UK new builds rejected for social housing

ninky_2

it seems when it comes to private sector new builds we are being fobbed off with substandard pokey shoeboxes that are on average 25% smaller even than those in japan.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8052470.stm

tbh i'm not that surprised by this story. but isn't it time we had legislation to prevent this shoddiness. i suspect that much of what is being built now will not stand the test of time and will just have to be ripped down again in a few years when people refuse to buy or live in them. a complete waste of resources.

PasturesNew

This rejection has been known about for ages. Developers are known for having to build some social housing for every new estate they put up - and to build those houses bigger/better than the private ones they're building.

lostinrates

I might be wrong, but I believe there is a minimum space requirement for foster children in a bedroom? IMO no new house should have anything marketed as a ''bedroom'' or cot room that does not meet this minimum space requirement.

space_rider

Well I had a housewarming for my then 1 year old house. I had invited my 4 siblings with their children and a few friends with their children. Well after everyone had gone I discovered holes in the wall where the kids had obviously found something lying around and bashed the walls with it whilst playing. Had that been my old house which was built in the 30`s it wouldn`t have happened.

I have also taken calls in a call centre dealing with repairs on central heating systems, I was amazed at the amount of calls I took from tenants whose children had taken radiators off walls, climbed on gas fires etc.

Incidently, none of my nephews or my friends children live in social housing but their houses are much more solidly built than mine!

CLAPTON

Interesting

and Prescott bulldozed thousands of Victorian terrace houses because they were substandard

a mad world.. we would rather keep people in B&B or hostel accommodation rather than give then 'substandard' victorian or new build houses... I wonder if anyone asked their opinion.

the largest owner of empty property in the UK is of course local coucils/housing associations because they wont let them out until they meet their standards and often they can't afford to bring them up to this standards.

space_rider

CLAPTON wrote: »

Interesting

and Prescott bulldozed thousands of Victorian terrace houses because they were substandard

a mad world.. we would rather keep people in B&B or hostel accommodation rather than give then 'substandard' victorian or new build houses... I wonder if anyone asked their opinion.

the largest owner of empty property in the UK is of course local coucils/housing associations because they wont let them out until they meet their standards and often they can't afford to bring them up to this standards.

I didn`t realise that. Maybe housing associations should buy them.

Pssst

Another example of the failure of John Prescotts iniquitous Pathfinder sheme.

Is it not curious that they are not good enough for social housing and that soical housing must now meet a minimum standard,but that hard working perhaps low paid individuals,can live in some damp squalid terrace and struggle to pay a morgage but no one cares about them?

Of course i recognise that there are also many,decent workers in social housing but I'd venture that the majority lead alternative lifestyles.

chopperharris

People didnt want these homes , they were too small , uneconomical to upkeep and heat , they were also removed as housing stock to fuel the housing bubble.

Now there is a downturn in economy , high unemployment , they then become viable through cheaper labour it then offers a new rung to replace the rtb scheme perhaps through sweat equity.

CLAPTON

chopperharris wrote: »

People didnt want these homes , they were too small , uneconomical to upkeep and heat , they were also removed as housing stock to fuel the housing bubble.

Now there is a downturn in economy , high unemployment , they then become viable through cheaper labour it then offers a new rung to replace the rtb scheme perhaps through sweat equity.

I'm rather doubtfull about whether people didn't want them... two little terrance houses knocked together can make an excellent starter home and it doesn't have to cost a lot (unless of course the state does it when it then does costs a fortune).
I also doubt whether they cost a fortune to heat or uneconomical to maintain (we're talking small terrance houses here not ones with tennis courts and moats)

bo_drinker

space_rider wrote: »

Well I had a housewarming for my then 1 year old house. I had invited my 4 siblings with their children and a few friends with their children. Well after everyone had gone I discovered holes in the wall where the kids had obviously found something lying around and bashed the walls with it whilst playing. Had that been my old house which was built in the 30`s it wouldn`t have happened.

I have also taken calls in a call centre dealing with repairs on central heating systems, I was amazed at the amount of calls I took from tenants whose children had taken radiators off walls, climbed on gas fires etc.

Incidently, none of my nephews or my friends children live in social housing but their houses are much more solidly built than mine!

Grand children to be proud of. Nice. :rotfl:

Graham_Devon

All the council places on my plot are bigger, with 2 toilets etc. They also all have bigger plots.

The private ones are smaller, 1 toilet, tiny gardens.

Standard procedure round here.