We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
PLEASE READ BEFORE POSTING: Hello Forumites! In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non-MoneySaving matters are not permitted per the Forum rules. While we understand that mentioning house prices may sometimes be relevant to a user's specific MoneySaving situation, we ask that you please avoid veering into broad, general debates about the market, the economy and politics, as these can unfortunately lead to abusive or hateful behaviour. Threads that are found to have derailed into wider discussions may be removed. Users who repeatedly disregard this may have their Forum account banned. Please also avoid posting personally identifiable information, including links to your own online property listing which may reveal your address. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
The Forum now has a brand new text editor, adding a bunch of handy features to use when creating posts. Read more in our how-to guide
is it possible......
Comments
-
BitterAndTwisted wrote: »You are correct and my own personal feeling is that these people are fraudsters of the highest order ..;)
But I don't fully understand the legal/contractual position for social housing tenants who own other properties. I know there is a fairly standard clause that means they must occupy their social housing property and can't sublet it, that maybe applicants for social housing must declare property ownership.
But I don't know the position when a social housing tenant who is legitimately allocated a property, continues to occupy it and then buys somewhere else to rent out. Clearly they are no longer in housing need but social housing tenancies are relatively secure and I don't believe changes in need or economic circumstances after they move into their council house has any bearing on this.0 -
Your girlfriend is the name on the tenancy of her house so there is no reason why you cannot move in with her. you can check up with the council information center at your local council to find out the implications on benefits and the like before you move in.
As far as your house goes, you could let it out on an assured shorthold tenancy but you would have to check out the terms of your mortgage to see if you can, you may be able to change your mortgage agreement so you will have to contact your mortgage provider.
The other thing is that if the house is left empty you will be liable for paying council tax, gas, electric and water standing charges.
There are a lot of people out there that like to take the moral high ground and tell you this or that is not right. Take no notice and good luck0 -
i would just like to point out that i am not wanting to do this to defraud the government, if we were to do this it would be done legitimately and everything would be declared with regards to benefits etc.
its just that out of the 2 houses we like my fiances the best. if it turns out we cant do it then we will have to rent somewhere in the same village.
it is a housing association house as apposed to a proper council house.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 354.4K Banking & Borrowing
- 254.4K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 455.4K Spending & Discounts
- 247.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 604.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 178.5K Life & Family
- 261.6K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards