By using this website, you agree to our use of cookies to enhance your experience.


Brexit vote would put £900bn of UK property investment at risk – claim

Up to £900bn worth of property investment in this country will be at risk of harm if the UK votes to leave the EU, according to a new survey of more than 3,000 individual investors.

The new study by online equity crowdfunding platform SyndicateRoom assessed how the upcoming EU referendum will affect individual investors and found that almost half of the investments at risk in the event of a Brexit are believed to be in the property market.

When comparing the views of investors across the spectrum of company equities, SyndicateRoom found that around £2,025bn of assets will potentially be adversely affected if the people of Britain choose to exit the EU, with an average £81,000 of invested assets per capita.


The research also found that more than half of respondents (55%) expect that a Brexit will have a negative impact on savings across UK households, from high-earners to low-earners.

“At SyndicateRoom, we want to help individuals increase their net wealth through equity investment – and based on this research, it appears that is more likely and more achievable if the UK remains part of the EU,” said Goncalo de Vasconcelos, CEO and co-founder of SyndicateRoom.

SyndicateRoom also assessed the cost of living impact of a Brexit vote, finding that women expect to be more adversely affected than men if the UK chooses to leave the EU. This was reflected by a stark contrast in employment prospects in a Brexit scenario, with 54% of men expecting to have better employment prospects if UK left the EU.

But while the latest poll by Guardian/ICM out this week shows a 52-48 split in favour of leaving the EU as the referendum campaign gathers pace, SyndicateRoom estimates that over half the UK population believe that the UK is likely to remain part of the EU, following the referendum vote.

“Our findings demonstrate that in times of uncertainty, investors should give added attention to portfolio diversification, given the evident risk in the property market,” de Vasconcelos added. 

  • j j
    • j j
    • 02 June 2016 00:26 AM

  • j j
    • j j
    • 02 June 2016 00:29 AM

    Hello - I am sorry but the average British voter does not care about this. We don't mind a crash in house prices if it means we will get autonomy back. Sorry xxxxx h

    Jon  Tarrey

    Except, of course, you won't. What do you think the UK government can't currently do? What are the EU preventing them from doing? Do you really believe the guff from Boris and other outers that 60% of our laws are dictated to us by the EU? From what I've read, we make something like 90% of our own laws in Westminster and the UK is one of the least regulated economies in Western Europe. The regulation we do have, mostly protected by the EU, concerns things such as workers rights, human rights, health and safety and the environment. Important things, wouldn't you say?

    As a country, we also pool our sovereignty to the UN, NATO, the G7, G8 and other global organisations. Our science, tech and medical industries all rely heavily on collaboration with the EU and the rest of the world. The idea that, if we leave, we get back 100% sovereignty, is such nonsense. It's why the Out side barely mention it any more. They've lost the argument on the economy, they've lost the argument on everything else, so now they turn to immigration - their trump card.

    If you want to live in a country with 100% sovereignty, go live in splendid isolation in North Korea. That's not the way the modern world works. Whether we like it or not, we live in a global, interconnected word. Many of the challenges we face don't respect borders. We export more to the EU than anywhere else. We have a deficit on goods, but a surplus on services. It's all about give and take.

    All this "take back control" guff is emotion-led hysteria and nonsense. The Leave side haven't put forward one good reason for us to leave the EU. Anyone who says anything against them is shouted down with Project Fear or accused of being part of a Goldman Sachs-funded elite. It's absurd.

  • icon

    Jon Tarrey - It looks like you believe the hype of the Remain side so there is no point in trying to persuade you otherwise . Watch 'Brexit the Movie' if you want to see why we will be better off out. I bet you won't though. I also don't know how you can claim project fear is being used only by the 'Out' campaign when Cameron is threatening everything from World War 3 to Tsunami's if we leave. We are the 5th or 6th largest economy in the world and the EU need us more than we need them. We can claim back our own country and we will be better off without all the EU regulations. Just ask our fishing industry if you don't believe me.

    If you think that we make the majority of our own laws and that we aren't being slowly swallowed up by the EU super state you are being very naïve! Either that or you work for a company that is being funded by the EU. That is our money in the first place by the way!

    Jon  Tarrey

    Well, Gordon, as Brexit the Movie was made by a bloke who denies climate change, forgive me if I don't put myself through an hour of that dross. Surely, as well, it should be "Brexit the Film?" I thought we were all about taking back control, being proud of our Britishness.

    Project Fear has indeed been used by both sides, I haven't claimed otherwise. I think Cameron and Osborne have led an awful campaign for the Remain side. But the Remain side also has many more rational, progressive voices, which the Leave side seriously lacks. Put your faith in Farage, Gove, IDS and Johnson at your peril. Plus, and without wanting to defend Cameron - who I can't stand - he didn't actually say Brexit would lead to World War 3. That was a misquote by Boris Johnson, the king of making stuff up.

    This idea that the EU needs us more than we need them is patent, arrogant nonsense. It's this Little Englander sense of superiority that puts people off the Brexit campaign. We have a surplus when it comes to services, we export more to the EU than they do to us and we benefit greatly from being part of the single market. To say otherwise is just myopic.

    You say we would be better off without EU regulations, but if we want to trade with Europe we will have to accept these regulations. If we want to be in the single market, we will have to accept free movement of people. Even if we come out of the single market, we'd still have to abide by EU regulations when working with the EU. So what's the point? And pesky regulations aren't always a bad thing - in many cases, they are absolutely vital to protect our workers rights, environment, food production standards and health and safety. They might be boring and unfashionable, but they are absolutely vital to a civilised democracy.

    Our fishing industry is only still in existence because of EU quotas. In the 70s we were overfishing to the point of extinction. Stocks were down to record lows. There is such a thing as sustainability, you know. Pure greed gets you nowhere. If you keep fishing and fishing until there's nothing left, what then? And was it the EU who forced British fishermen to sell their licences to the Dutch, Spanish and elsewhere? No, no it wasn't. The EU can't be blamed for the decline in the fishing industry - left alone, left unregulated, they would have caused the death of the industry anyway.

    OK, Gordon, name me some laws that the EU force upon us. Tell me how we're being swallowed up by an EU super state. Talk of an EU army has no actual evidence to back this up, but that doesn't stop it being parroted on a regular basis. What's wrong with being funded by the EU? Our farmers, our science and tech industries, our small towns depend on it. Put forward your alternative, rather than simply slating the EU.

    You want to come out to improve democracy. With FPTP, an unelected second chamber and an unelected head of state, that ain't gonna happen. You want 100% sovereignty? Ain't gonna happen. That's not the way the modern world works. You want control of our borders? We already have that.

    All the Brexit side have to put forward is: if we come out, we'll be free, free to control our destiny, our laws, our borders, out trade deals. Free to become Great Britain again. This isn't the Empire any more. Times have changed. The main issues we face don't respect borders. If we Brexit, do you really think it will make much difference to immigration? Do you think the refugee crisis will disappear? Do you think the issues in Europe elsewhere will have no bearing on us any more? Splendid isolation might sound good, but that's not how things work. And, besides, isolation with the Tory right and UKIP sounds absolutely dreadful.

    The Leave campaign hasn't put forward a coherent case for why we'll be better off out. It's all emotion-led, gut-instinct rhetoric; vague, not really sure, it'll probably be alright, it will be worth it in five to ten years, we don't really have a clue what we're doing, we'll return you to a land of milk and honey that never existed, don't you worry.


Please login to comment

MovePal MovePal MovePal
sign up