Council houses for fixed terms only!

toby3000

A couple of questions really- a lot of people seem to be saying that HA/Council housing is subsidised, but I assume they just mean that they're not paying 'market rates', which is different to it being directly subsidised.

While I can see that under-occupancy might be a problem, but I don't think we should be too hasty to force people to move, especially if it's on the basis that they could afford to rent privately.

Obviously the way forward would be building more housing, but I can't see that happening

ninky_2

i think it's time to stop discussing fourcandles situation. s/he isn't living in council housing so has little bearing on the op.

Gorgeous_George

How about this...

Mum, Dad, daughter and son live in a large 3 bedroom council house. Mum decides she wants out and rents a flat privately. Dad decides son is a pain in the a**e and palms him off onto Mum. Mum needs a bigger house and the council provides one. Daughter gets pregnant and leaves home - into a 2 bedroom council house. That's property with a market value in excess of £500,000; 7 bedrooms for 5 people. Only Dad pays his rent himself, the rest receive LHA.

I'd give them secondhand caravans.

GG

Mum_of_3_3

Wee_Willy_Harris wrote: »

Well, the argument seems to be that if they've been waiting for 2 years, why have they not secured private rented in that time?

I can't comment on the specifics of your family as I don't know the area. But 2 years in temp seems like a long time to me.

They've not been in temp for 2 years, it's coming up for 9 months now I think. The reason they're in temp accommodation is complicated, but basically they were living with a family member and on the council list for overcrowding when they had the second. Then they had twins and the family member kicked them out into temp so that they would get a house.

They could get a private let as I guess the council would give them a deposit, and I think they should and if it was me I would. I know he earns NMW and because all the kids are under 6, I think his oh has her hands full, which means they would have to claim LHA and not many LLs accept that.

To be honest drive me mad as they are part of this me-me-me set and honestly think that council housing is their right. Also, if it were me I would've stopped at 2 kids knowing I couldn't afford to house the two I already had, but that's a whole other thread

M_o_3

ninky_2

Gorgeous_George wrote: »

How about this...

Mum, Dad, daughter and son live in a large 3 bedroom council house. Mum decides she wants out and rents a flat privately. Dad decides son is a pain in the a**e and palms him off onto Mum. Mum needs a bigger house and the council provides one. Daughter gets pregnant and leaves home - into a 2 bedroom council house. That's property with a market value in excess of £500,000; 7 bedrooms for 5 people. Only Dad pays his rent himself, the rest receive LHA.

I'd give them secondhand caravans.

GG

a lack of information here in a deliberate attempt to dehumanise those who may well be in genuine housing need. are any of them working? single mum's are clearly in housing need if they need to provide childcare and therefore unable to work (or can only get low paid part time jobs).

where would you put the secondhand caravans? travellers pitches are few and far between and need to be privately purchased since maggie removed local authority need to provide.

Mum_of_3_3

ninky wrote: »

i think it's time to stop discussing fourcandles situation. s/he isn't living in council housing so has little bearing on the op.

Surely Housing Association housing is a different type of council housing and meant for the people who need help with housing costs :think:

Wee_Willy_Harris

ILW wrote: »

I would say in fourcandles case, he has stated that to rent privately in his area costs approx £650 per month. I would say that was affordable on £59k salary. The £400 he is paying seems rather low.

Compared to £650, I would say that £400 is clearly an "affordable rent", wouldn't you?

Oner of the main reasons for the introduction of secure tenancies was to provide people with security of tenure. To now turn social housing into some sort of emergency temporary provision goes against everything that it was introduced for.

Wee_Willy_Harris

Mum_of_3 wrote: »

Surely Housing Association housing is a different type of council housing and meant for the people who need help with housing costs :think:

Housing associations and council accommodation are, in all but details, one and the same thing.

ILW

Wee_Willy_Harris wrote: »

Compared to £650, I would say that £400 is clearly an "affordable rent", wouldn't you?

Oner of the main reasons for the introduction of secure tenancies was to provide people with security of tenure. To now turn social housing into some sort of emergency temporary provision goes against everything that it was introduced for.

In this case I would say they £650 is very affordable and £400 is a bit of a joke and rather insulting to others in a more needy situation.

wherediditallgothen

ILW wrote: »

In this case I would say they £650 is very affordable and £400 is a bit of a joke and rather insulting to others in a more needy situation.

I would agree. Perhaps they could send me £125.00 per month to help subsidise my rent?