Council houses for fixed terms only!

wherediditallgothen

FOURCANDLES wrote: »

lets face it H ASSOCIATION TENANTS WILL WORK BETTER THEMSELVES AND MOVE ON WHEN THEY CAN AFFORD TO

You aren't.

You probably aren't alone either.

Wee_Willy_Harris

poppysarah wrote: »

Maybe the market is squewed by housing benefit payments?

Low rents would benefit the UK.

Low house prices would benefit the UK, and force rents down, but there isn't the political will to address that issue.

Mum_of_3_3

FOURCANDLES wrote: »

.........As I have said we have many people in receipt of things they could refuse from tax credits to winter fuel payments etc but they do not why have a go at a person who has been honest up front from the start and adheres to a contract.

As my Mum used to say when I was a kid two wrongs don't make a right. Just because others don't have morals, it really doesn't mean you shouldn't have any too! If someone came on here posting that their earnings was a high as you and that they still claimed Winter Fuel or Tax Credits I expect they would experience the same replies as you have

FOURCANDLES wrote: »

Correct and to sound like our mp's I am not doing anything wrong, I am playing by the rules and adhering to my contract and NO where in my contract does it say if you better yourself please hand back the keys and move on .

The MPs were playing by the rules too when they claimed for duck houses and horse manure, just cos it's playing by the rules it doesn't mean it's not morally wrong!

FOURCANDLES wrote: »

At a local council meeting our councillor stood up and said I feel many in the room fail to understand what affordable homes are or how they are funded or allocated..

I think all of us understand how affordable housing is allocated, what we can't believe is how tenants can keep them for life no matter how much they earn!

Mum_of_3_3

FOURCANDLES wrote: »

And many posting on here care for the needy, bloody hell I live in a H association home I am not thick

!!!!!! you are NOT needy, you earn £59k a year. If you are needy we are destitute :mad:

WhiteHorse

mufi wrote: »

The sooner new council tenants have to agree to vacate once they no longer need such a large property, the better for everyone.

Agreed. Some tenancy agreements have always contained clauses to that effect. Lazy or politically motivated councils choose not to utilise them.

Mum_of_3 wrote:

Also, I feel there should be a upper earnings limit for each household as round here I know there are lots of people still living in council housing when they could easily afford private rental (there's actually someone with a Merc and a Bentley parked outside of their rented council house).

Agreed. I've seen the same.

diable wrote:

There also should be no automatic right to an "upgrade" if you have more children, the same as if you are a homeowner and can't afford to buy something larger.

Agreed. If you can't feed 'em (or house 'em), don't breed 'em.

Private renters have time limited tenancies, so why should council tenants expect extra privileges? If someone wants a tenancy for life, there's a word for it ... ownership.

Mum_of_3_3

Wee_Willy_Harris wrote: »

Again with this "subsidy". Most, if not all, houisng associations run at a SURPLUS, not a loss. In fact, many are now being critisised for the amount of surplus they are holding.

If you read the post I quoted, Fourcandles said that most people in private rental are subsidised by LHA until they get a LA/Council property.

I was trying to point out that the longer he stays put the longer we have to pay LHA to a family in his local area and therefore the longer we have to subsidise the family in private rental not Fourcandles!!!

Wee_Willy_Harris

Mum_of_3 wrote: »

If you read the post I quoted, Fourcandles said that most people in private rental are subsidised by LHA until they get a LA/Council property.

I was trying to point out that the longer he stays put the longer we have to pay LHA to a family in his local area and therefore the longer we have to subsidise the family in private rental not Fourcandles!!!

I stand corrected. Thankyou for the clarification.

Wee_Willy_Harris

WhiteHorse wrote: »

Agreed. Some tenancy agreements have always contained clauses to that effect. Lazy or politically motivated councils choose not to utilise them.

Nope. It's enshrined in law. Councils cannot over-ride legislation, whatever their political make-up. Neither can housing associations.

Wee_Willy_Harris

WhiteHorse wrote: »

Agreed. If you can't feed 'em (or house 'em), don't breed 'em.

There is no "automatic right" to an upgrade apart from that available to all within the confines of statutory overcrowding (as defined by section X, 1985 housing act).

WhiteHorse

Wee_Willy_Harris wrote: »

Nope. It's enshrined in law. Councils cannot over-ride legislation, whatever their political make-up. Neither can housing associations.

I'm sure that I have read that it is so, although I cannot produce the quote. Would you point me at the relevant law?