housing executive waiting list

absoluteutopia

alisara wrote: »

How dare anyone make such nasty assumptions.

It's true whether you like it or not

totallybroke_2

ikati5 wrote: »

Also remember the new legislation coming in that allows them to check you are still eligible for social housing after two years and that you have to be a low earner now to be eligible. A council house is not for life anymore and there is no right to buy!!

where can i find out about this new legislation?

so if you start earning more money will u be evicted?

totallybroke_2

alisara wrote: »

I have not read all the comments, got to about three comments in (one by absoluteutopia) and they are saying be a single mother.

I am so angry at the ignorance.

How dare anyone make such nasty assumptions

do be so ignorant, read all the comments before make your own assumptions/comments

alisara wrote: »

I have been on the waiting list for 5 years, no word and absolutely no hope of ever being housed. Instead I am living in private rental (and NO i am NOT on benefits) and my child and I have never and it looks like we will never have a permanent home.

so u have a home, why would the nihe ever dream of rehousing you?

bestpud

totallybroke wrote: »

how long where u 'homeless' for, before they gave u a house??

About a month if I remember correctly. It wasn't long anyway.

Why, if you don't mind me asking?

tara747

I'm glad that Right To Buy has ended, if indeed it has. It was an ill-concieved scheme.

highrisklowreturn

All public housing should be privatised and the tenants put out to the streets. F them. The entire idea is repugnant, that one section of society should have without consent to subsidise the other. Were it not for social housing, and the attendant paying by the government of social rent from the early 80s onwards we would not have gone through several property booms over the past 30 years, leaving the working poor as opposed to the work-shy poor unable to buy.

saverbuyer

highrisklowreturn wrote: »

All public housing should be privatised and the tenants put out to the streets. F them. The entire idea is repugnant, that one section of society should have without consent to subsidise the other. Were it not for social housing, and the attendant paying by the government of social rent from the early 80s onwards we would not have gone through several property booms over the past 30 years, leaving the working poor as opposed to the work-shy poor unable to buy.

Couldn't agree more. HB makes it difficult for normal working people to compete on rentals. Why rent to me working 40 hrs a week for £400 a month when you can rent to a family of two claiming benefits for £700. Crazy that the small working section of society should pay mortgages for gambling landlords. Not to mention increase it with inflation even if the working population wages are static.

Oh and Tara the right to buy still exists the only difference is the amount of discount is capped at near 30K. Previously the discount increased with the occupation time.

tara747

saverbuyer wrote: »

Couldn't agree more. HB makes it difficult for normal working people to compete on rentals. Why rent to me working 40 hrs a week for £400 a month when you can rent to a family of two claiming benefits for £700. Crazy that the small working section of society should pay mortgages for gambling landlords. Not to mention increase it with inflation even if the working population wages are static.

Oh and Tara the right to buy still exists the only difference is the amount of discount is capped at near 30K. Previously the discount increased with the occupation time.

1. RTB depletes the stock of council houses.
2. The discount is COMPLETELY immoral; the taxpayer is subsidising someone's acquisition of a house!
3. I just don't get the reason(s) behind it!

saverbuyer

tara747 wrote: »

1. RTB depletes the stock of council houses.
2. The discount is COMPLETELY immoral; the taxpayer is subsidising someone's acquisition of a house!
3. I just don't get the reason(s) behind it!

I agree 100% and I suspect when the concept was original conceived it didn't take account of the potential of credit bubbles to the system. It was probably thought that the majority of people who live in council houses wouldn't ever be able to afford to take advantage of the RTB so the stock wouldn't get depleted. Obviously easy credit took care of that. These’s also obviously fault with the housing executive not recycling the funds from RTB into building new stock.

tara747

saverbuyer wrote: »

I agree 100% and I suspect when the concept was original conceived it didn't take account of the potential of credit bubbles to the system. It was probably thought that the majority of people who live in council houses wouldn't ever be able to afford to take advantage of the RTB so the stock wouldn't get depleted. Obviously easy credit took care of that. These’s also obviously fault with the housing executive not recycling the funds from RTB into building new stock.

Exactly!

The system was devised by Thatcher in the 80s as a vote-winner, but it shafted the taxpayer.