Should 'Social Housing' be re-branded 'Taxpayer-supported Housing?

leveller2911

ILW wrote: »

I believe that the statuted standards for social housing for such things as room size are higher that any regs for private house building. Cannot see why social housing tenants should be entitled to larger rooms whilst paying lower rents.

Now you mention Social Housing should be of a "lower standard than private" the old lady opposite me went without any form of heating for the whole of last Winter because the HA "forgot" her, even after endless phone calls from us neighbours.

Is that low enough for you? You sound just like a spoilt little brat in the playground

link to your statement ?

ILW

leveller2911 wrote: »

Now you mention Social Housing should be of a "lower standard than private" the old lady opposite me went without any form of heating for the whole of last Winter because the HA "forgot" her, even after endless phone calls from us neighbours.

Is that low enough for you? You sound just like a spoilt little brat in the playground

link to your statement ?

Can you explain why in many cases social housing needs to be built to a higher standard than private?
eg: minimum room sizes.
Are social tenants fatter than private ones?

leveller2911

ILW wrote: »

Can you explain why in many cases social housing needs to be built to a higher standard than private?
eg: minimum room sizes.
Are social tenants fatter than private ones?

Show some evidence of your claim.If it was the case then those in Private housing have been shortchanged and should never have bought the properties in the first place.

All the 3 bedroom Council houses I have ever been in had a "boxroom" bedroom no bigger than 8x6 , enough for a single bed and wardrobe so you can't get any smaller than that.

ILW

leveller2911 wrote: »

Show some evidence of your claim.If it was the case then those in Private housing have been shortchanged and should never have bought the properties in the first place.

All the 3 bedroom Council houses I have ever been in had a "boxroom" bedroom no bigger than 8x6 , enough for a single bed and wardrobe so you can't get any smaller than that.

I believe social housing still needs to be to Parker Morris standards.
No such criteria for private rent or purchase.

Graham_Devon

leveller2911 wrote: »

Show some evidence of your claim.If it was the case then those in Private housing have been shortchanged and should never have bought the properties in the first place.

All the 3 bedroom Council houses I have ever been in had a "boxroom" bedroom no bigger than 8x6 , enough for a single bed and wardrobe so you can't get any smaller than that.

The minimum space thing is a relatively new thing. The 4 beds near me had to have downstairs loos built onto the houses. Basically they have added a small bit sticking out at the front of each house next to the front door, with a sloping tiled roof to house the downstairs loo.

The council can then house tenants in them, which they wouldn't have been able to do without the downstairs loo.

Here's an example from one council:
http://www.ashford.gov.uk/pdf/ADOPTED%20VERSION%20Residential_Space_and_Layout_SPD.pdf

Standards are listed on page 25 onwards.

leveller2911

ILW wrote: »

I believe social housing still needs to be to Parker Morris standards.
No such criteria for private rent or purchase.

So in your view it should be a race to the bottom , the likes of Bovis Homes and all the other poor quality housebuilders can build shoddy ,small houses not fit for purpose but you argue that Social Housing should be even smaller and of lesser build quality just to prop up the profit margins of Bovis and private landlords.

Seems to me Social Housing is the way to go.Build masses of low cost starter homes. Low affordable rents with good sized living spaces instead of massively overpriced tiny boxes that only increase the Bovis share value.

Why don't you start a crusade to force Bovis and their ilk to make private housing better quality.

ILW

leveller2911 wrote: »

So in your view it should be a race to the bottom , the likes of Bovis Homes and all the other poor quality housebuilders can build shoddy ,small houses not fit for purpose but you argue that Social Housing should be even smaller and lesser build quality just to prop up the profit margins of Bovis and private landlords.

Seems to me Social Housing is the way to go.Build masses of low cost starter homes. Low ,affordable rents with good sized living spaces instead of massively overpriced tiny boxes that only increase the Bovis share value.

Why don't you start a crusade to force Bovis and their ilk to make private housing better quality.

Oddly enough I sort of agree with you, but only on a basis that everbody that wants one of these places should be able to have one. Bit like state education or NHS which is available to all but many chose not to use.

Graham_Devon

leveller2911 wrote: »

Seems to me Social Housing is the way to go.Build masses of low cost starter homes. Low affordable rents with good sized living spaces instead of massively overpriced tiny boxes that only increase the Bovis share value.

So many appear to think the same.

There doesn't seem to be any political will though. I guess the resounding issue, in our society as it stands today is "wheres the profit?".

The housing construction sector (and possibly many business sectors, especially the banking sector which has a god like presence) would be falling over itself to slam the government if the government proposed low cost building and sales.

prepareathome

Its seems some here think all social housing is brand new, most is old some very old. Mine is fairly new 1932 and certainly not large by any imagination.

olly300

prepareathome wrote: »

Its seems some here think all social housing is brand new, most is old some very old. Mine is fairly new 1932 and certainly not large by any imagination.

I agree with you.

I know people who live in social housing that are Victorian and Edwardian properties.

As well as estates where some of the properties were built in the 1920s and 1930s.

London councils have been ensuring they have got rid of as many older properties as possible via RTB or auctions as they cost more money to maintain particularly if they are listed.

Plus the Victorian and Edwardian properties often have small rooms including kitchens and bathrooms that are smaller than the current new build private properties.