BBC show on council housing now - 21:00 4th May

Jimmy_31

sjaypink wrote: »

My facts in this case are from a published report investigating the issue, I provided a link to the same.

It clearly states that less than 10% of social housing tenants are non-UK born.

So, where do you get your facts from? Oh yes, your husband, who says that tenants are 75% immigrants, and all get free furniture and appliances... and its all a conspiracy.... the government is in cahoots with the several million people who are benefitting from these 'golden plated' tenancys to keep it all hush hush.

Its not a conspiracy, go and ask your local council if immigrants are entitled to have a fully furnished house.

Wee_Willy_Harris

catkins wrote: »

Do you or have you worked for a housing association? My husband is not a liar thank you very much. I saw paperwork relating to a lot of the things he told me and I know a lot of the people he worked with who also told me what goes on.

It surprises me not that your husbands friends are as mendacious as he is.

Wee_Willy_Harris

catkins wrote: »

Yes Really!!!!

I don't care what is made up about social housing. The truth is most of does go to migrants, at least in and around London. If the truth were known by more people I guess more people would be up in arms about it.

My husband worked for housing associations - where do you get your facts?

Ummmm..... From the link provided? Where do YOU get YOURS?

Wee_Willy_Harris

catkins wrote: »

Oh yes it is. The couple I know were told they would not be eligible for social housing BECAUSE THEY BOTH WORK!

The providers of social housing, including councils, will have a published, publicly available, allocations policy. Most can be found online. There is never a provision for employment being a bar to the allocation of social housing. To do so would be unlawful.

Wee_Willy_Harris

Jimmy_31 wrote: »

If you are quite happy for council tenants to be treated exactly the same as somebody who goes out to work day in day out year after year then thats fine.

I personally think its disgusting that people who choose not to work for a living are treated better than people who work, i think its disgusting that the tenants are given so much say in what materials are used on the property, i think it would be safe to say a lot more houses could be upgraded if these tenants were not given so much choice. Its far far cheaper to have every house done to the same basic specification.

If you are happy for a council tenant to recieve payments that are intended for redecoration purposes, to then go out and waste the money on something else then thats fine but personally i dont think its the best way for a budget to be allocated.

Must be nice to live in your world were this type of thing is unheard of.

Why shouldn't a tenant, ANY tenant, be offered the choice over the style of kitchen to be fitted? Why shouldn't they be offered a quality product which will last the test of time? Why shouldn't they be encouraged to take a pride in their home? And why, if they so choose, should they not be offered the chance to live in an undecorated house if that is what they want. I'm glad not to live in your totalitarian state!

catkins

Wee_Willy_Harris wrote: »

The providers of social housing, including councils, will have a published, publicly available, allocations policy. Most can be found online. There is never a provision for employment being a bar to the allocation of social housing. To do so would be unlawful.

So why were they told this - oh don't tell me I suppose they are liars too!!

There are liars on this thread but I am not one of them

Wee_Willy_Harris

catkins wrote: »

Definitely all true. I have to wonder if the posters that are adamant that this is not true are themselves in social housing with a new kitchen, new washing machine etc and don't want the public in general to know what goes on.

You and my husband work/worked in social housing and know that this all definitely goes on. My husband used to get annoyed about it and the things he told me made me sick!

Sick in the head, by the looks of it.

Wee_Willy_Harris

catkins wrote: »

Wee_Willy_Harris wrote: »

Twaddle. Utter twaddle.



It's not actually. Do you live in social housing? I think you must and have had everything new which is why you are saying it is not true

I'm saying it's not true because it's not true.

chewmylegoff

sjaypink wrote: »

My facts in this case are from a published report investigating the issue, I provided a link to the same.

It clearly states that less than 10% of social housing tenants are non-UK born.

So, where do you get your facts from? Oh yes, your husband, who says that tenants are 75% immigrants, and all get free furniture and appliances... and its all a conspiracy.... the government is in cahoots with the several million people who are benefitting from these 'golden plated' tenancys to keep it all hush hush.

The two aren't mutually exclusive. Nationwide you could have 90% uk born and in London you could have 75% immigrants.

I expect there are quite a lot of immigrants in social housing in London. What would you have the local authorities do? They don't control immigration, they have to deal with the consequences.

sjaypink

Jimmy_31 wrote: »

Its not a conspiracy, go and ask your local council if immigrants are entitled to have a fully furnished house.

It would all depend on how long they have been in the UK, where they have originated from, and their current circumstances (therefore housing needs).

I think its obvious form this thread that many people are unable to differentiate between 'iimigrant' & 'asylum seeker'.
We have different duties towards people from outside the UK depending on their current status.

Likewise, I wonder whether any considerations have been made as to (for example) *assured tenancys, *temporary accomodation, * emergency housing, *furnished accomodation, *charity provisions, *LA furniture rental packages, *community care grants (dwp), *social services discretionary provision....etc

Hardly black and white