Britain's Hidden Housing Crisis

Zero_Sum

neas wrote: »

2. 500k family. Once business failed they should've drastically cut back expenses, got a lodger (looked like 4 bedroom house). They prob had a couple years to sell up. Also getting an interest only 100% mortgage was very daft (didnt i hear they bought in 2001 tho) so presumably should've been paying or saving up 150k-200k to repay mortgage? Basically lived lifestyle beyond means.

The fact they bought in 2001 for £500k, would mean it probably be worth around the £1m mark today. This to me would suggest he'd been taking MEW to prop up his failing business. Should've cashed in & bought a modest 3 bed semi for £200k outright, when the business was going down the pan.

BitterAndTwisted

The people you know who were repo'd probably had ample time to arrange for the property to be sold via the usual channels, months and very possibly years if they were making some payments.rather than waiting around for it to be sold at auction for that pittance you mentioned.

Single people with no dependents of either gender are inevitably considered as an extremely low priority for LA housing where demand outstrips supply by a factor of many thousands. LAs cannot magic empty and suitable properties from thin air at a moment's notice, so I think it's entirely reasonable to prioritise families with children over those with none. Single people have more options to house themselves with family, friends or work-colleagues even if it meant kipping on a sofa: couples with children rarely have the same choice. I could put up a pal in my own home almost infinitely but I couldn't accommodate a couple with kids for more than a night or two: I just don't have the room.

BigAunty

C_Mababejive wrote: »

There are some harsh judgements being made. This could happen to almost any one of us. All it takes is a divorce,relationship failure,sudden illness,redundancy and if you cant recover quickly enough,you can easily slip below the waves. Most people dont have sufficient savings to sustain their lifestyle for a year or so.

I agree that the programme showed that homelessness could be caused by a number of different unanticipated factors and it demonstrated these.

It also showed that a certain stage, the route to homelessness had an almost unstoppable momentum and that at x stage, there is very little that the household can do to forestall it.

However, I think it also did show that the behaviour, poor decision making, tendency towards denial and lack of insight did also contribute.

The narration was as objective as it could be in reporting the background that led to their current predicament but I'm sure I'm not the only one who felt like screaming at them 'wake up' 'why did you do that?' 'what's wrong with you' as they came out with another delusional opinion or counter productive act. I've witnessed this type of thing before at close quarters.

I went through a horrible time trying to help an unemployed friend in debt who confided in me that as her savings had diminished, she might lose her flat. I bent over backwards to try and resolve it, by encouraging her to seek expert debt advice, how to increase her income and cut back on her lifestyle to match her decline in income.

For example, because she grew frustrated with the call centre in trying to end her phone contract, she merely stopped the direct debit, didn't open any letters from them and was furious and surprised that she was being pursued by a debt collector. She remained adamant that the phone company was to blame and that she would not pay the debt.

She ended our friendship when I asked her why she took out a £1000 loan for a holiday when she said there was nothing left for her mortage payments, why she had stalled on getting replacement lodger for one who had left a year before as the rent would cover her household expenses and her friends and I had redecorated and furnished her space room for this, and why despite being unemployed, she ran a car and went out nearly every night of the week. She insinuated that I was a snob and said that deserved that holiday, it was too good to miss.

This is also the type of person that debt counselling and homelessness services must see, not just unlucky ones, but ones who have a sense of wilful entitlement and don't accept any responsibility for their actions.

Better_Days

C_Mababejive wrote: »

There are some harsh judgements being made. This could happen to almost any one of us. All it takes is a divorce,relationship failure,sudden illness,redundancy and if you cant recover quickly enough,you can easily slip below the waves. Most people don't have sufficient savings to sustain their lifestyle for a year or so.

