mortgage but have been given a council house no work!

Wee_Willy_Harris

WhiteHorse wrote: »

Key word: Funding.


I did not refer to Housing Benefit. Council rents are well below market rates. Ergo, they are subsidised.

No. A simple and very common mistake. Social housing rents are affordable, but not subsidised. Most providers actually run at a profit (surplus) which helps to fund new builds and improvements.

paddygirl

CHRISSYG wrote: »

medical issues are the reason we are doing exactly that , we have priority status because of dds needs , we will sell our house once we have moved .

Thats fine, but my comment wasnt about your situation. OP needs to explain her situation abit more before its clear in my mind as to why she has been offered a council house whilst still an owner occupier.

Theres no need for emergency housing in a lot of situations like this, its folly to argue that its better to give out a scarce resource before someone actually needs it. They arent homeless so its not exactly urgent, and so what if they are overcrowded-that shouldnt be more priority that a medical case for example.

Wee_Willy_Harris

paddygirl wrote: »

Thats fine, but my comment wasnt about your situation. OP needs to explain her situation abit more before its clear in my mind as to why she has been offered a council house whilst still an owner occupier.

She's already said that her current property is no longer affordable and she's now overcrowded. Which bit didn't you understand?

paddygirl wrote: »

Theres no need for emergency housing in a lot of situations like this, its folly to argue that its better to give out a scarce resource before someone actually needs it.

Perhaps, in the OPs area, it isn't such a scarce resource.

paddygirl wrote: »

They arent homeless so its not exactly urgent, and so what if they are overcrowded-that shouldnt be more priority that a medical case for example.

Maybe it isn't. But medical needs are judged in relation to housing, so they will almost certainly be competing for different properties (general needs v adapted/level access).

Oldernotwiser

Unfortunately, it's always been the case that social housing is allocated to people who act irresponsibly. I know because my parents were on the waiting list for council property for over 40 years!

paddygirl

Not sure why you've got the chip on your shoulder wee Willy

OP said they have put the house on the market and they are overcrowded. so what? the point i am making is that in normal circumstances you wouldnt be given social housing as an owner just due to overcrowding. at no point has she said they are homeless. as already said there are lots of options avaliable to those who struggle with a mortgage. selling should always be a last resort.

And you can be approved on medical needs and not need an adapted property. Not everyone approved on medical grounds will need a wheelchair adaped property/level access bathing etc. the argument being made is one for overcrowding and I am simply saying that when it comes to banding on a normal housing register a medical case would normally be higher priority than someone who is overcrowded.

If its the norm to house someone into a council home who still owns a house who is struggling a bit with the mortgage and is slightly overcrowded due to having twins,then this country needs another major over haul as far as im concerned.

In fact, going through staceydaisy previous posts she says she is 58 and lives in a council flat. therefore i will be saving my efforts for genuine posters.

Wee_Willy_Harris

paddygirl wrote: »

Not sure why you've got the chip on your shoulder wee Willy

OP said they have put the house on the market and they are overcrowded. so what? the point i am making is that in normal circumstances you wouldnt be given social housing as an owner just due to overcrowding. at no point has she said they are homeless. as already said there are lots of options avaliable to those who struggle with a mortgage. selling should always be a last resort.

And you can be approved on medical needs and not need an adapted property. Not everyone approved on medical grounds will need a wheelchair adaped property/level access bathing etc. the argument being made is one for overcrowding and I am simply saying that when it comes to banding on a normal housing register a medical case would normally be higher priority than someone who is overcrowded.

If its the norm to house someone into a council home who still owns a house who is struggling a bit with the mortgage and is slightly overcrowded due to having twins,then this country needs another major over haul as far as im concerned.

No chips here.

Medical priority for housing is based on the suitability of your current housing when considering any medical conditions. So, a wheelchair bound applicant living in an adapted bungalow is adequately housed and wouldn't get a priority. However, if that applicant were living in a first floor flat, then they would NOT be adequately housed and would, therefor, be entitled to a priority on medical grounds. As such, most medical priorities will be looking for housing other than general needs.

Overcrowding is judged according to the number of people living in a property, regardless of the tenure of that property. It seems rather perverse of you to suggest that only those who rent can be overcrowded in the eyes of social housing providers. In most cases, low level overcrowding (ie just 1 or 2 bedspaces short) would attract low level priority, so the fact that an offer has been made may be more of a reflection on local demand than anything else. If demand is low, so will the qualifying factors be.

tomjonesrules

I am a little confused, the OP appears to post under two different names? I can't post links but if you at the thread 'omg !!! its twins' you'll see what I mean.

paddygirl

Exactly, the post is a wind up, which I am no longer falling for!

good luck to all those that have nothing better to do then waste time and energy on this.

Wee_Willy_Harris

tomjonesrules wrote: »

I am a little confused, the OP appears to post under two different names? I can't post links but if you at the thread 'omg !!! its twins' you'll see what I mean.

As confusing as a "newbie" who joined less than a week ago but seems well versed enough to dig up a thread that was last contributed too in May.

tomjonesrules

Wee_Willy_Harris wrote: »

As confusing as a "newbie" who joined less than a week ago but seems well versed enough to dig up a thread that was last contributed too in May.

Apologies for having a brain.