Well, I've heard it all now (re 'selfish baby boomers')

I had to read that a few times Witzend lol...cant believe people think that! like you I helped my son with buying his first house because if I hadnt he would never get on the property ladder...

I suppose if you're in the position of never being able to afford a house due to ever-increasing prices and see others of your peer group being helped onto the housing ladder thanks to the Bank of Mum and Dad, maybe a certain amount of bitterness is justified.

I agree gettinonabit , I would love to be in a position to help my children . 2 are renting , one lives with me and one is desperately trying to save up to afford a deposit . Him and his partner both work full time in reasonably good jobs and put money away every month , it is an enormous struggle just to find the deposit for a modest house in this area (Cheshire) .
I see the children of my friends getting help from their parents and feel rotten that I cant help mine.

Yes, I can understand bitterness, and thinking it's very unfair, but to imagine that parents are doing it for selfish motives - to keep their own house prices high? I do call that a bit twisted.
Mind you a number of posters on that site have all baby boomers down as greedy, selfish parasites, so maybe I shouldn't have been surprised.

What a nasty attitude by a certain percentage of the population. We had to work very hard for our houses, my first mortgage had an interest rate of 15% and took my entire month's salary to pay the mortgage. When you work hard all your life and people begrudge you it leaves a nasty taste in the mouth.
I gave DS the deposit for a flat after he left university and he has never looked back, the price he got when he sold in London practically bought his house up north.
I paid off DD's mortgage when she went to live abroad so that she wasn't having to pay for two houses. Thank goodness I didn't have a lot of children or I would be in the poor house now.

Mmm....yes, accusing people of keeping house prices high simply by helping their kids is a bit off, but in a bizarre way these accusers have a point, I suppose. Enabling buyers in a crazily overheated market has the effect of creating even more demand, which helps keeps prices high.

If the first-time-buyer market collapsed due to no-one having the means to buy, then house prices should fall to a more affordable level. In theory.

In practice, I think the ridiculousness of the market has a lot to do with foreign investment.

So I can't really blame those posters for being bitter in a way; they are simply drawing attention to the mad inequality in society.

And true, we've worked hard for our mortgages at much higher interest rates, but at least house prices were within our reach. I was earning £8k when I bought my house ( £23k- admittedly a tip).

My house is now worth £200k. Not a fortune. But it's an asset that many people can only dream of nowadays.

I may just kill the next person who says "We had to work very hard for ..." (the grin is so you don't use this in evidence against me as of course I do not mean it but it does make me very angry). The vast, vast majority of people work very hard but some are never in a position to capitalise on their earnings, some suffer life events and some just do not have the luck to be in the right place at the right time. Do I begrudge those who work hard and are able to get the very most out of their hard work - no - but please do not belittle those who work hard and do not have the same good luck. It takes both to come out ahead of the crowd.

gracesgran kill me now.

Of course people work very, very hard these days, and probably for relatively less. There's certainly less security these days. I don't think anyone is belittling anyone, are they?.

I was not really talking about people working very, very hard these days but those of the same age. By making success conditional on hard work it implies the contraposition is true. Obviously it is poor logic to say if those that work hard are successful then those that are not successful do not work hard but it seems to be implied. Why would I think that? Because so many of our wonderful media say exactly that as do a large section of the great British public. It is almost used as a justification for being better off - but it isn't. A little gratitude and rather less narcissism would be nice.

Normally I would have thought it but I wouldn't have said it so I apologise if you feel it out of place - I shan't say any more about it.

But we are of our time, aren't we?
We married, both worked, went without, were lucky enough to rent a room in someone's house, shared kitchen , never went out for meals or on holiday, saved like mad in a building society for a few years because then they would give you a mortgage for a house, not taking the wife's salary into consideration (she would leave work when she had a baby), bought 2nd hand furniture apart from the bed and cooker etc etc. - and lo and behold, not of our making house prices have gone up. I would like them to come down again to enable young people to get on the housing ladder, it makes no difference whatsoever to me if they drop.

But now we are better off we can lend the DC some money for a deposit.

I said I was not talking about different generations (or thought I did) Jalima. Many people did all that you said but statistics tell us that 40% of pensioners are entitled to Pension Credit so for every one that did all that you did almost half of them did not get the same result.

All I'm asking for is for us not to believe it is all down to our own efforts - it is never just that and it seems disingenuous to say so. Yes you did all those things and you were one of the lucky ones - it left you able to help your DC. That is lovely but it is not the same for everyone however hard they try to do the right thing, work hard, etc.

I was about to say exactly the same as Jalima. Things were different in the 1970s when we eventually bought our first house - a little new build, it had the bathroom fitted, a sink unit in the kitchen, Marley tiles on all the floors and a mud pit for a garden. My meagre wages didn't count towards the deposit or mortgage but we did manage to somehow live off them while we sorted the house.

Perhaps if new homes were more basic they could be more affordable? Should they really come with fitted carpets and white goods?

