• About
    • Ethics policy
    • Privacy Policy
    • Ownership, funding and corrections
    • Complaints procedure
    • Terms & Conditions
  • Contact
  • Support
  • Newsletter
Brighton and Hove News
16 July, 2025
  • News
    • Politics
    • Business
    • Opinion
    • Community
  • Arts and Culture
    • Music
    • Theatre
    • Food and Drink
  • Sport
    • Brighton and Hove Albion
    • Cricket
  • Newsletter
  • Public notices
  • Advertise
No Result
View All Result
  • News
    • Politics
    • Business
    • Opinion
    • Community
  • Arts and Culture
    • Music
    • Theatre
    • Food and Drink
  • Sport
    • Brighton and Hove Albion
    • Cricket
  • Newsletter
  • Public notices
  • Advertise
No Result
View All Result
Brighton and Hove News
No Result
View All Result
Home Brighton

The unintended consequences of interest rate rises

Higher borrowing costs affect developers too, meaning fewer homes are built including social housing

by Ed Deedman
Tuesday 1 Aug, 2023 at 12:00AM
A A
6
Here’s why it’s not always easy to include affordable homes in new schemes

Ed Deedman

As interest rates have risen, the obvious and desired effect is to make borrowing more expensive, reducing the money people and businesses have available, reducing spending and (hopefully) curbing inflation.

But what are the longer-term, perhaps unintended, consequences of interest rate rises in development? How does it change the developments we produce?

Everyone is affected by the current interest rate rises when it comes to where they live. If you rent the cost of renting is going up.

When house prices are predicted to decrease, fewer people look to buy a house, leaving more to rent. That creates an increase in demand for rental property which, combined with rising borrowing costs for landlords, new regulations for rental property and inflation on maintenance costs, pushes rental prices up.

If you own a property, the cost to pay for it via a mortgage increases which, combined with increasing costs elsewhere, brings property prices down as less people can afford the prices they were at before.

This also means that if you own your home outright, lucky you, then it’s also costing you as your house price decreases – and to cap it off, no one is in the least bit sympathetic, sorry.

All this we know. What isn’t so widely mentioned is that some 86 per cent of homeowners with a mortgage are on fixed-rate deals of two to five years in length.

Of course, it depends when they took out their deals, but a substantial number of homeowners are still paying well under the Bank of England rate – and all hoping interest rates will come back down before their fixed rate period expires.

That in itself has unintended consequences because those people are definitely not moving house right now, which leads to a lack of housing on the market, which also helps prop up prices to some degree.

In the same way that mortgages are available as fixed rate or variable, so are development loans, which are the main way non-plc house-builders fund their developments.

Back when the interest rate was sub 1 per cent, there were very few fixed-rate loans on the market, so most developers took on variable loans, blind to the interest rate rises ahead.

Clearly it would have been better to seek out those fixed-rate deals but hindsight is a wonderful thing as they say.

There is another piece in the puzzle – rising build costs. Inflation in every aspect of the job. Materials prices, transport costs, borrowing costs, building regulation standards, sustainability measures – these all cost a lot of money and so the cost to build is also continuing to rise.

And don’t get me started on the costs of surveyors, solicitors, valuers, etc. Anyone issuing paperwork (probably while “working” from home) has been increasing their prices too. Got to pay for that Netflix subscription on in the background as you work, I guess.

Where am I going with all this? In short – if the value of the homes that developers produce decrease and the cost of all the borrowing, parts and labour to build them goes up, what happens?

In the short term, with developments under way, profits decrease (cue the violins) – but in the long term, new developments are allowing for all these factors and still factoring in the minimum return the banks require as a margin to cover a continuation of these problems

How is that possible when house prices and most of these costs our outside our control? In my first article, I described the viability method that local authorities use to calculate how much social housing developers can provide. Find out more here.

Briefly, you take the estimated end value, deduct all the costs including the land and what’s left can be put towards it.