Yes, there but for the grace of God go I. I developed a chronic illness in my early 40's and was retired on ill health grounds. It is likely that I will never be able to well enough to work again. But we haven't lost our house despite the fact that I earned more than my DH. Why, well because:
1) We didn't mortgage to our limit (although I accept that we were very lucky in that we bought our first house in the early 90's - it is much harder now)
2) We had no loans or credit outstanding other than our mortgage despite being deluged with offers of credit for thousands
3) We built up 'rainy day' savings
4) I took out a critical illness policy when I was in my 30's which eventually paid out (after a 5 year battle)
5) When I was retired we reduced our expenditure and accepted that our standard of living would have to change substantially
6) We have access to the internet where I can shop around for the best deals, and have been able to make substantial savings as a result
7) DH is from Yorkshire and will never spend £2 when £1 will do :rotfl: Him buying himself a cup of coffee from Starbucks or the like happens about once a year :A

These things can happen to any of us, but it is how individuals respond that is important. Some do get a run of dreadful circumstances from which it is impossible to recover, and then it is very easy to 'slip beneath the waves'. Sadly these people are often invisible, and I have a great deal of sympathy for them and their families.

FBaby

Better_Days wrote: »

Yes, there but for the grace of God go I. I developed a chronic illness in my early 40's and was retired on ill health grounds. It is likely that I will never be able to well enough to work again. But we haven't lost our house despite the fact that I earned more than my DH. Why, well because:
1) We didn't mortgage to our limit (although I accept that we were very lucky in that we bought our first house in the early 90's - it is much harder now)
2) We had no loans or credit outstanding other than our mortgage despite being deluged with offers of credit for thousands
3) We built up 'rainy day' savings
4) I took out a critical illness policy when I was in my 30's which eventually paid out (after a 5 year battle)
5) When I was retired we reduced our expenditure and accepted that our standard of living would have to change substantially
6) We have access to the internet where I can shop around for the best deals, and have been able to make substantial savings as a result
7) DH is from Yorkshire and will never spend £2 when £1 will do :rotfl: Him buying himself a cup of coffee from Starbucks or the like happens about once a year :A.

This sums it up. I watch that programme and did have a tear coming to my eyes as the pain felt by each individual was so clear, but at the same time, I felt angry with them because it all cases but the last which didn't know much about the circumstances, their situation was caused by their own doing.

When all goes well in the present, people turn a blind eye to the potential hardship of the future. They see the future as untouchable and only another present far away. In the end, we are all responsible for a big chunk of our future and if we refuse to prepare for eventualities, then we have to accept the risk of not doing so.

Mobeer

BigAunty wrote: »

The way I interpreted that clip is that a neighbours car in an adjacent drive way motored away at a similar time to their departure. I thought that they'd sold their other motor to pay for Xmas so only had one vehicle left, albeit a hugely expensive one.

They were loading both a Lexus and a Toyota Yaris before leaving - mum drove off in the Yaris followed by Dad in the Lexus. I would guess that one car was borrowed for the day given they have sold one car previously.

moremore

Thomas Jefferson got it right when make this quote about banks…
'I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties that standing armies. If the people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around the banks will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent of their fathers conquered. The issuing power should be taken from the bank and resorted to the people, to whom it properly belongs.'

[Deleted User]

I completely agree to the comments made, yes they are judgments, yes people are distressed and have 'reasons' for burying their head in the sand.., but they are also choosing to bury their heads in the sand rather than deal with things.

To explain: the first time I ended up in a hostel (I'm afraid it happened to me twice.., bad partner choices on my part which I take responsibility for).., I was at one point living on £13 a week child benefit for me and my then only son due the local useless DSS sending my giro elsewhere for six weeks plus. I received housing benefit cheques.., I surely was desperate enough to use them for food, but I sent them straight to pay the rent (it was a shared ownership house so was rent payments needed as well as the mortgage). I had my son to look after. My then ex became more and more difficult, he lost his job, I was told finally by housing that I no longer needed to pay for the house rent/service charges, so it was up to my ex to claim housing benefit etc.

