some advice on housing association flat

tomjonesrules

lighting_up_the_chalice wrote: »

Plenty seem to do so. But OK, we'll play it your way. Identify a place in England where there is no availability within the appropriate LHA rate without a top-up?

That's anywhere in England, the entire country. And I'll just use Rightmove as a reference. Can't be any fairer, can I?

Of course this is some availability, but not nearly enough for everyone. Supply and demand you see - did you not cover it at school?

Can you substantiate this 'plenty' that manage to top up their rent and not get into debt by doing so? I'll give you a clue to help you along, DWP impact assessments cover all the stats.

lighting_up_the_chalice

tomjonesrules wrote: »

Of course this is some availability, but not nearly enough for everyone. Supply and demand you see - did you not cover it at school?

Can you substantiate this 'plenty' that manage to top up their rent and not get into debt by doing so? I'll give you a clue to help you along, DWP impact assessments cover all the stats.

Here's a pretty typical thread on this very board. They haven't even claimed the LHA they are entitled to yet..... https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/3664193 ....

I'll say again that there is no issue with availability of properties within the 30th percentile rate. If you disagree, just show me where.

tomjonesrules

lighting_up_the_chalice wrote: »

Here's a pretty typical thread on this very board. They haven't even claimed the LHA they are entitled to yet..... https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/3664193 ....

I'll say again that there is no issue with availability of properties within the 30th percentile rate. If you disagree, just show me where.

I asked for facts, not a post on MSE! I even pointed you in the right direction, are the reports a bit difficult for you?

Oh, and Crosby currently has no one bed properties on RightMove within the one bed LHA rate. That took me twenty seconds to find ... still waiting for your evidence!

Killmark

suelees1 wrote: »

I'm sure I must be misreading this as it seems that you're saying everyone should have access to social housing so they can buy it ???

Only if it was sold at the market value and available to all bidders, as opposed to a discounted price for the current tenants.

My arguement though is this people do end up prioritised for social housing often through circumstances of their open choosing. How is that fair?

Also some statistics for you concerning population and social housing:

As of 2007.

White, 17% in social housing, 11% private renting
Mixed, 35% in social housing, 22% private renting
Pakistani, 17% in social housing, 18% private renting
Bangladeshi, 49% in social housing, 14% private renting
Black Caribbean, 43% in social housing, 9% private renting
Black African, 49% in social housing, 9% private renting
Chinese, 7% in social housing, 39% private renting

lighting_up_the_chalice

tomjonesrules wrote: »

I asked for facts, not a post on MSE! I even pointed you in the right direction, are the reports a bit difficult for you?

Oh, and Crosby currently has no one bed properties on RightMove within the one bed LHA rate. That took me twenty seconds to find ... still waiting for your evidence!

Ummmm............

http://www.sefton.gov.uk/pdf/LHA%20rates%20A4%201112.pdf

http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-to-rent/property-32260945.html
http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-to-rent/property-27758122.html
http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-to-rent/property-34996853.html

Killmark

Marisco wrote: »

@Killmark, of course everyone has a need for housing, but why should those who can afford private rent have social housing? It should be reserved for those who cannot afford to have a home, not those who can afford to rent privately. I rent privately and can afford it, would it be right for me to have social housing, when there are others in much worse positions than me? And I really don't think having to limit the size of your family is much of an excuse!! How on earth do you think people managed years ago, with large families and small houses? There is no law that says every kid should have their own bedroom!

Because they didn't have a sense of entitlement and knew they couldn't have everything they wanted immediately.

Incidentally I never said every child should have their own bedroom, personally don't see a problem with children sharing, my wife was one of 6 girls and they all slept in the same room.

But then again in her country they don't have a welfare state that actively encourages breeding within certain sections of society.

Killmark

lighting_up_the_chalice wrote: »

We have a system of housing related benefits (LHA) which factors in family size. As such, everyone can afford a property to meet their needs. In the same way that a social housing tenant may qualify for larger social housing if their family expands, the private tenant may also qualify for a higher rate of LHA which makes a larger property more affordable. Those who choose to delay having children are doing just that.... choosing.

I am well aware of house LHA works but here is a personal example.

Where I live the flat we rented was amongst the cheapest 2 bed flats in the borough, yet the rent was 10% higher then the mortgage on the 3 bed house we bought. To build the deposit we had to hold 2 full time jobs each and save where ever we could such as walking up to an hour to get to work.

Now what your saying is fine if you don't care about security of tenure (which social tenants have but private tenants don't) or don't aspire to homeownership, if you do well you have the make some hard decisions on how long your prepared to delay having a family.

lighting_up_the_chalice

Killmark wrote: »

I am well aware of house LHA works but here is a personal example.

Where I live the flat we rented was amongst the cheapest 2 bed flats in the borough, yet the rent was 10% higher then the mortgage on the house we bought. To build the deposit we had to hold 2 full time jobs each and save where ever we could such as walking up to an hour to get to work.

Now what your saying is fine if you don't care about security of tenure (which social tenants have but private tenants don't) or don't aspire to homeownership, if you do well you have the make some hard decisions on how long your prepared to delay having a family.

As I said.... choices, choices, choices. We all have them.

Killmark

lighting_up_the_chalice wrote: »

As I said.... choices, choices, choices. We all have them.

Yes you can choose to be responsible or choose not to and face little consequences, perhaps even be rewarded for it.

Meanwhile it is the responsible people who are paying for the irresponsible.

Some people do find themselves in situations not of their own making and I have no problem with them being supported, I do however think those who inflict it upon themselves shouldn't be rewarded.

lighting_up_the_chalice

Killmark wrote: »

Yes you can choose to be responsible or choose not to and face little consequences, perhaps even be rewarded for it.

Meanwhile it is the responsible people who are paying for the irresponsible.

Some people do find themselves in situations not of their own making and I have no problem with them being supported, I do however think those who inflict it upon themselves shouldn't be rewarded.

How is having children while renting from a vibrant privately rented market irresponsible?