Council houses for fixed terms only!

FOURCANDLES_2

dmg24 wrote: »

This is the key here - the social element of social housing has been long forgotten. It used to be for those who were most in need, now it is for those who can get their foot in the door and then don't give a damn about anybody else.

I do care about others my family first I pay rent a full council tax , water rates etc I do not recieve benefits and that now includes NO child tax credits unlike many . If I was asked to pay a little more rent ie xtrax £100 I would if they wish to pay me to go a decent amount I would go but only if it benefits me . I will not do myself down for bettering myself.

ILW

FOURCANDLES wrote: »

Tax payers live in them .

And many do not, but still had to pay for them,. (the vast majority earning less than your £60,000 salary)

ninky_2

Wee_Willy_Harris wrote: »

If we really want to see realistic house prices and a more open housing market, then we also need to address all these issues within the owner occupier sector as well. Doing away with the amateur landlords would be a start. Perhaps a tax on under-occupied owner/occ properties would also help. We keep being told that we're all in this together, yet the owner/occs seem to want immunity while penalising everybody else.

i agree - people should certainly not be allowed to keep 'investment' properties empty when there are so many in housing need. unlikely to see that from a tory led govt unfortunately. that doesn't make lifetime tenure of social housing a good thing though.

FOURCANDLES_2

The main point is they should be looking and private tenure agreements and should follow Europe as people need a stable and long term home . Remove any tenant who breaches rules etc or for rent arrears . I could buy if I moved to another county but that is a reason I could afford it what else is in these county's work wise as I could move my business as they do not have the money to pay for my product or service.

FOURCANDLES_2

ILW wrote: »

And many do not, but still had to pay for them,. (the vast majority earning less than your £60,000 salary)

Yes but many do, I can assure you do not pay for my association house I do . Some tax payers think they pay for everything I now am aware why daily mail is printed in such large print.

ninky_2

FOURCANDLES wrote: »

Yes but many do, I can assure you do not pay for my association house I do . Some tax payers think they pay for everything I now am aware why daily mail is printed in such large print.

don't think the new rules will impact housing association anyway. only council. and only future tenancies.

Kittikins

I think that short-term contracts is a good idea for many of the reasons outlined in previous posts. Private tenants pay "market" (or inflated) rents and have very little security. I don't quite understand why people in social housing feel they should be protected for life, no matter how good their circumstances can become.....If after the 5/10 period the tenants are assessed as having enough money to rent or buy privately, why should they stay where they are? Of course, if they still need the house/flat, then of course they should stay where they are for a further rental period.

I'm struggling as a divorced parent to keep my house for me and DD whilst paying a massive mortgage and I could be like some of my friends and ask for a HA house with virtually no rent to pay and security for life.

What I don't particularly agree with though is the way everyone slags off Maggie and the Tories for selling off the houses, which I agree was completely wrong, but no one complains about the fact we've had what feels like countless years under a Labour government and they've not reversed decisions/made substantial improvements to the way social housing is run.

FOURCANDLES_2

Wee_Willy_Harris wrote: »

To encourage sustainable communities, housing associations will often apply a "local lettings" policy to more popular properties to ensure that a person with a connection to the area is granted the tenancy. This is particularly so in rural settings with little social housing availability.

The reason why I got it thank you , THIS GUY CLEARLY KNOWS HIS ONIONS FOLKS

N79

FOURCANDLES wrote: »

The main point is they should be looking and private tenure agreements and should follow Europe as people need a stable and long term home . Remove any tenant who breaches rules etc or for rent arrears . I could buy if I moved to another county but that is a reason I could afford it what else is in these county's work wise as I could move my business as they do not have the money to pay for my product or service.

Just remember that the European style system you like has the following additional features.

1. Ts are locked in for the same long periods as LLs (albeit normally with a limited right of assignment). In the UK Ts may not have security of tenure but they do have the flexibility to move with only a months notice.

and

2. The big one, the elephant in the room that never gets discussed when people talk about european style tenancies: repairing obligations.

FOURCANDLES_2

Kittikins wrote: »

I think that short-term contracts is a good idea for many of the reasons outlined in previous posts. Private tenants pay "market" (or inflated) rents and have very little security. I don't quite understand why people in social housing feel they should be protected for life, no matter how good their circumstances can become.....If after the 5/10 period the tenants are assessed as having enough money to rent or buy privately, why should they stay where they are? Of course, if they still need the house/flat, then of course they should stay where they are for a further rental period.

I'm struggling as a divorced parent to keep my house for me and DD whilst paying a massive mortgage and I could be like some of my friends and ask for a HA house with virtually no rent to pay and security for life.

What I don't particularly agree with though is the way everyone slags off Maggie and the Tories for selling off the houses, which I agree was completely wrong, but no one complains about the fact we've had what feels like countless years under a Labour government and they've not reversed decisions/made substantial improvements to the way social housing is run.

That's the BRITS all over you should be asking for more rights for private Tenants but NO but they ask for the poor level of protection be given to council/association tenants mind boggling.