Thousands of homeowners have been given the green light to extend their properties without having to apply for planning permission.

The Government introduced temporary rules giving homeowners more freedom to build extensions in 2013. It has now made them permanent.

The rules enable homeowners in England to build single-storey rear extensions of up to six metres on a terraced or semi-detached property and eight metres on a detached one without having to submit a full planning application.

Housing Minister Kit Malthouse said: “These measures will help families extend their properties without battling through time-consuming red tape.

“By making this permitted development right permanent, it will mean families can grow without being forced to move.”

Why is this happening?

The move is part of a package of reforms designed to help make the property market more efficient.

Not only will families have more certainty about the modifications they can make to their homes, but the Government is also scrapping restrictive planning rules for commercial property to make it easier for business owners to respond to changing trends on the high street.

Under so called permitted development rights, property owners will be allowed to convert shops into offices without having to go through the planning process.

Who does it affect?

The move is good news for homeowners who want to extend their existing property rather than face the cost and upheaval of trading up the ladder.

The Government sought to reassure anxious neighbours that the measures took into account the potential impact extensions would have on nearby properties, by limiting their length and height.

It is hoped that giving property owners the right to change shops into offices will also help to breathe new life into beleaguered high streets.

What’s the background?

More than 110,000 extensions have been completed since 2014 under the relaxed rules.

But homeowners should note that permitted development rights do not apply to flats or maisonettes, as well as to properties in certain ‘designated areas’, such as conservation areas, national parks and areas of outstanding natural beauty.

The Government has previously also proposed making it easier to extend properties upwards.

It launched a consultation last year on allowing spaces above shops, garages and car parks to be converted into homes, especially in areas of high demand.

It has set a target to have 300,000 new homes built every year, with 1 million properties added to the UK’s housing stock by the end of 2020.

But building levels still remain well below this figure, with only 165,000 new homes built last year.

Top 3 takeaways

• Thousands of homeowners have been given the green light to extend their properties without having to apply for planning permission

• The Government has made temporary rules giving homeowners more freedom to build extensions permanent

• The rules enable homeowners in England to build single-storey rear extensions of up to six metres on a terraced or semi-detached property and eight metres on a detached one without submitting a full planning application.

Owning a property could be the key to happiness, with homeowners reporting a greater sense of wellbeing than renters.

Those who own a property, either outright or with a mortgage, have higher levels of life satisfaction than people renting, regardless of tenure.

Social housing tenants were slightly more likely to be dissatisfied with their lives than those who rented in the private sector, although they were also more likely to be unemployed and in poor health, according to the Office for National Statistics.

Director of Benham and Reeves, Marc von Grundherr, said: “We’re a nation of aspirational homeowners and so it’s no surprise that those that have managed to reach the life mile marker of owning their own home will feel more satisfied with themselves, compared to those that remain resigned to a rental market plagued by issues of affordability.

“However, with employment levels at record highs and those listed as employed leading the way when it comes to homeownership, we should hopefully see more and more tenants make the jump to homeowner over the coming years and enjoy an uplift in life satisfaction when they do.”

What makes people happiest?

Perhaps unsurprisingly, people’s health had the biggest impact on happiness, with people reporting to be in good or very good health also having the highest levels of life satisfaction.

Age also had an impact, with younger people reporting high levels of life satisfaction, with happiness falling in middle age but rising again in people’s later years.

What role does money play?

Money plays a significant role in people’s level of life satisfaction, but not necessarily in the way you might think.

For example, having a higher level of household spending was more strongly related to feeling happy than having a high income.

The way people spent their money also appeared to have an impact, with those spending a higher share of their cash on experiences, such as nights in hotels and eating in restaurants, more likely to feel very satisfied with their life than those who spent more on food, insurance and mobile phone subscriptions, even if their overall level of spending was the same.

In terms of economic activity, perhaps unsurprisingly, people who were retired were happiest, while those who were unemployed or could not work due to sickness or disability were the least satisfied.

People’s economic status now has less of an impact on how happy they are compared with when the same research was carried out six years ago.

What about love?

