Couple with child near me, offered a 2-bed bungalow in social housing!

Chrissie72

Just wondered; how could this happen?

This couple are mid 40s, they have a child of 13, and have been in private let for 3.5 years since going bankrupt in late 2009.

She told me that she has been on the housing list for 5 years - 1.5 years before she and her husband went bankrupt. And last week, they were offered a bungalow from a local housing association!

I am baffled as they're not elderly or disabled. Only under occupied (the private let has 3 bedrooms,) but I think you would only get priority for under-occupying, if you're on housing benefit and her husband actually works, so they can't be. She is a stay at home mum and he works full time. The rent is only £70 a week, instead of £150 a week that their private let house is! They will have masses of surplus left. If they have been paying £150 a week, then they will be saving £80 a week!

Spare me the 'you sound jealous' and 'what's it got to do with you' lectures please I just wonder why and how they would be offered a bungalow. It's in a very nice area too.... a village with only 450 people, 4 miles from the nearest main town, half a mile from a main road, and with no shops or schools for a mile. I would have thought that kind of area would be highly sought after! It's so quiet and rural, yet only 4 miles from a large main town.

sandsni

Maybe one or other of the couple (or child) has a degenerative illness that will limit their mobility in the future. Or other problems you know nothing about. Maybe they just got lucky and were highest on the list for that type of property when it came up.

BitterAndTwisted

No shops for a mile. For an elderly and infirm person or couple with no car, that would be a fair distance. Perhaps that's the reason they have been offered it.

They are very fortunate, but perhaps in the area you mention there isn't the kind of pressure for LA properties as in many others elsewhere.

richardw

Perhaps others on the list with greater need ahead of her turned it down.

kingstreet

Try getting care in rural areas and you understand why social housing in such places isn't well taken up by the elderly and infirm.

In Staffordshire, it is incredibly difficult to get care covered just three or four miles from the town centre, so it sounds completely understandable here.

theartfullodger

Perhaps they are getting help from a councillor or council officer: Corruption over such matters is not unknown..

MUCH more likely they've been on the list, bid for something & won.. Have you VERY CAREFULLY read the local "housing allocation" policy, checked it against their ACTUAL CIRCUMSTANCES (ie not what everyone gossips about but reality - which may well be private) and worked out what priority they might get??

Each council area must have an allocation policy: (Broadly) as long as it is rational then that's what matters (eg could be allocate on basis of application date...)

No, I'm sure you don't sound at all jealous to some people.... but to others...

Cheers!

leveller2911

Many Social Housing landlords are now raising the rents for new tenants. Just up the road from us a house has become vacant and the previous tenants were paying £92-00 a week rent.A couple we know who are also tenants of the same Housing Association would like to move into the vacant house but have been told by the HA the new rent will be £149-00 a week.The couple are existing tenants of the same landlord and only want to move 50yds but apparently its viewed as a "new tenancy". This is because Social Landlords can now charge up to 80% of the average rents in area AFAIA.

As previously mentioned services in villages can be dire and so the uptake of Social Housing in rural areas may reflect this.

System

Chrissie72 wrote: »

a village with only 450 people, 4 miles from the nearest main town, half a mile from a main road, and with no shops or schools for a mile.

It may be a bungalow but that is not to say that it is suitable for the elderly or disabled especially considering the lack of amenities and distance from 'civilisation'

Maybe they are the only family/person that is willing to accept the limitations that this bungalow has due to its location/amenities

Funky_Bold_Ribena

How did it happen?

They were on the list
They came to the top of the list
They were offered the next property that became available.

Something like that maybe?

Wicked_witch

No shops for a mile and not close to public transport links or school wouldn't be very desirable at all for a lot of people, especially considering the extreme winter weather of the last few years. It does sound nice to me, but as I don't drive I wouldn't be able to accept it (I do 'qualify' for social housing) and anyone elderly or with younger children would likely find it very unsuitable. That has probably factored into the allocation a lot.

Thrugelmir

Chrissie72 wrote: »

Spare me the 'you sound jealous' and 'what's it got to do with you' lectures please I just wonder why and how they would be offered a bungalow. It's in a very nice area too.... a village with only 450 people, 4 miles from the nearest main town, half a mile from a main road, and with no shops or schools for a mile. I would have thought that kind of area would be highly sought after! It's so quiet and rural, yet only 4 miles from a large main town.

Sounds as if its unsuitable for more elderly tenants who may rely on public transport.

As its 2 bed. A couple with one child appear to utilise the property to its full potential.

Ultimately they are only renting it not purchasing it.