Ugo51

oh, I see
At the beginning we'd rent, of course, until we're definitely sure of what we are doing.

You're right, definetely, but I was taking a step further, imagining we are going to like Sweden to stay.
In that case we'd need to set up a mortgage

Ugo51

thanks lattmjolk!

Yes, 30k sek/month is about what I've seen as well for postdocs.
I have no idea what she will be earning either, we've never tried to give a look how much herjob is paid in Sweden, but I'd say in the region of 30k SEK as well (given what she earns here compared to what a postdoc is paid in the UK)

I have to say that 10 000 SEK leftover is a lot, and if I was assure to get what you say we would, I could start buying one-way tickets in this very moment

My Swedish is terrible. I just started it last week

Jag är Ugo och jag är 28 år gammal

Blackladder

Ugo, I Think I should explain that you never actually own an apartment in Sweden. Privately owned apartments are almost non-existent in Sweden. Instead, they are housing cooperatives. You don't actually buy the bricks and mortar, just the right to live there. The simplest way of explaining this is to compare with a shareholder in a Company. The shareholder doesn't own the Company, just a stake in it. So you may be paying 1.5 million Swedish Crowns (a not unusual price in the Stockholm area) for a stake in a high rise apartment THAT YOU MIGHT NEVER GET BACK. A hundred and twenty thousand quid is quite a risk taking. Then you have to pay the monthly charge (Another 6000-10000 Crowns a month).
Blackie

Ugo51

Hi Blackie, I heard about that but, as far as I was told, that refers only to flats/apartments while you can actually own a house.

The idea (alhough, and I can't stress this enough, I'm just in the process of gathering info, I'm not planning a move for another 15 to 18 months) was to stay in a rented flat for a period just to get accustomed to the place and to understand whether it might suit us, and then to go on and buy a house as far away from the city centre as it's posisble by keeping the commuting time under 60min

lattmjolk

I would like to address this concern as it seems to be prevalent among immigrants. The basic point is that this is the traditional way of "owning" an apartment in Sweden. It's just how we do it here.

You either have a rental apartment or own a "bostadsrätt" (free translation "living right"). 30% of the apartments in Sweden are bostadsrätter, in Stockholm the share is 40%. If any government in any way should ***** with the functionality of this system by taking away rights from the owners of bostadsrätter, they would be committing political suicide.

Bostadsrätter in Sweden are the equivalent of owned apartments.

The monthly charge you pay covers, for example, garbage collection, maintenance of the building(s), gardening and common washing machines. It also usually (always?) covers heating and water, and often broadband and a basic range of cable TV channels as well.

In the calculations I used for Ugo51 the apartment cost 2 000 000 SEK and the monthly charge was 3500 SEK. There are plenty of similar apartments. There is a relation between the price and the montly charge - the higher the charge, the lower the purchasing price.

To make a final point: I have never in my whole life heard a native Swede express any concern about this "ownership problem".

Source for the stats:
http://www.boverket.se/Global/Boende...%C3%A5ndet.pdf

Ugo51

thanks, this confims what I knew

And in any case 30% is not much...
I don't remember the exact figure but I'm almost sure the total amount of flat for rent in Genoa, and therefore not owned by whoever lives within, is much higher than that.

Do you know how it works when you want to leave the bostadsrätter? You just have to hand in a notice to the local government, or it's you duty to find another applicant and therefore is similar to actually having a flat to sell before to be able to move out?

lattmjolk

Just to clarify: 70% of the apartments are rentals, 30% are bostadsrätter (that is, equivalent to owned apartments). There are basically no other ways of having an apartment.

You sell your bostadsrätt just like you would an owned apartment, it's just formally different. You put it out for sale on a site like Hemnet (www.hemnet.se) using a real estate agent and there is bidding. When the deal is done, you move out and the new owner moves in.

To reiterate:
In practice, it's no different from an owned apartment. It is how you own an apartment in Sweden.

Extreme

One major difference compared to an "owned apartment" is that you don't have the right to rent it out. You have to ask for permission from the board of the association. I've heard that this is changing through legislation, but I'm not sure.

Also, at least in Stockholm there are apartments (condominiums) that you own outright. They are called "andelslägenheter". I've heard that it's hard to get a mortgage for this kind of condo though. However, there is no problem in renting these out.

One of the idea's behind a bostadsrätt is that the association can carry loans that originate from when the building was built. Hence the higher monthly fees on newly constructed condos. Eventually the loans will be paid off and the fee will decrease.

lattmjolk

Thank you, good point. Most associations (bostadsrättsföreningar), however, will permit you to rent out for, say, up to a year at a time. You have to submit a reason, but this could be as simple as travelling for a couple of months, trying a new city or temporarily moving for work. The board is usually made up of members of the association so there is no reason for them to be overly restrictive.

And yes, you're right. The sitting government is trying to facilitate this further by revising the legislation.

I think the best argument for these restrictions is that you don't want people buying several bostadsrätter just to rent them out, basically becoming landlords. The bostadsrätt is supposed to be owned by its resident.

I don't think that "andelslägenheter" is what you're referring to. This term seems to refer to either some sort of hybrid between a rental and a bostadsrätt or a time-sharing concept. Please provide a source if you have one.

Thank you for pointing this out. Both the association and the members ("owners") usually have loans. In very old associations who have paid off their debts in full, the monthly charge can be very low.

Extreme

This is also the worst argument for these restrictions since every bigger city in Sweden has a shortage of apartments to rent. Look at all the people on this forum asking about places to rent. If condos could be purchased as investments to be rented out that would open up a whole new market for renters.

"ägarlägenheter" seems the correct name. Afaik, this is how the rest of the world deals with owned multi-unit housing.

http://www.boverket.se/Boende/Sa-bor...rboendeformer/
(For our English readers, use translate.google.com to copy and paste a translation of this page. Explains a lot of good stuff about owning in Sweden)

Bostadsrätt is in my opinion a socialistic way of thinking were the collective is more important than the individual.

lattmjolk

Perhaps I'm a bit slow but I don't see how this as a solution. The basic problem is that there are too few apartments overall being built in Stockholm. There is a shortage of both rentals and bostadsrätter. As long as there is a shortage of bostadsrätter, your solution would just mean that there would be a different (richer?) buyer with plans to rent it out. You will indeed have one more apartment for renters but one less for someone who wanted a bostadsrätt to live in.

It might also fuel a housing bubble (even worse than today's) like in Denmark where you are free to buy several apartments. The prices there have fallen drastically during the financial crises.

Please explain if I'm wrong. I love to be swayed.

Ägarlägenheter seems right. However, according to Wikipedia, there would still be an association owning the parts of the property which are not apartments. You still pay a monthly charge and the association can prevent you from renting out. In the four years this form of ownership has been available, a total of 700 ägarlägenheter have been built in Sweden. So this is basically not an option.

There seems to be no practical difference between the two forms of ownership. See above and Wikipedia.

Extreme

Good points. It would address the issue (if it's even an issue..) that too many rentals are being converted into condos. Especially in Stockholm. If you would have investors snap up a few during a conversion they would easily be back on the rental market within a short period of time.

Also, there are rumors that condos are sitting empty because it's too complicated to rent them out and the laws favors the tenants too much.
People want to hold on to it as an investment when temporarily or permanently moving somewhere else. For example, moving in with your fiancee, or when grandma moves to the nursing home...

Rent control and strong tenant laws are probably the main reason why no new rentals are being built. I also get the feeling that getting the necessary permits for construction etc are way too complicated and time consuming...

Back in the days... there used to be ads for some condos that "juridiska personer" (basically corporate entities) could buy and they supposedly had a more lenient association on matters such as renting it out. I hope that this new form of ownership, Ägarlägenheter, will take off and create better move ability on the housing market.
In practicality maybe not, but ideologically it’s huge.

Gordon Barlow

I just came across this report of a survey that reckons Swedes are the fifth happiest nation in the world. I don't know how scientific it was, but the results look about right!
http://www.thelocal.se/50156/20130909/

Ugo51

Ah! good you clarified because I had it wrong
OK, now it's clear.

But at this point I have to ask: is it true this applies only for flats and apartments but not for single-family houses?
And, if yes, why this difference?

lattmjolk

With "småhus" (small houses) the stats are 15% rentals, 5% bostadsrätt, 80% owned. Småhus would include singe-family houses, small multi-family houses (perhaps 2-4 apartments) and radhus (town houses). The småhus that are bostadsrätter are town houses or small multi-family houses.

As to why, I think that the more stand-alone the property is, the less point there is to have an association.