Being married or in a civil partnership led to the highest levels of happiness, with those who were separated most likely to report feeling dissatisfied with their life, followed by those who were widowed.

People who were single were slightly more likely to be unhappy than those who were divorced.

Those with dependent children were also likely to feel happier about their lives than those who did not have children at home.

Marital status now plays a bigger role in how happy people feel compared with six years ago.

It also has a greater impact on their sense of satisfaction than their economic status.

Top 3 takeaways

• People who own a property, either outright or with a mortgage, have higher levels of life satisfaction than people renting, regardless of tenure

• Social housing tenants are slightly more likely to be dissatisfied with their lives than those who rented in the private sector

• Overall, people’s health, marital status and economic activity had the highest impact on how positively they felt about their life.

Enquiries to The Property Ombudsman hit a record high in 2018, and consumers have been handed almost £2.2m after making formal complaints about property agents.

The service, which is one of three ombudsmen that handles property-related disputes, received 29,023 enquiries during the year, 22% more than in the previous 12 months.

Out of these enquiries, 4,246 progressed to become formal complaints, 16% more than in 2017.

Two-thirds of these complaints were upheld by the ombudsman, with property agents ordered to make a financial award in nearly 2,400 of the cases.

In a small minority of instances, agents were referred to the ombudsman’s Compliance Committee for possible expulsion from the scheme.

Katrine Sporle, Property Ombudsman, said: "2018 was an extremely busy year for The Property Ombudsman with increasing demand for the service."

However, she added: "This does not necessarily mean that agents’ standards are slipping, but rather that consumers are increasingly aware of their rights."

Why is this happening?

The boom in complaints was driven by dissatisfied landlords and tenants, with issues relating to lettings accounting for 2,450 of the total complaints handled.

A further 1,304 complaints related to sales, while 349 were about residential leasehold management.

The rental sector also accounted for the largest financial awards, with compensation averaging £845, compared with £604 for issues relating to sales and £497 for ones about leasehold management.

Who does it affect?

Within the letting sector, landlords were most likely to be dissatisfied with the service they received from property professionals, with 54% of complaints made by landlords and 42% made by tenants.

For the third year running, Greater London accounted for the highest volume of complaints at 20%, followed by the south east at 17% and the north west at 11%.

People were most likely to complain about communication and record keeping, with management, tenancy agreements and inventories and deposits also common areas of grievance.

On the sales side, 60% of complaints were made by people selling a property, with 34% made by those buying one.

Record keeping was the most common cause of complaint in this area as well, followed by marketing and advertising, and instructions, terms of business, commission or termination.

The south east saw the highest number of complaints against estate agents, accounting for 16% of the total, followed by Greater London and the north west at 11% and 9% respectively.

What’s the background?

The Government recently ran a consultation on creating a single ombudsman services for the property market.

The sector is unusual in that it has three different ombudsman schemes, not all of which cover all aspects of buying or renting a home.

Other ideas floated include setting up a New Homes Ombudsman who will handle disputes between homebuyers and housebuilders.

In August last year, the Ombudsman Service, which also handled property disputes withdrew its services, after saying it no longer wanted to offer a “broken solution to a broken market”.

Top 3 takeaways

• Consumers were handed nearly £2.2m in compensation in 2018 after making formal complaints about property professionals

• The service received 29,023 enquiries during the year, 22% more than in the previous 12 months

• Out of these enquiries, 4,246 went on to become formal complaints, 16% more than in 2017.

Homeowners are taking longer to repay their mortgages than before the financial crisis, despite putting down bigger deposits when they first buy a home.

In 2007, the average homeowner had netted at least 70% equity in their property by the time they were aged between 51 and 55. But today borrowers are waiting five years longer to reach this milestone.

Younger borrowers are also putting down bigger deposits than they were a decade earlier, according to insurer Royal London.

The typical 18 to 25-year-old put down 10% to 15% as a deposit last year, compared with just 5% to 10% for the same age group in 2007.

Despite this, by the time homeowners are aged between 26 and 30, they are typically sitting on an equity stake of just 15% to 25%, compared with one of 25% to 50% for the same age group in 2007.

Becky O’Connor, personal finance specialist at Royal London, said: "Moving up the housing equity ladder helps you to access better interest rates and makes homeownership more affordable.

"But as the age of first-time buyers has risen, families are having to wait until later in life before they make a serious dent in their mortgage and can benefit from lower rates."

Why is this happening?

Royal London attributed some of the difference in equity levels to more stringent affordability rules introduced for lenders since the financial crisis.

And changes to the rate at which house prices are rising has also had an impact.

Homeowners accrue equity in their properties faster during periods of high house price growth, but in the current subdued market their main means of increasing the proportion of their property that they own outright is through mortgage repayments.

Who does it affect?

Borrowers are typically aged between 36 and 40 before they have at least a 25% equity stake in their home.

And it is not until homeowners reach the 51 to 55 age bracket that they own at least 50% of their property.

The proportion of borrowers above the state pension age of 65 who need a loan of between 30% and 50% of their home’s value has been steadily increasing since the financial crisis.

Last year, 27% of 66 to 70-year-olds were in this position, compared to 21% in 2009.

What’s the background?

While owning a bigger share of their property might make homeowners feel good, there is a practical and financial side to having a large equity stake too – mortgage rates are typically lower for people who are borrowing a smaller percentage of their home’s value.

A best-buy two-year fixed rate mortgage for someone with only a 10% deposit or equity stake is 1.84%, but this falls to 1.54% for someone with a 40% stake.

As a result, annual repayments on a £200,000 mortgage are more than £350 a year cheaper, giving homeowners more money to play with if they want to make overpayments on their loan.

Top 3 takeaways

• Homeowners are taking longer to repay their mortgages than before the financial crisis

• In 2007, the average person owned 70% or more of their home by the time they were aged 51 to 55, but today borrowers are having to wait five years longer to reach this milestone

• Younger borrowers are also putting down bigger deposits than they were a decade earlier

Homes in less than one in 10 areas have ‘earned’ more than their owners in the past two years as house price growth continues to slow.

Only 8% of local authority areas recorded increases in property values that have outstripped local average pay during the period, down from 18% in 2017 and 31% in 2016, according to Halifax.

Richmond-upon-Thames was one of the few areas to buck the trend, with house prices rising by £55,483 more than local people earned during the period.

It was followed by Winchester, where homeowners earned an average of £45,016 more from their property than their job, and South Bucks, where property price rises outpaced earnings by £41,376.

Top 10 local authority districts (LADs) over the last two years:

Why is this happening?

A combination of factors has led to a fall in the number of areas in which homeowners earned more from their property than their job.

On the one hand, a combination of economic uncertainty and stretched affordability has put the brakes on house price growth, with increases in property values recently falling to a six-year low, according to the Office for National Statistics.

At the same time, after years of subdued rises, wage growth has started to pick up again and is currently outpacing house price increases.

Who does it affect?

Russell Galley, managing director at Halifax, added: “While the slowdown in house price growth may not be welcomed by homeowners, the narrowing gap between prices and wages should improve mortgage affordability for all, meaning that a larger house, home extension or even a first property are all more attainable.”

However, it is welcome news for homeowners in one of the lucrative areas, who have the potential to crystallise their housing equity when they sell up.

What’s the background?

Six of the top 10 areas where house prices are continuing to outperform salaries are in London and the south east.

West Devon, in the south west, was the area with the biggest difference between house price growth and earnings outside of these regions at £35,460.

Bromsgrove was the only place in the West Midlands to make it into the top 10, with house prices outstripping earnings by £25,303, while Harborough was the only local authority in the East Midlands on the list, with homes there earning £14,437 more than their owners in the past two years.

Despite 28 local authorities seeing house price growth outpace local earnings, on a regional basis, earnings were higher than house price gains across the UK.

The biggest gap was in Scotland, where people earned an average of £35,250 more than their home increased in value, followed by Yorkshire and Humber at £32,258 and the north west at £32,114.

London had the smallest gap, but even here earnings outpaced house price rises by an average of £19,649.