Our DC have all perhaps been fortunate that they've been able to work their ways up the property ladder as we did and haven't asked for help other than DIY advise and practical assistance. Although they all opted for very small weddings (one really small - they 'eloped'!) and a bit of money instead - but that's a different subject.

Actually, thinking more about it,I don't really consider that we did work that hard - it's just what we did. The same as nowadays. Some people try harder than others. I do feel though that we seemed to have had more of a saving, making do culture. That there seems to be less ability now to make do and mend and expectations are higher.

There was something I caught on the radio the other day about the high number of working couples who have cleaners and the rise of cleaning companies. Anybody else catch it?

I think you have a point there Nfk . We did work hard, but at the same time we had to make do and mend, because there was not the choice that there is now. We belong to a throw away society, whereas when we started out, we did not have a fridge or a washing machine, and when we bought them we expected them to last a life-time, they certainly lasted longer than the latest versions which I truly believe are built just to last as long as the guarantee; but then we were brought up in different circumstances, whereas today the younger generation could not do without their fridges and microwaves, because that is the way of life. I do not know why some enterprising company does not set up a scheme to build flats/maisonettes for first time buyers to rent over a certain period of time, part of that rent being put aside for them, so that after an agreed period, whoever is renting the property would HAVE to leave, receive their share of the rent which has been invested for them - hopefully - and have enough to buy somewhere of their own. I know it sounds like a fairy story, but if I was a multi millionaire I would give it a go. (That's probably why I am not a multi-millionaire).

When i was younger i never had any family or friends that lived in their own property, everyone rented either through the council or private landlord.

It just never entered my head that i could own a house. I too worked hard all my life since the age of 15 and i have rented all that time.

If only someone had told me the benefits of owing a home it is the biggest regret of my life that i didn't buy, not for myself but for my children.

I would then be in a position to help them purchase as they all live in rented accommodation as it is just so hard to get a deposit together.

I just hope that children who are being supported by their parents to get onto the property ladder realise how lucky they are, as for some it may never be possible.

What on earth is wrong with having a cleaner? There are so many self-satisfied remarks; we did this, we did that.

Times have changed and I imagine many people hoped it would get easier for their offspring. I imagine those living in hovels with no vote in Victorian times stood back in amazement at the changes in their children's lives too. Sadly I don't think it has got easier for a great many of the now middle aged generation and I don't blame them for being annoyed that we only thought of our generation even though we knew the problems that were up and coming.

Yes, times have certainly changed. For the better? I'm not sure. For one thing, the concept of "saving" is different now. With interest rates at diddly squat percent, what's the point?

And I think the concept of inheritance will change too, as more and more people sell their homes to fund care, leaving nothing behind.

In the last 2 weeks,as bonds and ISAs mature I havr been offered 1%, .8% and similar sums. At age 80 and 78 I don't want money tied up for any long period. No wonder young people can't or don't save now.

We helped to make the world as it is currently or we, at the least, didn't stop it happening. We lived voting in governments that were driving consumption and borrowing. If the next generation thinks this is normal it is not surprising.

I'm looking at this from a different angle than most (or maybe all) of you.
When I lost my mum, as an only child I inherited her house.
Our DS and his fiancee (now wife) both wanted to live in our part of Cheshire, but were struggling to afford anything in a good area, so, problem solved, they're buying mum's house from me!
It's all been arranged legally, the house remains mine until paid off in full, which hopefully will be in about another eight years and then it's up to them to stay there, sell it, whatever they want, it will be theirs to do with as they wish!
They pay me an amount every month, equal to what they'd pay for a mortgage, minus interest, which helps them enormously.
I probably lost about fifty thousand by selling the house to them, as I let them have it at a much reduced price, but hey, he's our only child, so it's worth it.
It's working well for me too, because I know if I'd sold it, and had that amount of money in the bank in one go, I'd have gone on a silly spending spree and wasted a lot of it! The interest rate is so low that keeping the money in the bank wouldn't have been worth doing.
If my mum had lived, we could only have helped our DS with a small amount towards a deposit for a house, but this way, I get to see mum's house growing into a family home again (baby due in early August), our DS and DDiL live in a lovely area, and I have them living in the next road to me, so it's a win win, situation!
If parents are in a position to help their children, why shouldn't they? It has nothing to do with trying go keep house costs high, and everything to do with wanting our families to get on the property ladder.

printmiss I like the idea too of creating homes where rent counts towards a purchase. I'm guessing that, in order to be able to justify that, a developer would need to invest a huge amount up front, thus making it non-viable financially.

If I were a multi-millionaire. I too would create developments for people to rent rather than own, where the tenants have an interest in the properties other than the purely financial; places which are a joy to live in, but ownership not an option. Sigh.

Meanwhile, I think we have to accept that we have a mindset in this country which is all about the acquisition of property.

Not sure how we go about changing that......

Gracesgran you are right there, we are the generation that allowed things to happen, because it was all so new and we wanted our children to experience things we never had. I think we went too far, and I sometimes feel guilty about this, but there is little we can do which will undo the situation as it now is, just hope that the younger generations will find their own way in what is becoming a more and more complex world to live in. I do not envy them.