Is owning a second home unethical? A philosopher reflects

Second homes, for so long the objects of aspiration, are swiftly becoming targets of condemnation. This year may even turn out to be the year that attitudes decisively shifted. In July, Leeds Building Society announced it would stop offering mortgages on them. Second homes “reduce the number of properties available for people to live in, at a time when there’s a wide consensus that housing supply in the UK is inadequate to meet demand”, said chief executive Richard Fearon.

The statement echoes complaints made in recent years by many communities that are suffering the consequences of an excess of second homes, most notably in Cornwall. Tensions bet­ween locals and second-home owners were dramatised in Mark Jenkin’s acc­laimed 2019 film Bait, in which selfish, rich urban blow-ins complain about the noise made by fishermen around the harbour and stop locals parking in front of their picture-postcard cottage.

They seem like caricatures, but a fisherman in St Ives recently told The Guardian that visitors do complain about the noise of the vans on the quay when the fishing boats leave early to catch the tides — and seemingly don’t care that the big engines of pleasure boats “spook the fish”.

Bait was filmed in black and white but the real issues are anything but. The ethical concerns over buying and maintaining second homes are complex. Should you buy one? Should you sell to people who you know will use it as one? If you do own one, how can you better contribute to the local community? Even the Leeds Building Society decision was more nuanced than headlines suggested, since it continues to offer mortgages on holiday lets and rental properties.

For a start, there is no reason to think that it is the sheer number of second homes across the UK that is the problem. Comparisons with other countries are difficult because most statistics track all forms of non-primary property ownership, including those bought to rent out. On this metric, around one in 10 UK adults owns a second property, a lower rate than in all but four of the 20 countries covered by the most thorough recent examination of second-property ownership in Europe. In five countries — Finland, Luxemburg, Cyprus, Spain and Estonia — more than 20 per cent of households own one or more properties in addition to their primary residence.

Nor is the seasonality of much second-home use inherently problematic. On Italy’s Ligurian coast, where I used to spend childhood holidays with family friends, many towns see their tiny populations swell for the summer. For much of the year, whole apartment blocks stand almost empty. But because almost all the holiday homes were built for that purpose, there are plenty of all-year round homes for locals, and a permanent population that supports essential services. The seasonality of the economy may present challenges, but the resorts have generally adapted. For example, people in service industries work flat out in season and many places shut up for long periods outside it.

But the UK’s second-home scene presents unique challenges due to a perfect storm of its geography, economy, housing policy and welfare system. Start with housing policy. The restrictions on new developments that help preserve the charm and character of many towns and villages make them more attractive to second-home owners and help drive up prices beyond the means of people who live there.

To make matters worse, the UK’s unbalanced economy means the highest wages are in London, the south-east and in a handful of other cities, leaving most jobs in rural and coastal areas poorly paid, especially tourism-related work. This leaves communities angered by holiday homes in a bind: they need tourism to thrive, but it’s only because other work has gone elsewhere that they have become so dependent on it.

Geography exacerbates the problems. The south of the country is already densely populated and as a result, there is direct competition with locals for housing stock. In Scandinavia, in contrast, land is in good supply and many people own a small country home which displaces no one. So although only around 3 per cent of UK households have a second home for their own use, these create many more problems than the one in five Swedish families who owns a summer cottage or cabin.

In the UK, the equivalent of these purpose-built cabins might be static caravan parks and lodges. There are around 365,000 of them, compared to about half a million bricks and mortar holiday homes. Apart from the odd grumble about how some of the sprawling coastal sites have become eyesores, they generate little complaint. At Trecco Bay Holiday Park in Wales, there are more than 2,000 static caravans — compared to around 29,000 second homes in the whole of Cornwall. But, because they are on a dedicated site where no one lives year-round, their presence is not a problem.

In towns such as Fowey and Mevagissey in Cornwall, in contrast, the most in-demand second homes are period ones, such as former fishermen’s cottages, that sit in the heart of the old town. In St Ives, for example, the historic cobbled harbourside “Downalong” district has become unaffordable to most locals, who often live in the Penbeagle estate overlooking the town.

This has led to several local councils introducing rules to limit second-home ownership. In Fowey, for instance, any newly built homes have to be for permanent residents as their principal residence.

The problem these councils are trying to address is not just an economic one. When outsiders hold the upper hand over locals, the whole character and way of life of a town changes. This kind of grievance fuelled the campaign of the Welsh nationalist group Meibion Glyndŵr, which in the 1980s set fire to more than 200 English-owned holiday homes. As in the south-west of England now, one issue was the inflation of house prices beyond the means of locals. But most of their anger was a response to the threat anglicisation posed to Welsh culture and language.

Strong clashes of interest between local residents and second-home owners would seem to be an unusual feature of Britain’s housing market. In lots of countries, holiday-home owners have been broadly welcomed — although in France, for example, rates of second-home ownership have also reached problematic levels in some areas, resulting in “Parisians, go home” banners being unfurled in the Basque region.

