Over crowding?

bodmil

...............

Violetta_2

I found some info from shelter, if the babies are under 1 they don't count , if they are overcrowded the council could prosecute the landlord, depending on the number of rooms they may not be overcrowded more details here http://england.shelter.org.uk/get_advice/repairs_and_bad_conditions/home_safety/overcrowding

geoffky

They must be bisexual...You are up to no good....Move on...

Violetta_2

geoffky wrote: »

They must be bisexual...You are up to no good....Move on...

Or polygamous.

harpoboy

Are they Free Mormons?

moneyistooshorttomention

...and, on a serious note here, some people here have tried to report a Council house to the Council as being overcrowded (because there is no doubt whatsoever that it is).

Did it actually work? Errr...well...no...because Councils generally have guidelines (I believe adapted for more "overcrowded times") that have absolutely derisory measures to work out whether a property is going to be officially proclaimed as overcrowded or no.

I don't recall the exact details, but the net result was that 10 people in a 3 bedroom house IS very overcrowded in anyone's book - unless its the Council deciding ...in which case it suddenly transmogrifies into "totally acceptable level" because the rules have been twisted so much on that point to help cram extra people in 9due to the shortage of available Council housing).

I suspect that those errr....rather "generous" guidelines have carried over into other sectors of housing besides the public sector one:eek:

So Mr/Mrs Sensible In the Street knows very well that each individual adult or couple needs a bedroom each etc - but that simply won't carry over into "official rules" in the 21st century:cool:

Norman_Castle

http://england.shelter.org.uk/get_advice/repairs_and_bad_conditions/home_safety/overcrowding

Angelicdevil

moneyistooshorttomention wrote: »

So Mr/Mrs Sensible In the Street knows very well that each individual adult or couple needs a bedroom each etc - but that simply won't carry over into "official rules" in the 21st century:cool:

We don't "need" a bedroom each, we've just been brought up in a time where we are able to have such luxuries.

It was only in the last century that many families lived in just one room!

Don't get me wrong, I wouldn't want it any other way BUT if I had no other choice I'd rather share like our ancestors did than end up homeless.

bodmil

...............

outofmoney

I don't see how the LL can be prosecuted. We are overcrowded. But we cannot afford larger and been on the council list nearly 14 years. Is this the LLs fault?

moneyistooshorttomention

Angelicdevil wrote: »

We don't "need" a bedroom each, we've just been brought up in a time where we are able to have such luxuries.

It was only in the last century that many families lived in just one room!

Don't get me wrong, I wouldn't want it any other way BUT if I had no other choice I'd rather share like our ancestors did than end up homeless.

Each to their own on that one.

My own personal viewpoint is my standards got set by late 20th century norms in every way and I'm not going to do "flexible" enough to bend in accordance with any later downgrading of standards (even if that's how things were for many previous centuries).

It IS very much a matter of personal choice and I can understand why someone would choose to "adapt" instead. It really is up to the individual to choose their own viewpoint on this.

I was only thinking earlier today that maybe the mid-late 20th century might end up being the only time in recorded history where an ordinary "woman in the street" was able to choose to remain single if she didn't find the right/suitable husband for herself ever. She couldn't do so really before then and I suspect things are going back again to people having to be "coupled up" in order to have a chance of a reasonable chance of housing (and forget any ideas about "It's a lovematch marriage or forget it" and that may be regarded as mid-late 20th century "luxury" way of thinking in the future...:().

My own personal choice is that I would "break" rather than "bend" to adapt to a Worse World - but I fully acknowledge/understand why other people would make a different choice. It is hard enough to have had to acknowledge that the automatic assumption made by many of my generation that "Life is getting steadily better...Society is getting steadily better" proved to be wrong in the event and "Normal" was just a 20th century "blip" and not a step on the road to even better times.