Regional performance over the last two years: 

A similar pattern was seen over a longer period, with London the only region in which house price increases outstripped average earnings over five years, with homes making £23,817 more than their owners.

At the other end of the scale, people in Scotland earned £79,675 more than their homes in the same period.

Regional performance over the last five years:

On a local authority basis, homeowners in Three Rivers in Hertfordshire saw the biggest gains, with their properties earning an average of £88,281 more than them.

It was followed by Waltham Forest and Brent, both in London, where house price gains outstripped earnings by more than £78,757 and £78,667 respectively.

Top 10 LADs over the last five years:

Top three takeaways

• Homes in less than one in 10 areas have earned more than their owners in the past two years as house price growth continues to slow

• In 2017, house price rises in 18% of areas outstripped earnings, and in 2016 the figure stood at 31%

• Richmond-upon-Thames was one of the few areas to buck the trend, with house prices rising by £55,482 more than local people earned during the period

Rents in northern regions are at their most affordable for a decade, as a result of weaker employment growth and lower barriers to becoming a homeowner in these areas.

At a national level, renters spent an average of 30% of their take-home pay on accommodation in the final three months of 2018, in line with the average over the past 10 years, according to Zoopla.

But the headline rate masked significant regional variations, with rents in Yorkshire and Humber taking up only 25% of earnings, while tenants in the capital handed over 39% of their pay.

The study, which looked at the affordability of renting in the private sector for someone in full-time work, also found that while affordability had remained broadly static in some areas, rents had soared by more than 20% in the past decade in others.

Where is it most affordable to rent a home?

Weak rental growth has left northern regions as the most affordable places in which to be a tenant in the private sector.

The north east has the lowest rents in absolute terms at an average of just £452, followed by Yorkshire and Humber at £501 and Wales at £528.

But when rents are considered as a proportion of take-home pay, Yorkshire and the Humber is the most affordable region, with tenants handing over just 25% of net earnings.

The north east is the second most affordable region with rents that are the equivalent of 26% of take-home pay, followed closely by the north west at 27%.

Where is it most expensive to be a tenant?

Unsurprisingly, rents are most expensive in London, at an average of £1,249, the equivalent of 39% of take-home pay.

The south east has the second highest level of rent at £870, followed by the east at £773 or 34% of post-tax earnings.

But the situation is improving in the capital, and after growing rapidly up until 2014 as employment levels expanded and the city saw a high level of in-migration, rents have since stagnated.

In fact, average rents in London are the same today as they were in 2014 due to stretched affordability acting as a break on further increases.

Rental affordability in the capital peaked at 43% of take-home pay in 2017, before falling back to 39% last year, in line with the long-run average for the region.

How much has affordability changed in the past decade?

Across Great Britain as a whole, rents have increased by 16% during the past decade, broadly in line with changes to average earnings.

The north east has seen the smallest change, with average rents edging ahead by only 1%, while rises were also subdued in the north west at 5% and Yorkshire and Humber at 9%.

By contrast, the cost of being a tenant in the east has soared by 23% since 2007, while it is 20% higher in the West Midlands.

Rents have also been hiked by 18% in London, the south east, Scotland and Wales in the past 10 years.

Top 3 takeaways

• Rents in northern regions are at their most affordable for a decade

• At a national level, renters spent an average of 30% of their take-home pay on accommodation in the last three months of 2018

• Yorkshire and Humber has the most affordable rents, while London has the least affordable ones, although the situation is improving

Today is Mortgage Freedom Day – the day by which borrowers have earned enough money to cover their repayments for the whole of 2019.

It takes homeowners until April 16 to earn the £8,729 the average person spends on their mortgage each year, based on a typical annual income of £28,752 after tax, according to Halifax.

Andy Bickers, mortgages director, Halifax, said: “If every penny earned this year went towards their mortgage today would be the day that the average UK borrower could celebrate paying off their mortgage for the year.”

Mortgage Freedom Day also fell on April 16 in 2018, suggesting there has been little change in affordability for homeowners in the past year, despite the Bank of England base rate rising by 0.25% in August last year.

