worth more than £2.2 billion.
He wants the government to devolve him the power to set higher rates of council tax on empty homes, including for what he calls “mega-mansions” in areas such as Westminster where he claims council tax is not currently a deterrent to prevent people leaving their properties empty.
The level of council tax for empty homes would be decided by local councils at whatever level they choose in order to make it an effective deterrent.
Khan - along with the Labour leaders of Westminster council - are also urging ministers to make it easier for councils to temporarily take over empty homes using established Empty Dwelling Management Orders, which have been restricted in recent years.
Khan cites one example in Knightsbridge where a property has been empty for almost a decade. Number 3 Trevor Square is a grade II listed, early nineteenth century, four-storey townhouse. The four-bedroom property, complete with two reception rooms, lies within the Knightsbridge Conservation Area. It is one of 1,100 empty homes in the City of Westminster which at current market rates could be worth £1.7 billion.
“It’s a scandal that so many much-needed homes across London lie vacant in the midst of a housing crisis. That’s why I’m working with Westminster city council to call on the government to implement a range of measures to crack down on long-term empty homes, including the devolution of powers so that local councils can set higher rates of council tax on vacant properties” says Khan.
“This would not only deter absentee international investment, but would free up housing stock across the capital for Londoners.”
He continues: “We are also urging ministers to make it easier to allow the temporary take-over of empty homes using Empty Dwelling Management Orders, which have been restricted in recent years.
“Over the last few years we’ve started building a record number of homes for Londoners, but there’s still a long way to go to fix the housing crisis and it will require much greater national investment. But ministers should start by making it easier for councils to bring long-term empty homes back into use so we can continue building a fairer and more prosperous London for everyone.”
Want to comment on this story? Our focus is on providing a platform for you to share your insights and views and we welcome contributions.
If any post is considered to victimise, harass, degrade or intimidate an individual or group of individuals, then the post may be deleted and the individual immediately banned from posting in future.
Please help us by reporting comments you consider to be unduly offensive so we can review and take action if necessary. Thank you.
/SadiqKhan-400x310.png)
.jpg)
%20(002).png)
.png)
Join the conversation
Jump to latest comment and add your reply
In Wales I had to pay an additional 50% council tax because I had a part refurbished property empty through no fault of my own during the Covid lockdown. That was bad enough. Seizing empty privately owned property though? That is pure communist.
a
In any case, it is not practical for the council to use massive mansions in Knights bridge for housing the homeless. The maintenance costs, bills etc would be ridiculous. Not to mention that the sort of people who own these places spend more in their month's holiday here than most locals spend in a whole year so do help the economy in their way.
By using these (rather than bulk buys of flats made as an investment) is enlisting the politics of envy to make the case.
Council ain’t bothered cos the Uk tax payer will pay.
Stupid article, he just wants to be seen as champion for the people.
Not the motorist though!
Government getting rid of fixed rental periods will only make the matter worse.
He should concentrate on getting brown sites to build more housing.
But he is a strong believer that it is always somebody else's fault.
Buck hous, 300 bedrooms.
I wonder if he has more rooms in his house than he needs. Perhaps he should be required to house a homeless family on an indefinite basis for their lives and those of their children and their children etc.
Spot on Ellie Edwards! I concur. It’s time for updating U.K. Parliamentary & Political party leadership ethics committee laws.
It should be mandatory for Khan as a Mayor and Starmer as the political party leader to provide rooms in their own, family, cousins, uncles, aunts, grandparents, charities, investment/business associates multiple owned houses under disguised methods for free-especially for illegals, renters for lifetime, and their next generations lifetime.
These laws should be mandatory and enforced rigorously U.K. wide to release the political leaders housing stock and for some fairness towards the hardworking current & future generations of British people who work hard to buy houses & provide good quality safe housing to tenants as PRS Landlords.
Or we can always dream that London voters will become sensible to vote 🗳️ Khan and his party out in the next elections to get Britain First or similar who actually put British people first.
Conservatives, Lib Dem’s, Greens et All are just as anti British PRS landlords as Labour unfortunately
Britain First is possibly the only hope for British taxpayers & future generations to stop U.K. becoming a socialist communist place, wiped out by illegals squatting alongside rogue tenants being protected by police/lawyers/councils in people’s second/multiple homes.
U.K.’s destruction is a certainty with Labour’s & all political party leaders except for Britain First, in my & many others opinion.
Best wishes to all honest, hard working good landlords.
