Council houses for fixed terms only!

wherediditallgothen

Wee_Willy_Harris wrote: »

But you are speaking from an experience of ONLY social tenants and ONLY those who call out of hours. Of course your opinion, based on that very limited experience, will be biased.

Of course anything that doesn't agree with your point of view is likely to only be of limited experience, (and therefore discounted) isn't it?

I'm sure that those who call during standard office hours are likely to be far more reasonable aren't they?

ILW

FOURCANDLES wrote: »

Again the private sector do not get the same level of service , so you say if the private sector get poor service so should the H association tenant . Of course you will get rude people that is every where however a private tenant complains less as they are not protected with a secure tenure. I would also add Our H association charges you for any damage and chases you for leaving and not paying the rent.
I would also add a H association tenant has the same rights as a private tenant and as such has a right to repairs to be carried out in a reasonable time of course you as in any sector wil; get those who abuse this.I again question are people moaning as they care for the gen needy ? I think not lets face it we all no many H association tenants can go private however many would need help with the high rents so will go to the benefit agency for this and many are doing so do you think it may cost more?

Fair point, but the flip side is that those who can afford to pay market rents should be made to.

wherediditallgothen

Fang wrote: »

You should be paying market rent. It's people like you that will lose out thanks to the Tories and that gives me a warm feeling, not unlike a hug from the baby Jesus.

My sentiments exactly :rotfl:

Wee_Willy_Harris

ILW wrote: »

On that basis the rent would have to be £0.00 to make a property affordable to anybody. I would suggest that for someone on £60k that £1200 per months is affordable.

So, a private let is advertised for £1200 a month. Along come the prospective tenant, who earns just £12k a year. Will the LL reduce the rent to an affordable level? No. Would the seller reduce the price on his property by such a margin? No. So why should social housing be any different.

Wee_Willy_Harris

wherediditallgothen wrote: »

Of course anything that doesn't agree with your point of view is likely to only be of limited experience, (and therefore discounted) isn't it?

I'm sure that those who call during standard office hours are likely to be far more reasonable aren't they?

We may never know because the poster to whom I replied didn't have that breadth of experience, by their own admission. Do you?

FOURCANDLES_2

It is clear I think it is not a genuine care for the needy with most posters it is because I do not get that. The rules on council houses/ H association houses will alter little when our own mp who is a tory says pie in the sky never happen and if it did it would be for new tenants so would not make a jot of difference for decades.Of course I could move and find a property to buy in a new county but why should I? As with any contract it will be adhered to .

Wee_Willy_Harris

ILW wrote: »

Fair point, but the flip side is that those who can afford to pay market rents should be made to.

Should house sellers be able to inflate their prices on the basis of the wealth of an individual buyer? How about private LLs increasing rents in the same manner?

wherediditallgothen

Wee_Willy_Harris wrote: »

We may never know because the poster to whom I replied didn't have that breadth of experience, by their own admission. Do you?

No. But the way you worded it made it sound like you were discounting the whole post.

ILW

Wee_Willy_Harris wrote: »

So, a private let is advertised for £1200 a month. Along come the prospective tenant, who earns just £12k a year. Will the LL reduce the rent to an affordable level? No. Would the seller reduce the price on his property by such a margin? No. So why should social housing be any different.

Because social housing should be charging market rents to those that can afford it and using that surplus to subsidise those that cannot. I know this is not the case but in my opinion it should be. I truly cannot see the justice in what many would consider to be well off people taking cheap homes from the less well off and this being facilitated by the state.

wherediditallgothen

Wee_Willy_Harris wrote: »

Should house sellers be able to inflate their prices on the basis of the wealth of an individual buyer? How about private LLs increasing rents in the same manner?

Yes they are entitled to ask for what they think they can get. If the other party is willing to pay that then it's up to them.