Council House sub-letting to be criminalized

borkid

ILW wrote: »

Some of the local people benefited, if the land had been sold, all of the local taxpayers would have benefited.

Depends where the land is. If the land were sold to a developer it could result in younger people in a village being priced out and the village becoming a satellite area of a nearby city/ town. The newcomers often don't use the local shop/ post office/pub etc and these eventually close down. If on the other hand local people could afford to continue to live there then there is a higher chance of the places staying open and it would be easier to employ staff in the area.

In rural areas it is often a greater benefit for the local tax payers in terms of life style if its local people who can live in the area.

Torry_Quine

I am surprised it wasn't a criminal offence already. anyone caught sub-letting should at the very least have the property taken from them and not be able to get one again. When there are many people with no or inadequate housing this is just not acceptable.

Kennyboy66

StevieJ wrote: »

I do, it is their home, the problem came from selling them off in the first place. I do find this 'lucky to have one' quite fascinating, I don't think it was long ago when people couldn't get out of them fast enough. I can't believe it has improved any, when all the best ones have been sold off.

This is what is great about this board. You can get the same person rubbishing council housing, how it's damp and sub standard and estates are full of chavs......, then whingeing that its not fair that people get council tenancies, especially that woman down the road who smokes and shops in Sainsburys.

They can even spout this nonsense in a single post.

Great idea to crack down on sub letting - although I have never seen it outside Greater London.

The 100k idea is risible and is the politics of envy and won't make a blind bit of difference.

RenovationMan

Kennyboy66 wrote: »

The 100k idea is risible and is the politics of envy and won't make a blind bit of difference.

I don't understand why the rentals aren't at market rates already. Those who need state assistance will receive it so why are we feathering the nest by supplying subsidised housing to those who don't receive state assistance?