Council tenant

donnajunkie

DX2 wrote: »

So the money tree at the bottom of your garden will pay for all of this?

councils spend plenty of money on unnecessary modernisations of houses and also knock down housing to replace it with new housing. for example we had a new kitchen put in in 1994. last year we got yet another new kitchen put in. was it really necessary? councils also spend money on daft things like flower boxes in town centres trying to win britain in bloom type competitions. there must be many other things that i havent thought of that councils waste money on. if people care about the housing situation then how much extra tax would it cost them if it was paid for that way? an extra penny? they would get their money back eventually because instead of having houses sat empty they would have rent coming in and council tax being paid. that is extra revenue that could also help cover the cost. a while ago i saw on the local news that the city council in newcastle are building new council homes. if they can do it why cant other councils?
i am simply trying to look for solutions to the problem. are you trying to look for solutions?

donnajunkie

exitroute? wrote: »

My council has just purchased a boarded up 3 bed home a stones throw from me for £30,000, according to the local newspaper report last week. Its been empty for at least 15 years and they have not been able to find the owner..so..a compulsory purchase has gone through. Thats good but...they could have given 30 tenants in under occupied decent habitable 3 bed homes £1000 each if they were willing and able to downsize. The house costing the council £30,000 will need total refurb..its going to end up costing more like £100000 to put one family in.

if they could not find the owner how were they able to pay them the £30000? arent there laws requiring owners of property to keep it in a decent state? in most cases then they could just sue the owner for the cost of refurbishment. whether we like it or not something has to be done or it will continue to get worse. would it be better to start now or in 10 or 20 years time?

donnajunkie

viktory wrote: »

:rotfl: Really? As simple as that eh? Just whack up a few more houses. But...where are these houses to be built? Should we build on ALL the green land in England? How are we to pay for these houses? What about the additional services all these houses will require? Schools, roads, public transport, jobs for the people moving into the houses, doctors, dentists...the list is endless.

The only answer is to immediately rescind the right to buy and the right to acquire. If you want to buy a house, go and pay the asking price for a house in the open market.

theres no shortage of private houses being built. due to the housing problem i believe there are often rules for new developments were a percentage of the housing has to be affordable housing. however they are still private houses requiring a mortgage so people on low incomes wont be able to live there coz they cant get a mortgage. why not make a percentage of the housing council housing instead?
i agree with your point about right to buy.

Macro_3

donnajunkie wrote: »

councils spend plenty of money on unnecessary modernisations of houses and also knock down housing to replace it with new housing. for example we had a new kitchen put in in 1994. last year we got yet another new kitchen put in. was it really necessary? councils also spend money on daft things like flower boxes in town centres trying to win britain in bloom type competitions. there must be many other things that i havent thought of that councils waste money on. if people care about the housing situation then how much extra tax would it cost them if it was paid for that way? an extra penny? they would get their money back eventually because instead of having houses sat empty they would have rent coming in and council tax being paid. that is extra revenue that could also help cover the cost. a while ago i saw on the local news that the city council in newcastle are building new council homes. if they can do it why cant other councils?
i am simply trying to look for solutions to the problem. are you trying to look for solutions?

Do you have any idea of the state that local authority funding is in currently? There is no spare money. Most local authorities are having to make tens of millions of pounds of savings from the budget for this year and the years to come, stopping non-essential services, cutting essential services and making redundancies. Government funding has been cut, projected council tax revenues rises haven't happened as house building etc has tailed off and council tax rises have been capped, all at a time when the costs of running these services have risen. In short, they have less money, fewer ways to raise more and higher expenses. The financial challenges facing LA's are immense.

Did the LA need to 'waste' money modernising your kitchen? Well, on the surface of it, no - you were happy with your kitchen before, judging by your post. However, the government set La's a target to have all housing acheiving decent homes standards by 2010. So your LA will have been compelled to refurbish your kitchen in order to meet central government targets. As for demolishing/rebuilding, sometimes the cost of refurbishing properties to bring them up to standard can be more than simply rebuilding.

donnajunkie

Jomo wrote: »

I've heard it all now :rotfl:

well like i said i was just speculating. i am simply trying to think of solutions rather than coming here to laugh at people and have a dig at every idea people come up with. do you have any ideas?

donnajunkie

volvic09 wrote: »

Thanks everyone for replying.

What I don't understand is they (council) would probably give my house to a family who have never worked and have no intention of working. The council then only get £5 per week. Would they not prefer someone who is able to pay full rent, full council tax. I know there is a shortage of housing but don't see why really.

I really think its quite hard for people like me (24) who has recently left uni and working full time to actually get on the property ladder as I can't get a mortgage as I don't have 20% deposit. Private tenacy is probably the only option in the future. I would have loved to have kept my house on if my dad passed away

they will probably pay more than £5 a week and i believe the housing and council tax benefit comes from central government and not directly from the councils finances.

Jomo

donnajunkie wrote: »

well like i said i was just speculating. i am simply trying to think of solutions rather than coming here to laugh at people and have a dig at every idea people come up with. do you have any ideas?

Well at least come up with sensible ideas then :rolleyes:

I had to laugh...what did you expect?

donnajunkie

Macro wrote: »

Do you have any idea of the state that local authority funding is in currently? There is no spare money. Most local authorities are having to make tens of millions of pounds of savings from the budget for this year and the years to come, stopping non-essential services, cutting essential services and making redundancies. Government funding has been cut, projected council tax revenues rises haven't happened as house building etc has tailed off and council tax rises have been capped, all at a time when the costs of running these services have risen. In short, they have less money, fewer ways to raise more and higher expenses. The financial challenges facing LA's are immense.

Did the LA need to 'waste' money modernising your kitchen? Well, on the surface of it, no - you were happy with your kitchen before, judging by your post. However, the government set La's a target to have all housing acheiving decent homes standards by 2010. So your LA will have been compelled to refurbish your kitchen in order to meet central government targets. As for demolishing/rebuilding, sometimes the cost of refurbishing properties to bring them up to standard can be more than simply rebuilding.

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.

donnajunkie

Jomo wrote: »

Well at least come up with sensible ideas then :rolleyes:

I had to laugh...what did you expect?

well you know if you read what i said properly you would have seen that i didnt really think it was a good idea myself. i simply wouldnt be surprised if something similar did happen in the future if the problem isnt sorted. has a government never done something you think is silly or totally wrong?

chesky369

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?