Council tenant

donnajunkie

chesky369 wrote: »

There are literally thousands of empty houses - some of them in the 'best' parts of our towns - owned by foreign property companies who have lost track of their portfolio. I think if a house or apartment has been empty for more than, say, five years, it should be purchased at a minimal price by the relevant local authority and taken into the public housing stock. If nobody knows who owns it, the money should be kept in an authorised bank account so that it can be repaid to the owner if they ever get around to claiming it.

I also think that local authorities have wasted their powers in the past by allowing developers to build blocks of flats without insisting that 20% must be for public housing. If everylocal authority acted the same, developers would have no alternative but to do so if they wanted to build - the price would be higher to the private purchaser but so what?

i spy with my little eye a sensible post. :beer:

Macro_3

donnajunkie wrote: »

its just the general wasting of money i see that makes me think if they didnt spend it on that they could spend it on something more important. i am aware of the decent home thing but surely they should inspect homes first to see whether they are at a decent standard rather than just assuming they need certain things. a kitchen that is 14 years old doesnt usually need replacing. personally i think if we need anything at all its a new bathroom but no we get a new kitchen that isnt needed.

What general wasting of money? Be specific.

Back to your kitchen. The inspection/condition of your kitchen might not even be relevant. Under Decent Homes, a kitchen needs to be less than 20 years old. Lets say that your LA knows that 70% of the kitchens in the houses that it manages have kitchens older than this - so it has to replace these. The LA also knows that it doesn't need to replace your kitchen for another 5 years (assuming that it meets the size/layout criteria of Decent Homes). However, to have 100% of the kitchens replaced in one broad sweep would only cost a small percentage more than replacing the essential 70%, as the LA will only pay certain costs once and can 'bulk buy' to a greater extent. If, on the other hand, they do 70% now and replace your kitchen in 5 years, it would cost them significantly more. What then?

It's like bulk-buying an essential household item if you see it being sold cheaply, but on a larger scale. It would appear to you to be a waste of money, but could in the long term be moneysaving.

Jomo

There are some mad and crazy ideas flying around on this thread!

Jomo

donnajunkie wrote: »

i spy with my little eye a sensible post. :beer:

Think you need an eye glass

volvic09

Thanks again for all your comments. Kind of puts things into perspective now

exitroute?

Are we looking for sensible ideas re housing or re councils saving costs? I gave sensible ideas re housing a few threads back. Another problem has been the Govt schemes for part buy/shared ownership etc etc. Employed social housing tenants were supposed to benefit and get a foot on property ladder. Its logical that the larger homes are underoccupied by older folks whose kids have grown and left home. I am, lets say, a mature lady in low paid employment and I jumped for joy thinking i would finally get out of social housing. i applied for the scheme and was accepted. What few properties are at 25% share are mostly apartments which i dont want but the main issue is, I only have a few years left to work and cant get a mortgage and even if I could, would have to pay that plus extortionate service charges and eat when i could afford to! It is unaffordable for me to move through these so called affordable schemes. Why should I have to pay the same as everyone else buying these apartments when I am giving back a property for someone in need? Where is my incentive to move?

exitroute?

Meant to add that the young man may like to try applying for a shared ownership place via these Govt scheme for employed SH tenants. he has many years ahead of him and its likely he will be able to afford it. i know thats not what he would like and I still think he should be allowed to stay in his own home. he could find his ideal partner if not already and have a family soon after..why not let them have the council home he is already in.

exitroute?

Hi Mcneff..are you there? Thanks for your message. Sorry but I am not au fait with PC ..trying me best. Tried to send u a message back but cant see where to type. I clicked reply and your message was still in box. Can u advise me how to put posts on favourites bar please as you suggested? Thanks very much. ..sorry folks..could only think of this way to get to Mcneff.

Alleycat

Volvic09 - as your dad is the named tenant and is currently unemployed, he would be entitled to claim Housing and Council Tax Benefit with you as a non dependent. Your income would be taken into account to decide on how much to deduct - see here:-

Aged 18 or over and in remunerative work

• gross income less than £120.00 = £7.40
• gross income £120 - £177.99 = £17.00
• gross income £178 - £230.99 = £23.35
• gross income £231 - £305.99 = £38.20
• gross income £306 - £381.99 = £43.50
• gross income greater than £382 = £47.75
• Aged 25 or over and on Income Support, Job Seekers Allowance or Employment Support Allowance (IR), or aged 18 or over and not in remunerative work = £7.40

Your dad should be paying towards the bills as well as he has some money coming in from JSA.

You won't be added to the tenancy as to do that the council would need to create a completely new tenancy (legally they cannot just add you on) and it is unlikely that their allocations policy would allow this. I.e. many council's now do not operate a separate transfer list and expect tenants wishing to move to reapply on the council waiting list. They may get a higher banding or extra points but unlikely.

As a council tenant, your dad will have a secure tenancy. Assuming the tenancy was never joint (i.e. with your mum etc) or had never been passed on previously there would be assignment and succession rights. This basically means that there can only ever be one assignment or succession.

Assignment can take place by way of a mutual exchange (i.e. swapping with another council or housing association tenant) or assigning to a member of the tenant's family (who has succession rights). There is usually a clause in the tenancy agreement that will state that in order to assign you need to have the agreement of the housing provider but this could be challenged if the council refused to recognise it.

Succession takes place on the death of the tenant if there is someone who qualifies as a statutory successor. As the daughter of the tenant and assuming that you have occupied the property as your only or principal home for a minimum of 12 months preceeding the death of the tenant, you would automatically succeed to the tenancy.

If however you were to succeed to the tenancy, the council would have the right to seek possession against you if you were underoccupying in return for providing you with a smaller property. They can however only do this within 12 months of the succession.