There has also been little change in the date since 2014, with it moving back by just six days, mainly due to wage growth and house prices remaining broadly stable during the period.

Why is this happening?

Mortgage repayments are the single biggest monthly expense most homeowners face, so it is unsurprising that it takes an average of nearly a third of a year for people to earn enough to cover them.

But interest rates at close to record lows and intense competition among mortgage lenders, have helped Mortgage Freedom Day remain relatively stable during the past five years.

Who does it affect?

Unsurprisingly, there is significant regional variation in when Mortgage Freedom Day occurs.

It comes soonest for people living in Scotland, arriving on March 8, while those in Northern Ireland can celebrate in on March 12.

The day also falls in March for homeowners in the north and north west.

At the other end of the scale, people in Greater London have to wait until June 20 before they have earned enough to pay their mortgage for the whole year, while it takes until May 22 for people in the south east and until May 5 for those in the south west.

In terms of individual local authorities, Copeland in Cumbria has the earliest Mortgage Freedom Day of February 18, and Brent in London has the latest one, with homeowners having to wait nearly seven months more until September 5.

What’s the background?

People who rent a home have to wait an average of 10 days longer than homeowners before they have earned enough to pay for their accommodation for a year, with Rent Freedom Day coming on April 26.

Like Mortgage Freedom Day, the date is unchanged compared with 2018.

But while regional variations follow similar patterns to those for Mortgage Freedom Day, the gap between the various dates is bigger for those who rent their home.

Northern Ireland has the earliest Rent Freedom Day of March 24, followed by the north at April 1.

Greater London again had the latest date, although at July 30, it comes more than a month later than Mortgage Freedom Day.

Top 3 takeaways

• April 16 is Mortgage Freedom Day – the day by which borrowers have earned enough money to cover their repayments for the whole of 2019

• Northern Ireland has the earliest Mortgage Freedom Day of March 12 and Greater London has the latest one of June 20

• Rent Freedom Day comes 10 days later, falling on April 26

Landlords could be barred from evicting a tenant at short notice without a good reason as part of a government overhaul of the rental sector.

The Government has launched a consultation on abolishing Section 21 notices for eviction. The so-called no-fault evictions, currently allow landlords to evict tenants with just eight weeks’ notice once their fixed term contract has come to an end.

The move will effectively create open-ended tenancies, which the Government claims will bring greater peace of mind to people who live in rented accommodation.

Landlords will still be able to evict tenants for reasons recognised under law, such as if they fall into rent arrears or damage the property, but they may have to go through the courts to do so.

The Government also plans to amend the current rules so that landlords can regain their property if they want to sell it or move into it.

But despite these concessions, the Residential Landlords Association (RLA) warned it could put people off investing in property.

Why is this happening?

The Government claims that evidence shows no-fault evictions are one of the biggest causes of homelessness for families.

It adds that allowing them not only leads to tenants living with the worry of losing their home, but also contributes to people putting up with poor conditions as they are afraid to complain about problems in case they are evicted.

It hopes the move will not only give renters more stability but will also mean people no longer put up with sub-standard accommodation.

Who does it affect?

The move would obviously be good news for tenants, and it has been welcomed by housing charities.

But the RLA warned the Government there were “serious dangers” if it got the reforms wrong.

David Smith, policy director at the RLA, said: “With the demand for private rented homes continuing to increase, we need the majority of good landlords to have confidence to invest in new homes.

“This means ensuring they can swiftly repossess properties for legitimate reasons such as rent arrears, tenant anti-social behaviour or wanting to sell them.”

Jeremy Leaf, a former RICS residential chairman, also claimed that no-fault evictions affected only a small number of tenants.

He said: “On the ground, we don’t find this happens frequently at all, so hope that a thorough evidence-based consultation will flush out the extent of the problem.

“This will ensure that landlords do not desert the sector unnecessarily.”

The Institute for Public Policy Research welcomed the announcement but called on the Government to go further and introduce caps on rent increases and prevent landlords from evicting families within the first three years of signing a tenancy agreement if the only reason was to sell the property.

What’s the background?