In some parts of Europe, the purchasing of dilapidated or abandoned homes by international buyers has been welcomed by locals. Today, there is a “home for €1” scheme in Sicily to encourage people to take on empty properties in areas where the population has hollowed out. Similarly, rural Spain has seen its population rapidly decline and local authorities want outsiders to buy empty homes, even providing incentives for those who become permanent residents.

In many parts of Britain, the rate of second-home ownership should be manageable. But in areas where there are pre-existing pressures on housing supply, making it more difficult to buy a second home seems not just reasonable but necessary. As well as Cornwall’s restrictions on use for new-build properties in a number of areas, the Welsh government has also proposed a 300 per cent council tax premium on second homes.

But while the regulatory framework is friendly towards second homes, what should a current or prospective owner do? The obvious defence is: whatever is in your own best interests. You could argue that the problems of second-home ownership are structural and so it’s the system that needs to be fixed — a few principled refuseniks will not change anything (except perhaps salving their own consciences) and there is little prospect of a mass voluntary change of practice.

This defence looks stronger if you look at the reasons people have for second-home ownership. Many assume a place in the country is simply a sign of wealth, but an intriguing paper in the International Journal of Housing Policy shows that differences between European countries are largely explained by how well states protect against the risks of income loss in old age. The less people can rely on a good state pension the more likely they are to invest in property as either an asset or an income source in the form of rent. The UK fits this theory, since it does not guarantee pensioner incomes as well as many European welfare states, especially for the large number of self-employed.

Of course, if you want to buy a property as an investment or income stream, you don’t have to choose a holiday hotspot. But you’re never going to prefer somewhere with no housing supply issues, as both price growth and rents will be lower. And if you choose a prosperous city, you will still contribute to the housing crisis, since the growth of buy-to-let will be a major contributor to price rises there too.

Holiday homes also have the obvious attraction that they can be used for pleasure. The growth of web portals such as Airbnb has made finding renters for when owners are not using them extremely easy. And with climate change making the ethics of multiple annual flights for foreign breaks highly dubious, demand for holiday homes in the UK is sure to increase, as a cheaper and more convenient option than weeks in hotels.

Therefore, given that property is a good investment for old age in the UK, and such investments are needed, and that holiday homes in particular are ideal for high rental income, can we really blame people who take this as their best option to secure a comfortable retirement?

It’s harsher still to blame local sellers for contributing to the problem. A home is generally a person’s biggest asset and it would be too much to ask a seller to refuse to sell to someone intending to use the property as a second home, if that makes it harder to sell or results in a lower sale price.

However, the ethics of second-home ownership do not merely concern
the question of whether to own or not. How you use your second home is just as important. One of Fearon’s complaints was that “any home other than a main residence usually lies empty most of the time, which does not serve the local community or contribute to the local economy”. This inevitably means that many businesses become unviable, which can leave local people with fewer and sometimes none of certain kinds at all.

Filling homes with holiday lets doesn’t always solve the problem. In Bait, the posh Londoners are seen unloading their car with food and wine they’ve brought down from the capital. Were they to spend more of their money in the local economy during their stay, locals would resent them a lot less. It would also help if fewer felt that being on holiday entitled them to make noise well into the night.

Can we really blame people who take this as their best option to secure a comfortable retirement?

To truly have a second home, as opposed to a second property, implies that you also have a second neighbourhood, a second community. If all owners appreciated this and acted accordingly, it would not solve the problem of price and supply, but it could reduce some of the antipathy.

With all the moral opprobrium being heaped on second-home owners, it’s easy to overlook the more selfish reasons to think twice before buying. People are seduced by the fantasy of a place to relax away from home, by the sunny seaside or in the green and pleasant countryside. But every home requires maintenance, so if you have two, a lot of your headspace as well as your money has to be devoted to bricks and mortar.

Far from creating more downtime, a home can reduce it, since it doubles the hours you have to spend thinking about mundane domestic matters. No one is going to pity the burdens of owning two homes, but they are real and risk turning you into an unwilling de facto part-time property manager.

Like all economic activity, second-home ownership creates harms or benefits that are passed on to others to suffer or enjoy, what economists call externalities. Although focusing only on the negatives distorts the full picture, they are unfortunately now more pronounced, especially for younger generations who are struggling with rising rental prices and have no prospect of being able to buy a first home unless they have wealthy parents.

Second-home owners can do more to behave as full members of their adopted communities, but only local and national government action can fix the imbalance of second to first homes that is leaving people unable to afford a home in what are meant to be their hometowns.

Julian Baggini is an author and philosopher

Find out about our latest stories first — follow @FTProperty on Twitter or @ft_houseandhome on Instagram

FTWeekend Festival, London

Are holiday homes ruining the UK countryside and depriving locals of buying a property? At the FTWeekend Festival, taking place on September 3rd at Kenwood House in London, Julian Baggini will debate this most sensitive of property topics along with Nathan Brooker, editor of House & Home, James Max and Vicky Spratt. Book your pass at ft.com/ftwf