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!

Council houses for fixed terms only!

1…2526283031…54

Comments

  • ILW
    ILW Posts: 18,333 Forumite
    Wee_Willy_Harris wrote: »
    They aren't. But peoples circumstances change,t of affordable rents. Obviously, with such a change in circs, comes a change in available choices. But they are still choices, and so should they remain. Like the millionaire who chooses to drive the 10 year old banger.

    It appears on that basis that if someone were to get a serious illness and be awarded mobility allowance because they required help with getting around, that if they were then to get better they should go on receiving the payments even though their circumstances had changed.
  • Wee_Willy_Harris
    Wee_Willy_Harris Posts: 7,512 Forumite
    wherediditallgothen wrote: »
    There are a fair few 10 year old bangers about. So the person earning £52k pa household income can deprive the people for whom the only option is social housing?

    There are also a fair few social houses about.
  • ILW
    ILW Posts: 18,333 Forumite
    Wee_Willy_Harris wrote: »
    Yet the millionaire can deprive the poor motorist who's only option of personal transport is a 10 year old banger.

    Fourcandles is paying full rent, no HB in pay. Who is subsidising him?
    There is a virtually limitless supply of 10 year old banger, it far exceeds demand. Social housing on the other hand, demand far exceeds supply.
  • Wee_Willy_Harris
    Wee_Willy_Harris Posts: 7,512 Forumite
    ILW wrote: »
    It appears on that basis that if someone were to get a serious illness and be awarded mobility allowance because they required help with getting around, that if they were then to get better they should go on receiving the payments even though their circumstances had changed.

    If the original ethos behind that benefit was that it be awarded until death or surrender, then that choice would be theirs.
  • ILW
    ILW Posts: 18,333 Forumite
    Wee_Willy_Harris wrote: »
    There are also a fair few social houses about.

    Why are there long waiting lists then?
  • wherediditallgothen
    wherediditallgothen Posts: 1,520 Forumite
    Wee_Willy_Harris wrote: »
    There are also a fair few social houses about.

    Not enough apparently. As I believe may have been mentioned elsewhere in the thread.
    Set your goals high, and don't stop till you get there.
    Bo Jackson
  • Wee_Willy_Harris
    Wee_Willy_Harris Posts: 7,512 Forumite
    ILW wrote: »
    There is a virtually limitless supply of 10 year old banger, it far exceeds demand. Social housing on the other hand, demand far exceeds supply.

    Clearly, the supply/demand logic behind old cars holds as true as it does for social housing. If it didn't, they would have no value.
  • ILW
    ILW Posts: 18,333 Forumite
    Wee_Willy_Harris wrote: »
    If the original ethos behind that benefit was that it be awarded until death or surrender, then that choice would be theirs.

    And if it were awarded on that basis then I believe most would believe it were wrong and needs to be changed. Same with lifetime tenancies on social housing.
  • ILW
    ILW Posts: 18,333 Forumite
    Wee_Willy_Harris wrote: »
    Clearly, the supply/demand logic behind old cars holds as true as it does for social housing. If it didn't, they would have no value.
    That makes no sense, social housing is not in an open market.
  • Wee_Willy_Harris
    Wee_Willy_Harris Posts: 7,512 Forumite
    ILW wrote: »
    Why are there long waiting lists then?
    wherediditallgothen wrote: »
    Not enough apparently. As I believe may have been mentioned elsewhere in the thread.

    I believe another poster mentioned Oldham. Please allow me to quote part of the reply given in #223
    Wee_Willy_Harris wrote: »
    Interestingly, as you mention Oldham, social housing is run by "First choice homes Oldham". Looking at recent lets for 2 and 3 bed houses to non priority applicants and without age restrictions, there were 9 in April, 9 in May and 17 in June. Of these, a considerable number had been on the waiting list for under 12 months. Doesn't seem to be too much of a problem there.
This discussion has been closed.
★ ★ ★ Meet your Ambassadors

🚀 Getting Started

Hi new member!

Our Getting Started Guide will help you get the most out of the Forum

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 352K Banking & Borrowing
  • 253.5K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 454.2K Spending & Discounts
  • 245K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 600.6K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 177.4K Life & Family
  • 258.8K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
  • 37.6K Read-Only Boards

Is this how you want to be seen?

We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.
Update Your Picture