An aerial view of Cayuga’s Aurum flats on Hove seafront

So, if all the costs are rising and house prices are decreasing, the only two things that can be adjusted are the price of the land and the amount of social housing.

In rural areas, where developers are buying a field, the land price can go down to accommodate the rising costs and lower house prises because agricultural land is worth so little compared to its value with planning.

Therefore, social housing still gets built but farmers and landowners get less money when they sell. That’s why I’ve always argued those developments could and should provide a higher percentage of social housing and a higher standard of build than they frequently do.

In urban areas, it’s not so simple. The cost of building is substantially more than in rural areas, with complex problems to solve to get buildings built – and every development is a one-off.

Even more crucially, the land required is always very expensive in the first place as the existing buildings you will be demolishing already have value.

You can’t pay less for the land than it’s already worth without planning permission because the vendor won’t sell it for less – so the only thing that gives to make building possible is the amount of social housing.

This is not a good result, for anyone.

I frequently get asked about being a developer and there is often this idea that comes up that we developers hate providing social housing and do our best to avoid it. This is, for the most part, is wrong.

This week, the National Planning Barometer was published. It makes for stark reading with a conclusion that “the planning system is set up to fail”.

Also, the number one priority local authority committee members had was “providing affordable homes for future generations” (68 per cent).

We recently had a scheme refused in Adur, with the refusal stating quite clearly that our failure to offer as much social housing as their local policy requests was the reason.

If we could have offered more, we would have. The idea of selling a large number of units off plan, reducing our interest costs and risk is very appealing financially. And avoiding it doesn’t help us – we are still restricted to making 18 per cent maximum anyway.

Refusing schemes for not providing enough social housing in the eyes of the committee is common. It’s not just Adur.

The ironic, unintended consequence is that by refusing these schemes, even less housing gets built, social or otherwise, because developers can’t just magic 40 per cent social housing into schemes with all the other rising costs and decreasing house prices.

Toad’s Hole Valley from the air from the north

What’s left is fewer and fewer schemes getting built at all – nationally this year less than half of the country’s 300,000 target will be built, down from 205,000 built last year.

As the Planning Barometer succinctly says: “While councillors note that provision of affordable housing is a top priority, meeting their housing targets (the primary route for delivery of those affordable homes) is seen as a low priority.”

So as regulation increases, costs and interest rates rise and house prices decline, once again social housing takes a hit and developers are being prevented from delivering what they can by the committees who claim to want social housing more than anything.

Everyone blames everyone else and the only thing we agree on is that literally no one is happy with the system we have. Meanwhile, it gets harder and harder to deliver and prices and interest rate rises increase. What a mess.

Ed Deedman is a director of Cayuga Homes.

ShareTweetShareSendSendShare

Comments 6

  1. Chris says:
    2 years ago

    I wonder when it became incumbent on property developers to provide social housing. It seems that society is abdicating responsibility and placing it squarely on the back of the private sector. There must be a better way.

    Reply
    • John Walker says:
      2 years ago

      Society? Or governments?

      Reply
    • Loki says:
      2 years ago

      Absolutely. This article shows exactly why our housing policy which is geared towards generating profits will never deliver the housing we so desperately need. It wasn’t always this way and it doesn’t need to be so. Given the contributions that developments make to carbon emissions, in the midst of a climate crisis we cannot continue to keep building the wrong things. Brighton has been radically reshaped by new developments over the last few decades, but the housing crisis gets worse and worse. We must start building the houses we need rather than the ones that make someone the most profit.

      Reply
      • Ed Deedman says:
        2 years ago

        It’s a complex problem. In rural areas, as my article advocates (and as did my article on new towns) developers should be building better homes and more social housing.
        In urban areas we are struggling to make developments work with even no social housing as build cost is so out of control through over regulation and other issues. Here we need radical reform

        Reply
    • Ed deedman says:
      2 years ago

      It started in the 1980s. You can see the history of it here;

      https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm5801/cmselect/cmcomloc/173/17305.htm

      The key point is back then supply of social housing was not an issue. Now it obviously is. We clearly need a rethink because this model is no longer working.

