Debate House Prices
In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non MoneySaving matters are no longer permitted. This includes wider debates about general house prices, the economy and politics. As a result, we have taken the decision to keep this board permanently closed, but it remains viewable for users who may find some useful information in it. Thank you for your understanding.
We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum. This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are - or become - political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
Is this right?
Comments
-
Wee_Willy_Harris wrote: »She signed up to a "secure tenancy" and all the protection from eviction that affords her. As such, she has an enshrined entitlement should she be displaced as a result of regeneration/demolition. She will also get a disturbance allowance (usually about £3-£5k) to cover her costs (including decorating) and the loss of any financial investment she may have made in her existing home.
Security of tenure is the main reason people want social housing, in much the same way as it's the main reason people take on a mortgage. If you had bought a home and the council wanted to demolish it, YOU would want full market value so you could replace it "like for like".
In that case, as it is actually right, I have to say, it's morally, ethically and stupidly wrong.
I actually thought, maybe stupidly, that due to her circumstances, she may well be forced to move into a 2 bed when the new ones are put up, rather than just being asked nicely if she would.
Don't really know what else to say really. I'm a little lost for words due to the insanity of the situation.0 -
Any evidence to back this up? I wasn't able to find anything concrete but it was suggested that councils generally reserve the right to rehouse if there is under-occupancy.
councils can't force a move for under-occupancy. a tenant however can request a downsize. some councils offer incentives to do this.
http://www.rbkc.gov.uk/housing/movinghome/under-occupationscheme.aspxThose who will not reason, are bigots, those who cannot, are fools, and those who dare not, are slaves. - Lord Byron0 -
Wee_Willy_Harris wrote: »If you had bought a home and the council wanted to demolish it, YOU would want full market value so you could replace it "like for like".0
-
Graham_Devon wrote: »In that case, as it is actually right, I have to say, it's morally, ethically and stupidly wrong.
I actually thought, maybe stupidly, that due to her circumstances, she may well be forced to move into a 2 bed when the new ones are put up, rather than just being asked nicely if she would.
Don't really know what else to say really. I'm a little lost for words due to the insanity of the situation.
the tories are doing away with lifetime tenancies for new tenants which may be a relief to you - not sure whether that will include forcible downsizing. they can't remove them from those who already have the lifetime tenancies however.
it might seem crazy in this era of lack of social housing and very costly private housing. it wasn't such a crazy thing in the past however.Those who will not reason, are bigots, those who cannot, are fools, and those who dare not, are slaves. - Lord Byron0 -
the other thing that may make your blood boil is that council tenants can bequeath their lifetime tenancy down one generation. this means that people who wouldn't otherwise qualify for council housing can inherit a council house tenancy.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/8072078/More-than-90000-live-in-inherited-council-homes.html
More than £9 billion of council housing has been transferred to those who may not have qualified for state help on the basis of their own circumstances, figures suggest.
The annual rent subsidy from taxpayers to those who have inherited the cheap tenancy deals is estimated to be worth more than £300 million.
A loophole in the rules allows council house tenants to “bequeath” their tenancies when they die. It means that council houses are not just “for life” but also often benefit the offspring of those granted the local authority properties.Those who will not reason, are bigots, those who cannot, are fools, and those who dare not, are slaves. - Lord Byron0 -
Graham_Devon wrote: »In that case, as it is actually right, I have to say, it's morally, ethically and stupidly wrong.
I actually thought, maybe stupidly, that due to her circumstances, she may well be forced to move into a 2 bed when the new ones are put up, rather than just being asked nicely if she would.
Don't really know what else to say really. I'm a little lost for words due to the insanity of the situation.
well, i don't see why she should be treated any differently to a second social housing tenant, living in a 3 bed house somewhere else which isn't being demolished. she didn't choose to have the house demolished. if it wasn't being knocked down she'd be able to stay there permanently.
there is a completely separate question which is should the system we have be changed so that all social housing is allocated on the basis of need.0 -
chewmylegoff wrote: »well, i don't see why she should be treated any differently to a second social housing tenant, living in a 3 bed house somewhere else which isn't being demolished. she didn't choose to have the house demolished. if it wasn't being knocked down she'd be able to stay there permanently.
there is a completely separate question which is should the system we have be changed so that all social housing is allocated on the basis of need.
Personally I don't see why she should be treated differently to those people she works with. The same people on the same wage, having to bring up children in private rentals.
But hey ho. It's not my thoughts that count.0 -
Graham_Devon wrote: »In that case, as it is actually right, I have to say, it's morally, ethically and stupidly wrong.
I actually thought, maybe stupidly, that due to her circumstances, she may well be forced to move into a 2 bed when the new ones are put up, rather than just being asked nicely if she would.
Don't really know what else to say really. I'm a little lost for words due to the insanity of the situation.
You see making an agreement, followed up with a contract, and sticking to it as "morally, ethically and stupidly wrong"?0 -
the other thing that may make your blood boil is that council tenants can bequeath their lifetime tenancy down one generation. this means that people who wouldn't otherwise qualify for council housing can inherit a council house tenancy.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/8072078/More-than-90000-live-in-inherited-council-homes.html
More than £9 billion of council housing has been transferred to those who may not have qualified for state help on the basis of their own circumstances, figures suggest.
The annual rent subsidy from taxpayers to those who have inherited the cheap tenancy deals is estimated to be worth more than £300 million.
A loophole in the rules allows council house tenants to “bequeath” their tenancies when they die. It means that council houses are not just “for life” but also often benefit the offspring of those granted the local authority properties.
They aren't just houses, they are homes. And that was the deal they signed up to.0 -
PasturesNew wrote: »The thing is, where that actually happens, the owners usually aren't given anywhere near enough to buy like for like ever again. Many people bought their house and paid their mortgage off years ago and are now retired.... and offered so little money under the compulsory purchase that they couldn't buy a house anywhere in the country for the amount offered... and they're too old to get a fresh mortgage and start again.
I do agree with the woefull prices offered under these circumstances. Councils have a habit of publicising their plans to demolish while quietly moving tenants out and putting the shutters up, both actions which will see house values plummet in any given area.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply

Categories
- All Categories
- 348.3K Banking & Borrowing
- 252.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 452.4K Spending & Discounts
- 240.8K Work, Benefits & Business
- 617.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 175.6K Life & Family
- 254K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards