You are viewing 1 of your 1 free articles
Sue Phillips is the founder of Shared Ownership Resources
Shared ownership research focuses on short-term impacts, but what is a buyer’s experience over a longer period? Our new report sheds some light, writes Sue Phillips
The shared ownership scheme offers affordability, security and a stepping stone to full homeownership. Testimonials published by housing associations and their agents invariably portray happy customers – but this isn’t the whole story.
Those promotional testimonials tend to feature relatively recent homebuyers.
And housing sector research and evaluation largely focuses on short-term aspects such as ‘awareness’, consumer demand and sales completions.
But do the majority of shared owners experience good, long-term outcomes?
Some commentators have raised concerns about gaps between policy rhetoric and legal reality, and whether policies are based on assumptions rather than evidence.
Back in 2015, Professor Anupam Nanda and Professor Gavin Parker posed the question: “What evidence exists to support the assumption that shared ownership is affordable or progressive?”
Our new report – Shared ownership: the consumer perspective – asks whether claims that shared ownership is affordable, fair, consumer-friendly and a realistic pathway to full homeownership stand up to scrutiny from a shared owner’s perspective.
“Shared ownership has become exceedingly complex to navigate and information asymmetry is rife”
The report is groundbreaking in exploring disconnects between the interests of different stakeholders – the government, housing associations and shared owners – and conflicts of interest arising directly from the cross-subsidy model.
It concludes that the interests of entrants to the shared ownership scheme tend to be subordinate to those of housing associations under the government’s development funding model.
Shared ownership has become exceedingly complex to navigate and information asymmetry is rife.
Many shared owners state that while they had been made aware of the potential benefits of the scheme, various pitfalls had come as an unwelcome surprise.
Some expressed dissatisfaction with conveyancing solicitors – including those on housing association panels – for not fully explaining the legal nature of the tenure and associated hazards.
Caveat emptor (buyer beware) is a not uncommon response when shared owners express dissatisfaction. (Which in itself is noteworthy given that shared ownership is publicly subsidised and delivered as social housing.)
Although, on the other hand, many policymakers and housing professionals appear to genuinely place great faith in the value of the shared ownership offer. In this respect, Shared ownership: the consumer perspective constitutes an exercise in explaining mounting consumer dissatisfaction with the shared ownership model.
The report has been a year in the making.
At times, the pace of change in the social housing environment fuelled concerns that the report was destined to be out of date practically the moment it was published. Yet, conversely, it is increasingly topical.
The Levelling Up, Housing and Communities Committee recently launched an inquiry into the finances and sustainability of the social housing sector, posing questions as to whether shared ownership is desirable for potential purchasers, and whether the cross-subsidy model which underpins the shared ownership scheme has any continuing viability?
Shared ownership: the consumer perspective proffers a challenge to policymakers, housing providers and regulators to reassess prevalent taken-for-granted assumptions about the nature and desirability of the shared ownership scheme in its current format.
The report suggests that improved data on outcomes and satisfaction rates is essential to drive better outcomes for shared ownership households, and makes a number of recommendations regarding marketing, delivery and evaluation of the scheme.
Sue Phillips, founder, Shared Ownership Resources
Already have an account? Click here to manage your newsletters