# Is this the beginning of a trend.



## cabby (May 14, 2005)

High Court rules second homes ban in St Ives will remain.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cornwall-37938885

cabby


----------



## peribro (Sep 6, 2009)

There are some parts of Cornwall, although not many, that can sustain themselves economically without tourism. Like many parts of the Mediterranean coast and other tourist hotspots locals have been driven inland because people from outside can afford to pay more for desirable properties. Any form of state intervention will ultimately fail as willing buyers and sellers will find a way around it. 

In the near term what will happen is that the price of existing homes in St Ives will rise faster than they would otherwise have done because second home owners will have a smaller stock of houses from which to choose from as new builds will be denied to them. In turn this will make existing builds even more unaffordable for locals whilst the design and location of new builds will not be what locals would like.


----------



## nicholsong (May 26, 2009)

I am not sure how they will 'police' the ban.

If one declares that one is buying the house as a 'Principal Residence' how do they check if either you, or your partner, own another property elsewhere.

If you have already bought it and only use it at weekends, what sanctions have they against you - can the Local Authority force a sale?

Geoff


----------



## Mrplodd (Mar 4, 2008)

It's another idea that sounds good, but when it comes to the practicalities of enforcment it is not really workable.

A prime example is the use of mobile phones while driving, we all know it's both wrong and illegal, but when did you last see a police car whilst out driving? And if you do see one do they ever look at you?

I know of a bloke who is a complete tw*t, he has TWO mobiles, one he uses all the time whilst driving and the other one he never uses. When he gets stopped (which does happen) he simply produces the one he never uses and shows the Rozzer the call history which doesn't show any recent calls. The trouble is he is getting away with it. Still, he is, so he tells me, a MUCH better driver than I will ever be (anyway,police advanced drivers are rubbish according to him, even though he has no NCB, but that's because all other drivers are tossers innit?) so he can safely use his phone while driving.

Like I said, he is a **** and yes I HAVE told him to his face, but he knows far more about these things than I do.

Andy

Ooo look , software that takes out "naughty" words has been installed!! He is still a [email protected] !!


----------



## Penquin (Oct 15, 2007)

The difficulties of enforcing or managing it have already been explained in St Ives, the situation came about due to the massive number of second homes owned but rarely occupied and entitled to a reduction in tax because of that, BUT there are problems when the ownership of a second house is used to allow it to be let as a holiday rental - that brings money into the area, the second home owners who simply go there for a couple of weeks a year does not help the local economy hardly at all.

Such a distinction is why it will be VERY difficult for the planners to enforce - if someone wants to build a house for holiday lets, that would be approved, if they then changed their mind say a year later, would they be compelled to demolish it? No chance......

All of these difficulties were pointed out before the original vote was taken but they were ignored as local pressure from residents overwhelmed the councillors.

Yet another thing where it seems easy initially, but are actually virtually impossible to manage.......

It will probably be tried, it will go to a planning appeal and the decisions will probably be overturned simply using the ideas I have reported above (which have all come from BBC Spotlight broadcasts over the last few months - we watch that every evening).

"Act in haste, repent at leisure" or "Fast law = poor law" comes to mind.....

Dave


----------