The latest consultation is part of an overhaul of the private rental sector, which the Government has described as being the biggest for a generation.

Other changes that are coming into force including banning letting agents from charging fees to tenants and capping tenancy deposits at the equivalent of five weeks’ rent.

It has also announced plans to introduce a specialist Housing Court to resolve property disputes.

Around 4.5 million households currently live in privately rented homes.

Top 3 takeaways

• The Government has launched a consultation on abolishing so-called no-fault evictions

• The move will effectively create open-ended tenancies

• The Residential Landlords Association (RLA) warned it could put people off investing in property

A recent court ruling could potentially open the way to challenges to the 3% stamp duty surcharge levied on additional homes.

It could offer an opportunity for those who have already paid the charge to request a refund from HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) – and could set a precedent for other buy-to-let investors.

What’s the background?

Since April 2016, buyers have had to fork out an extra 3% in stamp duty when buying a second residential property for £40,000 or more, such as a holiday home or buy-to-let.

HMRC calls it the ‘Higher Rates on Additional Dwellings’ or HRAD for short.

What’s happened now?

A recent tax tribunal in Bristol found in favour of Paul and Nikki Bewley, and said they didn’t have to pay this 3% charge as they were buying a property which was, at the time, uninhabitable – even though HMRC contested it.

The Bewleys purchased a derelict bungalow in Weston-Super-Mare for £200,000 as a buy-to-let investment in January 2017.

At the time, the property was riddled with asbestos and had no central heating – and was not fit to live in.

The couple decided to demolish the original building so they could build a new home in its place.

They did so in the belief they would not be liable for the 3% surcharge for purchasing a second home. 

How much stamp duty did they pay?

When the Bewleys bought the property, they paid the normal rate of stamp duty of £1,500.  However, they were later told by HMRC they should have paid £7,500.

What does the law say?

According to the Housing Act of 1967, a property must have a cooking and bathing facilities and a lavatory to be deemed habitable.

What did HMRC say?

HMRC contested this and said it believed the higher rate of stamp duty was applicable on the grounds that a property was capable of being used as a dwelling sometime in the future.

What did the tribunal rule?

However, the tribunal ruled against HMRC and sided with the Bewleys, stating they shouldn’t be liable for the 3% surcharge because the property was not fit to live in immediately.

Due to the ruling, the couple ended up only having to pay the standard rate of stamp duty – a sum of £1,500.

Who does this affect?

Experts say this landmark case could open the flood gates for hundreds of claims from buy-to-let investors who paid the surcharge for the purchase of properties that needed renovation.

This could mean homebuyers who voluntarily overpaid on their tax will now seek to claw back millions of pounds in refunds from the taxman.

Specialist buy-to-let broker, Commercial Trust Limited, says this judgement suggests buy-to-let investors may have a case for exemption from the 3% surcharge if they are buying a property that is uninhabitable at the time of purchase.

It adds that potentially, this ruling could represent an opportunity for retrospective claims from buy-to-let investors who have paid the additional charge on properties that were uninhabitable at the time they were bought.

What does this mean for investors?

This verdict will come as welcome news to the ears of buy-to-let investors who have been hit from all sides recently by a combination of higher stamp duty costs, the loss of tax reliefs and stricter mortgage lending criteria.

This has made it harder for many to generate a decent income and led to many investors quitting the market.

Going forward, buy-to-let investors eager to avoid the 3% surcharge will try to look to take advantage of this loophole by purchasing properties that are derelict or uninhabitable.

What will happen next?

HMRC says it is considering the judgement carefully. But it is also expected to challenge people wherever it can – as there’s a great deal of money at stake if HMRC can force additional homeowners to pay the 3% stamp duty surcharge.

However, going forward, we could expect to see major legal arguments over what constitutes a ‘dilapidated home.

Top 3 takeaways

• HMRC loses a court case against a couple who were charged additional rate stamp duty on a property that was uninhabitable at the time of purchase

• Homebuyers who overpaid the tax in the same way could now seek to claw back millions from the taxman

• New investors may may take advantage of new loophole to avoid the 3% surcharge.