      Reply
  2. Doug Freebank says:
    2 years ago

    There are plenty of houses, the problem is that some people own 2+. Why build more houses so that profiteering buy-let-types can buy them all up?.
    Solution.
    10x council ta× on 2nd/empty homes. Massive tax on profiteers (‘landlords’),

    Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Most read

Plans for £6.9m swimming pool go before council cabinet

Sinkhole appears outside financially troubled Brighton school

How Brighton’s most useful shop keeps helping customers even though it’s closed

The unintended consequences of interest rate rises

Power cut affects thousands of homes and businesses in Brighton

Lifeboat picks up ill-equipped paddleboarders heading for windfarm at dusk

Water company brings in hosepipe ban after dry spring and heatwaves

Boy, 15, seriously injured in sword attack

Burger bar waits to hear if it can trade until 3am

Carpenter used old employer’s uniform to fraudlently buy goods on account

Newsletter

Arts and Culture

  • All
  • Music
  • Theatre
  • Food and Drink
An evening of goth sounds with The March Violets

An evening of goth sounds with The March Violets

15 July 2025
Love Supreme Festival 2025 : Day Three with Maxwell and friends

Love Supreme Festival 2025 : Day Three with Maxwell and friends

14 July 2025
Jessica Winter has ‘Got Something Good’ going on

Jessica Winter has ‘Got Something Good’ going on

13 July 2025
Palindrones headline a night of darkwave sounds in Brighton

Palindrones headline a night of darkwave sounds in Brighton

13 July 2025
Load More

Sport

  • All
  • Brighton and Hove Albion
  • Cricket
Plans for £6.9m swimming pool go before council cabinet

Plans for £6.9m swimming pool go before council cabinet

by Sarah Booker-Lewis - local democracy reporter
15 July 2025
31

Plans for a new public swimming pool are due to go before Brighton and Hove City Council’s cabinet on Thursday...

Sussex Sharks open T20 Blast with a win

Hampshire Hawks thwart Sussex Sharks in Blast

by Alex Smith - ECB Reporters Network supported by Rothesay
13 July 2025
0

Hampshire Hawks 171-4 (17.2 overs) Sussex Sharks 167-7 (20 overs) Hampshire Hawks win by six wickets James Vince hit the...

We have an awful lot of work to do, says Sussex coach

Sussex must up their game in T20, says disappointed Farbrace

by Alex Smith - ECB Reporters Network supported by Rothesay
11 July 2025
1

Sussex head coach Paul Farbrace said: “It is a hugely disappointing night. We haven’t been consistent in the last three...

Sussex Sharks open T20 Blast with a win

Sussex Sharks flounder against Essex in T20 at Chelmsford

by Alex Smith - ECB Reporters Network supported by Rothesay
11 July 2025
0

Essex 148-4 (16.1 overs) Sussex Sharks 145 (18.2 overs) Sussex Sharks lost to Essex by six wickets Michael Pepper’s pyrotechnical...

Load More
August 2023
M T W T F S S
 123456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
28293031  
« Jul   Sep »

RSS From Sussex News

  • Suspected fare dodger attacks ticket inspector on train 15 July 2025
  • Man dies in three-car crash 13 July 2025
  • Boy, 15, injured in sword attack 13 July 2025
  • Water company brings in hosepipe ban after dry spring 11 July 2025
  • Police officer spared prison after being caught with child porn 11 July 2025
ADVERTISEMENT
  • About
  • Contact
  • Support
  • Newsletter
  • Privacy
  • Complaints
  • Ownership, funding and corrections
  • Ethics
  • T&C

© 2023 Brighton and Hove News

No Result
View All Result
  • News
    • Opinion
  • Arts and Culture
    • Music
    • Theatre
  • Sport
    • Cricket
  • Newsletter
  • Public notices
  • Advertise
  • About
  • Contact

© 2023 Brighton and Hove News