Gaining social housing when working.

Marisco

I agree with Marybell and FBaby. I also think the level of "expectation and entitlement" is more now as well. Many people think they should be entitled to a house that has everything in it!! All the white goods, carpets curtains etc. Not many are willing to "do up" a place anymore, they want it "ready made"! All the houses I've bought have required work, and we did it ourselves as we couldn't afford tradesmen. I can do most things, apart from plastering!! I did try, but it ended up looking ..........interesting!

As Marybell said, it needn't cost a fortune, just a bit of imagination!! However, there is no getting away from the fact that there does need to be more affordable/social housing built, there cannot be a continuation in the increase in the population, without something "giving".

seven-day-weekend

Every property we have bought or had dealings with, from our own two houses, to a rental property we bought, to the flat our son bought, has needed something more than cosmetic work done to it, a lot more. My son's flat did have all the carpets, curtains and white goods in, we all thought this was a wonderful bonus, we certainly didn't expect it. Even so, it still needed a complete rewire and the heating updated.


I would expect a rental property to have sound structure and adequate heating etc, but I certainly wouldn't expect it to be all kitted out so all I had to do was unpack my suitcase!

Marisco

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

Every property we have bought or had dealings with, from our own two houses, to a rental property we bought, to the flat our son bought, has needed something more than cosmetic work done to it, a lot more. My son's flat did have all the carpets, curtains and white goods in, we all thought this was a wonderful bonus, we certainly didn't expect it. Even so, it still needed a complete rewire and the heating updated.


I would expect a rental property to have sound structure and adequate heating etc, but I certainly wouldn't expect it to be all kitted out so all I had to do was unpack my suitcase!

That unfortunately, is what some expect these days though SDW, and are doomed to disappointment, then come on here and whinge!!

BigAunty

PippaGirl wrote: »

I went and looked it up. Cameron has talked about time limiting all social housing tenancies to 5 years so they can be reassessed as to their need, if they have managed to get good jobs and their income is ok they would then be given notice to leave. As yet, it hasn't happened but is still being talked about. Obviously it seriously disincentivises anyone getting a better job or more hours or getting promotion because that might mean you lose your home! These new tenancies would only be for new social housing tenants, not the ones already in secure tenancies.

I'm not really up on these proposed changes. However, many countries operate social housing allocation differently from the UK.

Remember that the UK has ended up with hundreds of thousands of empty rooms due to a policy which will increase the size of the property as the household expands with no requirement for the tenant to reciprocate with a change when their household size decreases.

Also, it's incredibly hard to evict tenants even with rent arrears and anti-social behaviour.

We allocate tenancies based largely based on an urgent immediate need with some areas not even managing to house emergency cases and then we give people in temporary need a lifelong tenancy, thus blocking future accommodation for the needy.

In France, I believe that rent is pegged with income and I believe at a certain level, the tenancy ends. With the first past, at least this prevents people on large salaries from living in cheap housing.

In the US (probably at a local level, not a national policy) some social housing landlords interview their tenants and have strict policies about behaviour and rent arrears - eviction is easier and they grant temporary tenancies.

FBaby

BigAunty wrote: »

In France, I believe that rent is pegged with income and I believe at a certain level, the tenancy ends. With the first past, at least this prevents people on large salaries from living in cheap housing.

That is indeed the case, but also tenants have a lot more rights than they do in England. Evicting non-paying tenants in France is much more complex and long process.

Dunroamin

FBaby wrote: »

That is indeed the case, but also tenants have a lot more rights than they do in England. Evicting non-paying tenants in France is much more complex and long process.

That's certainly true in the private sector - you can't evict anyone, whatever they do wrong, during the winter months.

If, as a country, we don't build more social housing, I can't see why we can't have longer, more secure tenancies in the private sector, running alongside ASTs.

I grew up in a private rent controlled flat where my parents lived for over 40 years, so we managed to achieve this in the past.

thegirlintheattic

samwich1979 wrote: »

What annoys me the most is when im on the bus to work and it goes through a local housing estate most of the houses have lovely cars on the drive and nicely looked after gardens etc and i wonder how they manage to get social housing and they can afford to run a car?

Probably because they are on social housing so not paying full market rent or they got the property when they were in need but now aren't in need but don't get the house taken off of them.

I think you have an idealistic view of social housing, it's not all great. As for the quality of private housing, you get what you pay for. They should all meet certain basic requirements but you can't expect all flashy, mod cons.

Apply but don't expect to get anywhere, look on upping your income.

Hmm71

samwich1979 wrote: »

Im not in anyway implying that unemployed people dont look after their gardens etc.

My point is that these people who have the cars and nice gardens etc must be getting good money from somewhere to have these things so how have they got social housing?
I always thought it was people who didnt have the money for private renting or who are on benefits got help with housing.

Obviously you cant be struggling for every penny if you can run a car? And as i said we cant even afford driving lessons never mind buy a car and run it!

And no im not jealous im just very curious as to how people use our social housing system.

Is social housing only supposed to be for the unemployed these days then? My sister works full time and she has a council house. When we were kids we grew up in a council house but my parents both worked. I'm not sure there were many unemployed people round where we lived.
In the area where my sister lives now there are few unemployed people but they rent council properties.
Since I left home I've been in privately rented and owned a property so I'm a bit out of touch with how council housing works now but surely it's not just reserved for those out of work is it?

samwich1979

Marisco wrote: »

That unfortunately, is what some expect these days though SDW, and are doomed to disappointment, then come on here and whinge!!

Right ok, let me set this straight.

I have NEVER said i expected a rented house to be all kitted out with white goods etc. I have my own fridge freezer and washing machine plus furniture for the whole house. That is not my problem at all!

What i do expect is a structurally sound house without a damp problem and decoration to a decent standard.
Whilst viewing houses over the past month we have found that landlords round here do not share my opinion and want money for something they havent bothered their backside to pay out a little money on.
They would rather i paid out for all this when i cant afford it.

Thats my problem and surely people can understand this.

Marisco

Structurally sound yes, nicely decorated no. That's down to you. When you view, try and see past the decor and use imagination as to what it could look like by the time you've finished with it. I've always done that with all places I've lived, and some required a lot more that a bit of paint and wall paper!!