Winners and losers in user-pays rentals

If proposed curbs on interest-only loans make life easier for people who want to buy where they live, at prices uninflated by speculators, what about tenants?

Like it or not, investors pay for the units that are rented out. And that forgotten “minority” of tenants represents a whopping 75 percent of apartment residents in inner Melbourne more than 60 percent in Sydney.

Obviously, if restrictions on interest-only loans mean, say, 1000 families can afford to own rather than rent, that’s 1000 fewer competitors for rental properties. It’s also 1000 fewer properties available to rent – net result, no change.

And if property speculation is made less attractive, who will pay for the new units to house our growing populations?  And will rents go up to compensate?

It’s time we rethought our attitudes to renting versus owning. Being a long-term renter doesn’t mean you have failed, and there is a happy medium.

The quiet achievers in the residential market are housing associations and co-ops, where residents pay rent but share ownership and responsibilities.

Sure, many are for special needs and low income renters but others provide middle-income families with an attractive option between government housing and the brutal, loser-pays market.

One of the basic principles in most housing co-ops is that tenants have to be willing to participate in the running of their homes and in some schemes actually have to take a course in what that means.

If you want to know more you could start with this article on co-op housing from Crikey, last year.

For some specific examples, chosen at random, have a look at the Women’s Housing Company, Equilibrium Eco-Housing project and Melbourne’s South East Housing Cooperative.  These are all very different takes on similar concepts and you can find a lot more by googling Housing co-ops au.