“Builders make billions as housing crisis escalates”

… Multi-million pound executive pay
The rewards enjoyed by bosses are significant.

As well as their £141m wages, Tony Pidgley and Rob Perrins of Berkeley are also sitting on shares in the company worth £440m.

They are not alone. Two executives at Persimmon, another of Britain’s biggest house builders, have shares worth at least £105m as part of their company incentive plan.

Our investigation – published days after the Chancellor Philip Hammond announced more than £5bn of government money would be spent increasing affordable homes and speeding up house building – also shows that Taylor Wimpey CEO Peter Redfern has been paid more than £24m in the past five years. …

… Planning documents kept secret
Previous in-depth reporting by the Bureau highlighted how the UK’s planning system allows developers to reduce their affordable homes targets while keeping their justifications secret.

Developers carry out financial viability assessments for their proposed developments, which often conclude that meeting the affordable housing targets set by local authorities would reduce their profits to a point that the scheme would be worth their while. However those assessments are kept confidential, with even councillors unable to see them.

In order to make sure schemes goes ahead, the local authorities typically reduce their targets or accept payment from the developer in lieu of the affordable homes. That money is supposed to be invested into social and community projects, or the council’s own affordable housing schemes. …

https://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/2016/11/27/uk-housing-crisis-house-prices

“The Economist” finds circumstantial evidence for land banking by developers

THE average price of a house in Britain has doubled since 2000, as supply has lagged behind demand. Successive governments have aimed to put up 250,000 dwellings a year, but none has done so since 1980. Some blame housebuilders for this sorry state of affairs. The firms are accused of “land banking”, hoarding undeveloped plots to push up prices. Last month Sajid Javid, the communities secretary, told builders to “stop sitting on land banks, delaying build-out: the homebuyers must come first.”

There is plenty of unused land. The Local Government Association, which represents councils, recently identified sites for half a million homes in England which had been given planning permission but were yet to be built. Three of the largest builders, Persimmon, Taylor Wimpey and Barratt, have 200,000 plots of land that are “ready or close to ready” for development, according to an official report. Last year in England permission was granted for 250,000 housing units—enough to meet the target—but only 140,000 got under way.

To some, all this looks like anti-competitive behaviour by the big developers, eight of which build over half of Britain’s houses. A report from Sheffield Hallam University found that in 2012-15 the biggest private housebuilders increased construction by a third, but their profits trebled.

The builders protest that their critics misunderstand the economics of housing. Some land banking is inevitable: in order to show shareholders that their business has viable prospects, builders need a stock of land for future development. Builders’ profits have risen partly because they acquired land when it was cheaper than it is now, and the price of houses has increased.

Furthermore, the builders say, they are victims of bureaucracy. Even after planning permission is granted, there are conditions to meet, such as outlining plans for flood defences. “Back in my day, you only had to tell the council the colour of the bricks you planned to use,” says Ian Burnett of United Living, a property firm. Planning departments have shed staff following deep cuts to councils’ budgets. The lag between receiving planning permission and building being completed has risen by 12 months since 2007.

All this does not entirely exonerate the builders. Lately the government has become keener on large-scale housing developments. They tend to be farther from NIMBY-ish residents, and local authorities find it easier to manage one big project than lots of small ones. But they can give large builders local monopolies. To maximise profits on a plot, the builder may ration supply, putting up houses gradually rather than completing them all at once.

There is circumstantial evidence of this process at work. One study in 2014 looked at sites in London where more than 500 homes were earmarked and found that it was rare to build more than 100 of them a year. Research by Nathaniel Lichfield and Partners (NLP), a consultancy, suggests that as the size of a plot goes up, the annual rate of building gets relatively smaller. One development of 3,000 homes near Winchester, managed by two firms, saw only 526 constructed in six years, according to NLP (the companies insist they are developing the sites without delay).

These problems are not intractable. Councils could allocate smaller plots to a bigger range of builders, making the drip-drip style of construction more difficult. Andrew Lainton, a planning consultant, says that an obligation to build within a given deadline could be attached to planning permission. And ministers could get their own houses in order: one of the biggest hoarders of land suitable for residential development is government itself.

Source: The Economist, 24 November 2016 via Timekeeper newsfeed

Greedy housebuilders make billions while getting taxpayer subsidies – yet fail thousands of homeless families

The Chancellor has been blasted for giving more taxpayer ­subsidies to greedy housebuilders – who rake in billions while making the homes crisis worse.

In his Autumn Statement, Philip Hammond ploughed another £1.4bn into the affordable homes programme as well as £1.7bn for developers building on public sector land.

Yet the biggest builders – Persimmon, Taylor Wimpey, Barratt and Berkeley Group – have all missed affordable housing targets set by councils in recent years, while watching profits soar.

They even plan to pay out £6.6bn in extra shareholders’ dividends by 2021, the Bureau of Investigative Journalism found.

Now housing experts are ­questioning why builders need subsidies when the top four raked in more than £2bn in pre-tax profits last year – with their bosses getting immensely rich.

Eight directors of major housebuilders together earned £230m in the past five years.

Meanwhile, the number of homeless families in temporary accommodation in England has risen 45% since 2010 to 73,120.

