Housing Benefit under occupancy Help

ijwia

see this annoying the hell out of me with all your self righteous sanctimonious so called advice

private renters pay higher rents why = because they get to choose where and what kind of house/flat they stay in and they get help from the state if they can't afford it!

social housing = generally in deprived parts of town and there is really no choice where or what kind of house flat and condition you get offered!

therefore stop comparing like for bloody like! they are most definately not the flipping same

so why should the be treated the same ?

seven-day-weekend

ijwia wrote: »

see this annoying the hell out of me with all your self righteous sanctimonious so called advice

private renters pay higher rents why = because they get to choose where and what kind of house/flat they stay in and they get help from the state if they can't afford it!

social housing = generally in deprived parts of town and there is really no choice where or what kind of house flat and condition you get offered!

therefore stop comparing like for bloody like! they are most definately not the flipping same

so why should the be treated the same ?

You forget that you have a secure tenancy, which the private renters do not. They can be chucked out every six months.

Soubrette

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

You forget that you have a secure tenancy, which the private renters do not. They can be chucked out every six months.

Unless things have changed, landlords tend to use a 6 month contract which changes to a rolling contract at the end, so basically just two months notice after the initial six months of occupancy and you're out.

Someone made the point earlier about home-owners paying a premium or being forced to move out if they are under occupying their home - they already do, larger homes tend to cost more of your income that smaller homes in the same area.

lighting_up_the_chalice

ijwia wrote: »

see this annoying the hell out of me with all your self righteous sanctimonious so called advice

private renters pay higher rents why = because they get to choose where and what kind of house/flat they stay in and they get help from the state if they can't afford it!

social housing = generally in deprived parts of town and there is really no choice where or what kind of house flat and condition you get offered!

therefore stop comparing like for bloody like! they are most definately not the flipping same

so why should the be treated the same ?

The introduction of choice based lettings (CBL) for the allocation of social housing has made choice very much the preserve of that sector. Prospective tenants can choose which individual properties to bid on (or not bid on) and the rents charged stay the same regardless of the perceived quality of the area. Just another huge advantage for those who rent in the social sector.

lighting_up_the_chalice

Soubrette wrote: »

Unless things have changed, landlords tend to use a 6 month contract which changes to a rolling contract at the end, so basically just two months notice after the initial six months of occupancy and you're out.

Someone made the point earlier about home-owners paying a premium or being forced to move out if they are under occupying their home - they already do, larger homes tend to cost more of your income that smaller homes in the same area.

That depends when the property was purchased. And, of course, the larger property they choose to downsize from, the larger the equity release. Everyone's a winner!

ijwia

lighting_up_the_chalice wrote: »

The introduction of choice based lettings (CBL) for the allocation of social housing has made choice very much the preserve of that sector. Prospective tenants can choose which individual properties to bid on (or not bid on) and the rents charged stay the same regardless of the perceived quality of the area. Just another huge advantage for those who rent in the social sector.

!!!!!!!!

choice choice choice

thats all we hear from right wing government after right wing government

i had a choice of crap or less crap

so dont give us this choice crap fancy panty phrases that politcians use to con the joe public

choice the ruination of the public social sector

lighting_up_the_chalice

ijwia wrote: »

!!!!!!!!

choice choice choice

thats all we hear from right wing government after right wing government

i had a choice of crap or less crap

so dont give us this choice crap fancy panty phrases that politcians use to con the joe public

choice the ruination of the public social sector

CBL was introduced by Labour.

People want choice in the major life decisions, like where to live. They have choices if they buy, they have choices if they privately rent, so why should those in social housing have to put up with some local housing dictator telling them where they can (and can't) live? Shouldn't we all have choices?

ijwia

ha i've just got it yous are all

right wing conservatives

yous want to shape the UK after the US you think the USA is a great country that shows us all what is good about capitalism

we are on our road to the US system where the only social housing is private landlords who get subsidised by the US state and still make a profit

the US government doesnt have any social housing properties

they dont believe in in social its a bad word in america

ijwia

lighting_up_the_chalice wrote: »

CBL was introduced by Labour.

People want choice in the major life decisions, like where to live. They have choices if they buy, they have choices if they privately rent, so why should those in social housing have to put up with some local housing dictator telling them where they can (and can't) live? Shouldn't we all have choices?

see thats just it

the state provide social housing to people in dire need

=

people in dire need dont/should'nt need choice it's a con

you can't see that ?

if they persist with choice in every sector of social policy then that is effectively getting rid of social policy and issuing in the privatisation of the state

if you cant or dont see that you are and idiot

lighting_up_the_chalice

ijwia wrote: »

ha i've just got it yous are all

right wing conservatives

yous want to shape the UK after the US you think the USA is a great country that shows us all what is good about capitalism

we are on our road to the US system where the only social housing is private landlords who get subsidised by the US state and still make a profit

the US government doesnt have any social housing properties

they dont believe in in social its a bad word in america

And....... Breath.....

Now look through what I've said:

Owner/occs should be penalised for under occupancy.
Social Housing tenants should have a choice about where they live.
Social Housing should house more people.
In doing so, the efficient use of social housing will reduce demand for private rent.
That reduced demand will reduce rents in the private sector.

If that's right wing Conservatism, I must have missed something!