Allow owners to return to their second homes

There seems to be no good reason for preventing second-home owners to return to their properties. Even where these homes are in more rural areas the health facilities would have been designed to cope with the number of residents in that property. This is not like camping or motorhomes which place a temporary strain on facilities.

Why the contribution is important

Mental health benefits and ensures that such properties do not begin to deteriorate.

by Simpsojf on May 07, 2020 at 03:31PM

Current Rating

Average rating: 2.7
Based on: 21 votes

Comments

  • Posted by ElaineColley May 07, 2020 at 16:42

    This should include static caravan sites.

  • Posted by Sia May 07, 2020 at 16:52

    This should very much depend on the capacity of the community where the second home is based. Some rural and island communities have very fragile healthcare services. People coming in not only risk bringing the infection into the community (if it's not already there / there but contained), but also add pressure to a healthcare system which is not designed on number of houses in a location, but rather per head of ordinary population (i.e. permanent residents). Even if that did include second home occupants, surely the best way to keep all communities safe for now is to minimise the risk wherever possible.

  • Posted by helloworld May 07, 2020 at 18:30

    Second homes should be donated to the the state to help deal with the housing crisis and help to support second home owners to gain a little perspective on life. It should not be possible to own a second home due to the damage caused to the economy and to society by this unreasonable practice.

  • Posted by Nursewifemother May 07, 2020 at 19:36

    Totally disagree. Most are in rural areas and could place unexpected pressures on nhs

  • Posted by Jones17 May 07, 2020 at 22:45

    Rural areas have limited capacity to deal with more people coming in & potentially putting more pressure on the local NHS services. If people are concerned about their second home they should phone and ask someone in the community to check on it periodically.

  • Posted by Fiona1 May 08, 2020 at 09:27

    People should be allowed to use their own second homes once lockdown starts to ease as long as they are adhering to the social distancing. They pay for the home and need to be able to check the house is still in order and not falling into disrepair. Second home owners also contribute to the local economy alot of which is usually seasonal and as a shop owner I would like to see second home owners be able to return. I do not agree with them letting their homes out etc but see no reason for them not to return to their own second homes.

  • Posted by Americanpie May 08, 2020 at 09:35

    Totally disagree. Static caravan owners, lodge owner and second homes should not be occupied until the rules are totally relaxed. Try living in an area with limited facilities first.

  • Posted by carterkjef May 09, 2020 at 13:05

    Thank you Fiona1 - a little commonsense in a world of paranoia.

  • Posted by JLMBD May 09, 2020 at 14:59

    What no one seems to realise is that travel has inherent risk. To the community where the 2nd home is based, to the rescue and recovery services if needed, to any service that would need to attend and accident, to everyone who touches a fuel pump, gate or ATM after someone who has no idea they are carrying the virus. Local shops in remote communities are for local people and are often struggling under the current restrictions to provide everything for their own. Remote communities, often unaffected by the virus so far, where 2nd homes are based often have many vulnerable residents and most of them don't want any outsiders coming into the area and putting the community at risk. If your 2nd home is in a community where you can't ask anyone local to do an emergency repair then you don't belong there in the first place.
Log in or register to add comments and rate ideas

Idea topics