He buried his head in the sand. After a year, nothing was sorted (not even housing benefit) and the house was repossessed. He didn't even tell me til it was too late to stop it (2 days before eviction).

Same situation, same house, same messy finances and one person didn't sort it and one did. When I handed the responsibility over, service charges/rent etc were totally up to date. A year later thousands were owed and the house was repossessed.

Its all down to the choices you make. I was in just as iffy a situation as he was, was having a terribly pregnancy, in a yukky hostel (I cleaned the whole building top to bottom cause there was faeces up the wall everyone else just left it but no way was my then five year old living like that - woman with cancer in the programme offered a smelly shared room take note, if you can look after your grandchildren with cancer treatments u can scrub.., sorry but that's how I feel).

You can 'excuse' yourself from taking responsiblity for sorting messy situations because they are difficult/unfair/you can't cope etc or you can accept that they are and deal with it., working to make the situation better. I'm not superhuman, I just did what I could to make the situation better. There's always something. U've got bedbugs.., get the sprays and clean the place (I had to do it in this house recently - neighbours brought in bed bugs, they got to our hosue, I didn't tell myself if was my neighbours fault and I couldn't do anything. They weren't going to go on their own so I did what I could to get them gone. I bought the right sprays and cleaned and sprayed until they were gone. It took six weeks but there was immediate improvement once I started.). There's always something you can do. No one could have been iller than me in the hostel, I was diabetic and losing hours on the floor hypo (yes with my son there).., it was a nightmare , no help from anyone available (I did try).., but I still did what I could do regardless and actually wrote and wrote to housing associations til I got offered a house 130 miles away. That's what u have to do. What you can.

The baby I was carrying was born with brain damage and a malformed heart. He died eight days after being born. I don't like to even think of it now. I can't bear to remember how it felt, the lack of money, no help, being ill, and then losing a much wanted baby. It was so scary. I am sure it was due to the hypo's.., it could have been different if I had had more support/less stress (it really was awful, the hostels had double fire doors so I couldn't even call an ambulance, I just had to try and get myself to move to food, kept food bundles all over the place.., but I'd be lying there on the floor for long periods unable to move, 'there' enough inbetween bouts of unconsciousness to know that I had to.., but I just could not get my body to move.., knowing my son was in bed asleep and needed me) it was awful. There IS a high cost for these awful situations.., but these situations do exist.., u do have to do what you can regardless. It only gets worse if you don't.

Running_Horse

Hump wrote: »

Panorama special 'Britain's Hidden Housing Crisis' 9pm tonight on BBC1 - 6 months deciding a homeless application for one of their own ex-tenant's (evicted for rent arrears) - well done LB Croydon. Ex-tenant still thinks they will get another house - well done LB Croydon!

I believe people evicted for rent arrears never get another property. Why should they? If someone owed you money, would you keep supplying them with things? Rent should be the first thing you pay, not the last.

BigAunty

Running_Horse wrote: »

I believe people evicted for rent arrears never get another property. Why should they? If someone owed you money, would you keep supplying them with things? Rent should be the first thing you pay, not the last.

Strictly speaking, I believe the homelessness legislation requires that the rent arrears are when the person could have paid but did not, rather than just owing rent.

For example, if a tenant hasn't played any part in household finances and isn't aware that that partner hasn't paid, they may still qualify for assistance. A relative of mine was able to get social housing after successfully appealing an 'intentional homeless' decision on these grounds - truly, she did not know her husband had not been paying until the bailiffs turned up and she literally had to leave the house with her kids with just the clothes on their backs.

Also, a London council tenant has successfully appealed their eviction from council housing for rent arrears caused by their failure to claim HB by using the Human Rights Act, saying that the council should have done more to help her with applying for HB. The council were criticised by the judge and it's thought this ruling now makes it even harder for council tenants to be evicted for arrears.

It really is quite rare for a household like the family shown in that documentary to be evicted from council housing - most judges will reject a possession notice unless the council is able to show that they've done absolutely everything they can to resolve the issue.