Two bosses, Tony Pidgley and Rob Perrins, of Berkeley, have taken £141m in pay and share sales since 2011. They have shares totalling £440m.

MPs and campaigners have accused the top firms of keeping housing supply low to drive up prices.

The big four built 50,000 houses between them in the past year, but are sitting on 450,000 empty building plots.

Joanna Kennedy, chief of housing advice firm Z2K, said: “Only a fool would imagine the big volume builders work in the national interest.”

Shadow Housing Minister John Healey said: “We need much tougher rules. Non-developing firms should forfeit planning permission.”

The big four are all in the Home Builders Federation, who told us: “House building is a high risk business.”

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/greedy-housebuilders-make-billions-getting-9342409

Channel 4 “Britain’s Housing Crisis” – notes

476,000 outstanding GRANTED planning permissions not commenced.

28% rise in planning permissions, 10% more completed homes.

Average delay from granting planning permission to starting construction up from 21 to 32 months.

Developers build out big sites very slowly to maximise profits says MP Clive Betts.

Oxford – most unaffordable city – land is being hoarded says Ed Turner, Oxford Councillor and a housing spokesperson for the Local Government Association. Developers “making a fast buck”.

Big developers have made serious money –

Persimmon profits up from £638 MILLION – up 34% on the previous year.
Taylor Wimpey £604m – also up 34%
Barratt Homes – £682m – up 45%

(these 3 builders provide a quarter of all new homes, the eight next largest more than a half, small builders around a quarter). In the 1980’s small builders built two-thirds of homes each year.

Community Secretary Javid talks the talk but isn’t walking the walk – said he wants to “break the stranglehold of developers”.

Home Builders Association – weasel words – 30% more new homes in last 2 years, industry not sitting on land banks – no reason why they would delay. Nothing their fault.

Reporter puzzled by that statement – it includes existing houses turned into multiple flats and shops converted to housing. Official government data shows in 2013 133,000 new homes built – lowest figures in over half a century. 2015 – 152,000 new homes – up only 14% over 2 years NOT 30% and from a very low base. Over this summer housebuilding actually fell.

Javid “determined to do something about it”!

Small builders feel shut out – no land particularly in London, only small sites available. Developers have too cosy a relationship with councils says one small builder. Public sector land is not being released to small builders.

Last year the Big 3 house builders completed 44,360 homes and had planning permission to build a further 200,823 homes. They have strategic land holdings that could accommodate a further 278,600 more homes.

“Option agreements” are common – paying landowners if planning permission is granted – but only they can buy the land – no-one else.

A farmer near Gatwick told his story – first approach “a chat” to sell an option for exclusive development. They offered £275m which the farmer rejected, saying the developer already has land nearby they can develop. But options are not always recorded by the Land Registry so it is hard to know who controls such land.

So what is Javid going to DO, asked the reporter – a White Paper next month – we can’t have a market dominated by big suppliers, more small developers needed. But no idea how he is going to do it!

Reporter pointed out that the big house builders are major donors to the Tory party.

The big house builders are not impressed by talks of fines for not starting new builds more quickly. The bloke from their association said that if you start restricting the house building industry they will react by reducing output. The reporter asked if that was a threat – the spokesperson denied that. He said that, if the big builders had to forfeit land with planning permission but not started, house builders will restrict the flow of planning applications.

Land banking taxes may be needed says reporter, as the system is broken.

Nasty.

Barratt Homes London boss arrested

“The London boss of housebuilding giant Barratt Developments has been arrested after an investigation into alleged misconduct in the process for awarding contracts.

Alastair Baird, regional managing director for the London region, and one other former Barratt London employee were arrested this morning, the firm said.

It has suspended Mr Baird following the arrest.

Mr Baird joined Barratt as a site manager in 1987 and was promoted to London managing director in 2011 – a division employing more than 650 staff.

He is given a glowing review on the company’s website which praises him for being a ‘dynamic leader with an enviable reputation’ and ‘superb relationships with key public and private sector stakeholders’.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3851340/London-boss-housebuilders-Barratt-Developments-arrested-probe-awarding-contracts.html

“‘Rabbit hutch’ homes should be consigned to the past, say architects”

“Barratt and Persimmon singled out as worst offenders in survey of new homes on 100 developments”

More than half of family homes under construction by private housebuilders in the UK are too small, architects have said.

The typical new three-bedroom home is missing space equivalent to a bathroom while many are missing as much as a double bedroom when judged against minimum reasonable space standards launched by the government in October.

Homes outside London are the worst affected by what the Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA) attacked as “rabbit hutch” homes after it measured a sample of new homes on 100 developments.

RIBA singled out two of the leading housebuilders as the worst offenders. From a sample of new three-bedroom homes surveyed, it found Barratt homes were on average 6.7sq metres smaller than minimum space standards and Persimmon homes were on average 10.8sq m too small – about the size of a double bedroom.

“Tiny rabbit-hutch new-builds should be a thing of the past,” said RIBA president Jane Duncan. “But, sadly, our research shows that, for many people, a new home means living somewhere that’s been built well below the minimum space standard needed for a comfortable home. The government must take action to ensure a fairer minimum space standard is applied to all new homes across the country …”

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2015/dec/02/rabbit-hutch-homes-should-be-thing-of-the-past-say-architects?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other