What is a Housing Association?

Wee_Willy_Harris

bouche wrote: »

The Guinness Trust is NOT a Housing Association - it's of charitable status. As So the Peabody Trust.

You may look less stupid yourself if at least you could appreciate what these charities do for the homeless etc. They are NOT Funded in the same way as HA's are but with them, now, work in Partnership!!!!

Without the help of charitable organisations or trusts, the Housing Assoc's couldn't help nor house half the people they do now.

Please understand this.

From www.guinnesspartnership.com

About Us

Founded in 1890, Guinness Trust is now a major housing association in England and has been providing good quality, affordable homes for well over 100 years.
Having been originally formed with an endowment of £200,000 (the equivalent of £1.5 million today) by Sir Edward Cecil Guinness, great grandson of the founder of the Guinness brewery, Guinness Trust has joined forces with four other main companies to form The Guinness Partnership.

vet8

If I can interject boys!

We lived next to a HA estate several years ago. The houses were built after ours, we watched them being built and thought they looked very nice. After a year the story changed. A lot of the houses were lovely, nice gardens, tidy and well looked after. Others were no better than scrap yards. They either had unbelievable rubbish piled up in the gardens or the gardens were just jungles. The guttering was hanging off, the windows broken, it was incredible how brand new houses could be wrecked in just a year.

I felt very sorry for the people who bothered to look after their property if they lived next door to one of the disaster zones.

Wee_Willy_Harris

bouche wrote: »

Yeah now! They didn't stem from that though, you fool you.

Wrong again. Most were set up with CHARITABLE donations from the philanthropic upper/middle classes. Charity was very much their starting point and that remains the case.

Wee_Willy_Harris

bouche wrote: »

Yeah, did they move in to one that existed in the 1790's though??? NO.

Not even the 1890's as Pee Willy suggests. In fact at that time all the Paupers where paying rent to the wealthy landowners of the time.

I refer you to the answers I have already given. Get someone to read them out loud, if you're struggling.

Wee_Willy_Harris

bouche wrote: »

See!!
He'd be spinning in his grave at the thougt people like you assuming they gave it all away in order to take responsibilty away from the state.

I have absolutely no idea what point you are trying to make with this post. I suspect you don't either.

and_another_thing...

From someone who has lived in a housing association flat (north London) for most of childhood life and who now lives close to a few elsewhere - it depends. Some tenants are decent and look after their homes, others don't - just as you cannot predict exactly how neighbouring home-owners are going to affect your lives / value of your property- you don't know until you've moved in.
It's a fact of life - in cities anyhow, that there is a mix of private and social housing.
I grew up in a HA flat as my father got a job working for the council. He had to move to London for the job and as he had a family, was offered a HA flat to rent. This was 40 years ago now. He moved out and bought a house whilst my mother remained in the flat - she was a nurse and unable to afford to buy her own home after they split up.

Many new build HA properties now go to key workers or people on 'low incomes' that's below 60K!!! who would otherwise not afford to buy on the open market as well as to social tenants - some social tenants do work - not all claim housing benefit. As they are houses - the social tenants are likely to be families.
So good advice given previously was to contact the HA to see the breakdown of occupants. I do think it's a bit rash to dismiss a property without finding out more info.

Wee_Willy_Harris

bouche wrote: »

& I refer you to mine!! You need to understand these trusts were left via legacies, in peoples wills. You need to go back to where these charities stemmed from. Wealthy people who left their land and property to house the poor.

ie they were not responsible for housing problems of the 21st century. that has become a problem of the STATE ie the Government. HA's works in partnership with them cause their legacy's enabled charities / trusts to buy up land and property that the HA's today use to work with them - they have no choice.

The Gov sold a lot of land and properties under Maggie, amongst others, under the right to buy. They didn't however use this money to build more social housing - hence the need for HA's to work in partnership with people / charities like the guiness Trust.

My HA is now of charitable status, only cause they have to be - they get no funds from central governement anymore like they used to and have to be self sufficient.

They ARE ALL SKINT -It's not the same

Oh dear, still taking those stupid pills I see.

Let me work through your little fantasy and see if some inconvenient truths emerge.....

Nobody at the end of the 18th century was responsible for the housing problems of today. I mean, many of our major roads were initiated by the romans, but I wouldn't blame them for speed cameras!

Local Authorities didn't use the money from Maggies right to buy for building new homes, true. But they didn't because Maggie forbade it. She hated social housing and would have outlawed if she could.

Partnership working is more to do with efficiency and economy of scale.

No organisation HAS to be a charitable trust, or even gain charitable status. There are financuial advantages, but it isn't a requirement for HAs.

Anything else you don't know, just ask.

SingleSue

Milliewilly wrote: »

If not wanting to live next to nuisance neighbours makes me predjudiced then I am not afraid to say I am.

Its not a question of ignorance either. Stereotypes exist for a reason and I would not take the risk.

Well, my experience of nuisance neighbours has been in owner occupied houses (we were owner occupiers at the time too), they were druggies and eventually repossessed.

My experience of a lovely neighbourhood has been in HA, a real community, everyone helping others and all very house (and garden) proud...if only the owner occupiers next door would get with the programme and tidy up their gardens, it really brings the area down.

blckbrd

Rather than continue this vitriolic exchange and allow MillyWilly (who does herself a disservice) another opportunity to descend further into spelling fascism...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Housing_association

The history section is brief and informative enough for those who care to learn rather than point score.

I don't think there's one particular form of tenure for bigots and unsavoury characters - not judging by this thread anyway.

Milliewilly

blckbrd wrote: »

Rather than continue this vitriolic exchange and allow MillyWilly (who does herself a disservice) another opportunity to descend further into spelling fascism...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Housing_association

The history section is brief and informative enough for those who care to learn rather than point score.

I don't think there's one particular form of tenure for bigots and unsavoury characters - not judging by this thread anyway.

If you look through my posts you will clearly see a pattern. The only time I ever pick up on people's spelling or grammar is when they are directing abusive posts towards me, otherwise I live and let live.

If that makes me a spelling 'fascist' then fine.....