He may well want to steal other people's property - but even for the current consocialist government, they would consider this an over reach.
No surprise as William says its Communism, we don’t live a Democracy its just a sham a few over width Portable Cabins placed on side of the road for a week and half the people don’t vote, it should be compulsory.
Anyway Mr Khan is a dictator like Mr Gove who is taking over occupied Private Property.
Mr Gove says it fairer renting for Tenants to force them to pay 30% more.
Mr & Mrs Lex Ulez says in the transport for London booklet that 9 out of 10 vehicles are compliant, so that’s 90% of vehicles won’t need to pay the £12.50 per day to start their engines, public taken for fools.
This is the same man that brought London to a standstill, doubled pollution, doubled journey times, blocked off scores of roads, narrowed many more roads, no through roads, dual carriageway bike lanes and not a bike on them, silly bit of bus lanes, so all the existing traffic that used to be on roads above have to go on the remaining roads that were already busy, just add 20mph and your journey is complete, yes just let him loose housing that should do the trick.
The day the state can seize private property (other than proceeds of crime) is the day the country collapses as there will be no point in working hard and owning anything. Yes its annoying to see properties sat empty but there is always a reason for this situation. There may be some capital gain in London but most places there is little value in letting a place sit empty, it needs to be sold or let to cover the costs of insurance, repairs and other bills.
The day the state can seize private property (other than proceeds of crime) is the day the country collapses as there will be no point in working hard and owning anything.
Spot on, spot on, great post.
Theft 👮🏻♀️ Pure and simple, if this happens even once we cannot call ourselves a democratic nation.
Next step , seizing all properties
It is theft after all according to the left
This says everything about this country welcome to the fourth Reich
This isn't F Russia! Who does he think he is???
You have hit the nail on the head there Nick. If you give some people (perhaps nearly all people) too much power it goes to their heads - and they start to disregard other peoples' rights.
Thanks Ellie. I think someone should take the wind out of Gove's sails too. Can't understand how a supposed Tory can think he can just move the needle from the right, right over to the extreme left and it not to cause all sorts of issues.
I am genuinely scared being a property owner here now. Or for that matter trying to do any sort of 'business' for fear of government intrusion / moving the goalposts (a bit like their retrospective change to the Defective Premises Act where developers had 6 years liability now it's 30 years)! People here have made contracts based upon a certain amount of risk and timeframes. They would also have destroyed documents too since they were no longer needed. I wanted to build things but now I think Mmmm. Better just put into a pension!
Exactly Nick, the current policies make you want to liquidate everything because of Government interference or potential government interference.
That goes even for shares. I have somewhat reluctantly been selling energy shares because of what Governments can do to the companies.
I think it is difficult to build abroad though - very, very difficult to deal with building and property matters from a distance.
Agree Ellie.
I sold my Shell shares earlier this year. They say "never sell Shell". But I did due to the lazy loony left. Rachel Reeves thinks she can come along with her windfall taxes. It's dreadful the Tories did but in this woke world with the head of BP (Bernard Looney) saying they are a "cash machine" I guess politically they had to. He is a loony for saying that. Talk about doing a Ratner.
I would not build abroad from here. I don't even want to manage property. Certainly don't want an agent!
I'm thinking of buying US energy shares perhaps. I don't think they go for the windfall BS. But I fear they could drop back after the war...
I think you did the right thing to sell Shell. I have kept mine. I don't have a big holding of those, but might be a good idea to sell them. They are down today.
There have been people arguing for a windfall tax on the big five oil and gas companies in the United States.
Thanks for the advice on US shares. I haven't looked into it yet.
I was going to sell my BHP Billiton at £28 but waited for it to go Ex-Dividend. They've gone down and down and down since. I knew I should have just sold them!!!
Some good points there and especially that one about Rachel Reeves, amazing this week she has been caught flying to the US on First Class. Another hypocrite in the Khan camp, sponsored by hardworking people they are supposed to represent.
Reeves. Another champagne socialist. What is she doing in 1st class??? Wasting tax payers money. Then she wants to run after the gas and oil companies to pay for it! I bet the champagne was flowing in 1st class.
I am not an expert on shares, Nick. It could be that the US energy shares are a good buy - I don't know. I just read the article by Joseph Baines and Sandy Brian Hager.
It is always the way that shares don't go the way I expect or want. I have a new plan - which is to sell when they go up by 25% from when I bought them, irrespective of whether they are rated "a strong buy" by analysts. I am not really a gambler - and am happy with a smallish gain. However, a gain is not always what happens!
Understood Ellie. My shares have gone down too. Some are up. It's eroding away in the bank. I don't want to sell my properties as it's a good store for money. But I feel I have to! I don't want to spend it either... Decisions...
Some shares go up but they can keep going up. If the business has made big changes then that's reflected in the share price. A bit like releasing the iPhone. You can cash out with 25%, but if the business is and continues to make a lot more as it's grown then may be hold on.
I am more buying ETFs. I have the S&P 500. A bit of a loss from March last year but bought again and in some profit for this year. It pay dividends too. Big gain is the tax relief so I can afford to lose 40% and not be out of pocket.
You sound much more knowledgeable about shares and investments than I am, Nick.
I just worry that Governments can destroy companies as they did with Railtrack (putting it into administration) and BT (in making them bid a fortune for an operating licence). I sold a large number of National Grid shares before the end of the last tax year for that reason, although there hasn't been talk of nationalisation from Labour I don't think.
I have the same worries Ellie. I quite like my ETFs as they spread my exposure and to companies like Amazon, Google and Starbuck etc who I think are as untouchable as they can be taxwise.
It is easy for him to say that! Wouldn't He?
A local authority rehoused someone in my property. She wanted to be rehoused 4 years later in a bigger property and was told that the current property is adequate.
She thrashed the property to a devastation requiring £68,000 to restore it to meet Homes (Fitness for Human Habitation) Act 2018).
The same council rehoused her.
The property has remained EMPTY because I could not raise £68K to restore it. Yet the same council is demanding COUNCI TAX and threatening 200% shortly on the dodgy EMPTY HOME POLICY.
These are the sort of properties that Khan wants to seize but will do nothing to get it into use by righting the wrongs of their tenants - Bright Thinking Lord Khan.
So does Khan not think he is partly responsible as his former life as a human rights lawyer. Not just any human rights lawyer but an ambulance chasing legal aid one.
How many has he made it easy for to come to the UK shores and not challenged, how many criminals has he and his other weary mate Starmer gotten off on technicalities?
Now the hypocritical socialist who takes his dog for a walk in a fleet of Range Rovers wants to take property off people that have paid or invested in them.
Londoners please do the right thing and eject this complete Jockey the next time of asking.
The people own these houses in central London are mostly investors from Europe, Middle East and use this properties as a base, and do not need to stay in hotels. These people come to London to do business and to shop and shopping means jewellery for 300 thousand pounds, they help the retailers in London and economy in a very big way. If we are doing this, we are straggling the economy and start calculating the loss later. We have to be careful not to become a country to hate the wealthy, it is a hate crime. A person in senior leadership to think in this manner has a lack of vision, what is needed is how to improve and stimulate economy after being hit by Brexit, covid, inflation, London needs to rebuild its financial centre as a leader of world finance as it used to be. We need an intelligent leader with great vision.
Good Luck to finding one of those in the current crop...
Might have more success if we could persuade dear old Margaret to come back from the other side.
All true. But where can we find "an intelligent leader with great vision"? Certainly not in the Tory party. No F way in the Labour party. The less said about the Lib Dems and Greens the better.
Peter,
I would be inclined to dig Margaret up out of her grave and see if she can do any better. At least it might put an end to Gove.
😂😂
AI the gov, save lots of tax payers' money and time, cut the nonsense, and focus on recovering and stimulating the economy.
In practice many of these empty properties are unsuitable for housing the average family, being either in very poor condition or large mansions. The main stumbling block is much of this apparent sea of a vacant property is owned by overseas governments and companies, who would tie him up in the Courts for years, not to mention trash inward investment. A sensible solution is to increase Council Tax on Vacant properties on which there are no current or active plans to occupy. In addition, restricting the construction of properties that are not designed as family homes bunging up shoe boxes for Chinese investors to launder money should be made impossible by minimum room sizes for example along with minimum occupancy rules to prevent gaming the system with AirBnbs.
If you buy a car does anybody force you to drive it, if you buy food does anybody force you to eat it
If you buy your child a toy does anyone abuse and threaten the child if they don't play with it
It is not difficult to see where the politics of hate and propaganda is leading us
The properties were purchased through legal process. Surprisingly this is a kind of thinking from our senior leadership, making us look like a joke to the rest of the world. Not Qualified.
Why do they need to take over those big old Buildings, is it to house the hundreds of thousands of people that used to be housed by Private landlords before they were forced out by Gove’s law.
Please login to comment