New House Misery

darkpool

Well I can only assume pullip has a reversing light on her. I've never seen someone backtrack so much in a discussion.

I found it amazing how she came on spouting absolute nonsense about council houses being awarded on a "first come first served basis" then a few posts later she's admitting "single mums and asylum seekers will always be housed"

If only doctors could come up with a treatment to treat stupidness.

seven-day-weekend

But if you are in the lowest category and someone in a higher category bids for the same place, they will get it, won't they? So it is NOT first come, first served, there are still people automatically higher up the list than others.

I'm not saying truly needy people should not be given priority. It is the definition of 'needy' that needs looking at, I think! I don't see why a single parent is given priority over any other parent if there are no other issues.

piglet25

Single parents are not given priority just because they are single parents. For example, two sets of people are placed on the housing register on the same day, single parent with one child due to be made homeless two weeks later and married couple with one child due to be made homeless one week later. They are both eligible for a two bedroom property and both bid on the same one - it would be offered to the marred couple. Needs are worked out on each individual situation, not their partner status. In fact, if the single parent in the example above had been placed on the housing regster two months before the married couple, then the married couple would still get offered the property. If by chance they had found alternative accommodation and decded not to accept the offer, it would then go to the single parent as they had the next highest priority.

darkpool

So basically council houses are given on the needs of the applicant? I think that's what most people have thought all along.

Is is safe to say that single mums generally always get a council house because their needs are high?

Perhaps pullip should try and get some knowledge of council housing before she comes on here getting bolshy with everyone. I think she should start reading the Daily Mail so she's a little more aware of the issues.

seven-day-weekend

piglet25 wrote: »

Single parents are not given priority just because they are single parents. For example, two sets of people are placed on the housing register on the same day, single parent with one child due to be made homeless two weeks later and married couple with one child due to be made homeless one week later. They are both eligible for a two bedroom property and both bid on the same one - it would be offered to the marred couple. Needs are worked out on each individual situation, not their partner status. In fact, if the single parent in the example above had been placed on the housing regster two months before the married couple, then the married couple would still get offered the property. If by chance they had found alternative accommodation and decded not to accept the offer, it would then go to the single parent as they had the next highest priority.

Well that makes sense if that is actually the case. As far as I can see the married couple with one child need the 2-bedroom house more because there are three of them in the family.

So why do I know more single parents than anyone else in social housing?

piglet25

Possibly because a married couple are more able to find employment and share childcare ect, and give each other support than the single parent who would possibly struggle to find hours which suit the nursery times, and although both sets of people would properbly be entitled to help towards nursery costs, it is still a fair chunk to pay out from one wage. I know plenty of single parents who do work and go without other things just because they want to feel useful to society and avoid the stigma. There are also married couples who spend their days watching that Jeremy Kyle (arrgghh) so its proberbly a pretty even split.
I know some members have posted because their relatives aren't eligble for HA housing, but absolutely anyone can apply, its just a longer wait for some than others and as its based on need then thats the only fair way to do it.

Incyder

piglet25 wrote: »

anyone can apply, its just a longer wait for some than others and as its based on need then thats the only fair way to do it.

I think that clears it up nicely.




First come first served my Ar*e

catieeb06

JuniorSherlock wrote: »

On a new estate I should imagine that the HA homes will be shared ownership ones. People who buy those homes are young families who need to get onto the housing ladder. They don't tend to stay very long as once they are on the property ladder they look for somewhere slightly better.

I agree that owners can be just as much of a pain. The only neighbours I've ever had a problem with have been ones who have owned their homes. In many cases that is worse as at least with a HA you can demand that the problem be resolved.

The HA houses round here are a mixed bunch. You have your sweary families with their dogs who use the kiddies park as a drinking den and let their dogs foul everywhere and then you get the decent families who are just trying to bring up their children in a decent area as best they can.
Your attitude says a lot more about you than it does about those who rent from a HA.

I'm in agreement with this poster. HA's manage Shared Ownership properties. Doesn't mean that a few bad tenants won't move in, but you will have that where ever you live whether full home owners, people who rent or people who are in council houses.

seven-day-weekend

piglet25 wrote: »

Possibly because a married couple are more able to find employment and share childcare ect, and give each other support than the single parent who would possibly struggle to find hours which suit the nursery times, and although both sets of people would properbly be entitled to help towards nursery costs, it is still a fair chunk to pay out from one wage. I know plenty of single parents who do work and go without other things just because they want to feel useful to society and avoid the stigma. There are also married couples who spend their days watching that Jeremy Kyle (arrgghh) so its proberbly a pretty even split.
I know some members have posted because their relatives aren't eligble for HA housing, but absolutely anyone can apply, its just a longer wait for some than others and as its based on need then thats the only fair way to do it.

So what has that to do with need for social housing??

seven-day-weekend

piglet25 wrote: »

I think the misunderstanding has arisen from the statement of whoever bids first gettng their chosen property. The bidding process is open for a set number of days and you can only bid on whatever size property you have been granted eligibility for. When the biddng closes the staff rank the bids and the one with the greatest need out of all the bidders is offered a viewing and a tenancy if that suits both parties. If it were fastest finger first then folk would all bid at 00.01 on a Tuesday morning and it would all be a bit of a bunfight!

So this suggests to me that it is not in fact a 'first come, first served' choice. If you are eligible for a two-bedroom flat you can bid on it, yes. So can scores of other people and in the end it is still up to the Coucil/HA who gets it. If it was genuinely first come first served, the first eligible person who bid would get it.

And I'll tell you what, I bet jobless single Kylie with kids by different fathers is deemed to be in greater need of it than the married couple working for minimum wage with two children.

I would be very, very glad to be convinced otherwise, I really would. But my (albeit limited) experience does not bear this out.