New Build House Mis-Sold! What are our rights?

rodders470

I understand developer are obliged to supply affordable housing, and that is why we explictly asked if they were shared ownership, as opposed to HA rental properties.

The developer simply lied in order to secure a sale. Surely we could use this as leverage in order to reclaim any costs incurred by ourselves, or am i wrong?

Idiophreak

cheekychappy wrote: »

Is there some form of stigma attached to people in social housing or something?

Yes, everyone knows that if you're in a social housing you're lazy, have a big TV and smoke

Mrs_Arcanum

Chances are the social housing element will be of a better standard & relative size than those for sale.

kingstreet

rodders470 wrote: »

The developer simply lied in order to secure a sale

I disagree with this, for the reasons I gave earlier. It is quite possible a sales executive on a site isn't aware the HA in question is a former council's housing department. If he/she was aware, proving it is a completely different matter.

pinkshoes

rodders470 wrote: »

I understand developer are obliged to supply affordable housing, and that is why we explictly asked if they were shared ownership, as opposed to HA rental properties.

The developer simply lied in order to secure a sale. Surely we could use this as leverage in order to reclaim any costs incurred by ourselves, or am i wrong?

Did you have it in writing that there would be no social housing? I'm guessing not, so you'll have a difficult job proving what they said.

I'd go and speak to them and kick up a fuss.

Personally I'd pull out. I rented in a street with social housing, and although 95% of the tenants were lovely, it was the other 5% that caused 95% of the problems - trees ripped apart, cars used as football posts, car stereo ripped out, windscreen smashed, bike stolen etc... I would NEVER live in a street like this again!

Most developers are well aware of social housing lowering the value of the other houses, so some get round it by having two building sites, often in different locations, so they put ALL the social ones on one site, making the rest just private sale.

leicesterfarthing

I went to look a new build last month, massive development nearing completion, I was after a 3 bed semi... I was shown a plot with social housing (rented) opposite and this is what I found;

Less than 10 metres from the front door of "my" £240,000 house was a similar HA semi with 3 motorbikes (one with a wheel off) 4 youths sat on the step, a girl in her early twenties screaming her head off and running to another house diagonally opposite with 3 teenage girls sat on the step smoking. One bike was started up and the young lad drove around the cul-de-sac with no helmet on and just parked it back up.

The sales negotiator asked me what I thought, I was incredulous... no I am not a snob, but you can't "social engineer" like this. In established areas you don't get this drastic mix. It doesnt work! Why should I pay nearly quarter of a million pounds to live 10 metres away from someone paying (if at all) £400 a month for a very similar house? (albeit with all the front doors the same colour and cheap numbers on, a dead give-away)

I'd walk away, sorry to be so blunt, walk away.... that's why these houses arent selling. Shared equity housing is better (I've lived on an estate with these, not great, but better) but rented.... nah... give it a miss.

If you look on the site plan it should tell you what kind of housing there is, it probably says "affordable housing" it is your responsibily to find out what type..... caveat emptor.

You will recoup your survey and arrangement fees etc by going in hard with your next offer.... think long term.

Try and find established areas, the houses may not be brand spanking new, but at least you will have no nasty suprises (or at least minimise the risk)

Good luck!

charltonkeston

leicesterfarthing wrote: »

I went to look a new build last month, massive development nearing completion, I was after a 3 bed semi... I was shown a plot with social housing (rented) opposite and this is what I found;

Less than 10 metres from the front door of "my" £240,000 house was a similar HA semi with 3 motorbikes (one with a wheel off) 4 youths sat on the step, a girl in her early twenties screaming her head off and running to another house diagonally opposite with 3 teenage girls sat on the step smoking. One bike was started up and the young lad drove around the cul-de-sac with no helmet on and just parked it back up.

The sales negotiator asked me what I thought, I was incredulous... no I am not a snob, but you can't "social engineer" like this. In established areas you don't get this drastic mix. It doesnt work! Why should I pay nearly quarter of a million pounds to live 10 metres away from someone paying (if at all) £400 a month for a very similar house? (albeit with all the front doors the same colour and cheap numbers on, a dead give-away)

I'd walk away, sorry to be so blunt, walk away.... that's why these houses arent selling. Shared equity housing is better (I've lived on an estate with these, not great, but better) but rented.... nah... give it a miss.

If you look on the site plan it should tell you what kind of housing there is, it probably says "affordable housing" it is your responsibily to find out what type..... caveat emptor.

You will recoup your survey and arrangement fees etc by going in hard with your next offer.... think long term.

Try and find established areas, the houses may not be brand spanking new, but at least you will have no nasty suprises (or at least minimise the risk)

Good luck!

I agree. Walk away and put it down to life.
I dont care if anyone wants to label me a snob I simply do not want to live in some town planners experiment

Horizon81

Totally echo the last 2 sentiments. If you're paying that much for a house then you want it on a private estate.

Is there any way new estates can get away without having to have Hosuing Association/Social housing on them? Only asking as there's a newish estate near me where a mate of mine lives and I didn't think the local housing association owned any of them.

custardy

Horizon81 wrote: »

Totally echo the last 2 sentiments. If you're paying that much for a house then you want it on a private estate.

Is there any way new estates can get away without having to have Hosuing Association/Social housing on them? Only asking as there's a newish estate near me where a mate of mine lives and I didn't think the local housing association owned any of them.

probably is with certain land rights etc
I only became aware of the LHA set up workig at RM.
I could never understand why you had decent houses alongside similar houses but rented
was only when someone told me it was part of the deal to build the houses that they developer had to build X% social housing
As said it doesnt always work
I delivered to one area with flats and the LHA took care of the grounds
including gardeners and their own caretaker type guy
some flats were nice with duplex style penthouses etc (bought)
however round the corner were vermin. cars were vandelised,windows/doors to the foyers smashed etc
theres only so much you can do for some people

Yorkielass

Each council, as I understand it has a limit for the size of a development before you have to include social housing. I know in York it used to be 25 dwellings, so lots of blocks of flats of 24 dwellings were built. I believe their current ruling is developments of more than about 12 have to be 50% social housing and so hardly anything is being built.

Where I live there is a mixture of private and social housing, both shared ownership and housing association rented. Some of the original 'private' housing is now rented out and I would say the people renting those properties aren't any different in many ways to those renting the housing association stuff, in fact we hear more out of those in private normally, not that any are a huge problem. What I'm trying to say is that just because it's sold as private housing doesn't mean you'll get people renting it 6 months down the line who behave as lecicesterfarthing has described.