Council House Purchase Discount Query

vogue

My sister currently lives in a council property and has been a tenant for 9 years, I am aware she will get 35% plus 1% for every additional year she has been there after 5 years, so this will be a total of 39% discount under the right to buy.

She is planning to move in 18 months and I am thinking of moving in with her and purchasing the property.

I do know that if I was to be placed on her tenancy agreement, I would have the right to buy the property after 12 months.

My question is would I be entitled to the full discount of 39%

Anyone know this and do I have all info correct?

Any help would be appreciated, I really want to move back but cant afford the prices in the area my family live in, however this would give me the opportunity to be happier and live near my family again.

Many Thanks in advance

squinty

What you are asking is a way to manipulate the right to buy system to give you a discount that you are not entitled to.

You cannot put your name onto the tenancy agreement. A secure tenancy cannot be assigned apart from in a few specified circumstances none of which seem to apply in your case. Your idea is a non starter.

tim123456789

squinty wrote: »

What you are asking is a way to manipulate the right to buy system to give you a discount that you are not entitled to.

You cannot put your name onto the tenancy agreement. A secure tenancy cannot be assigned apart from in a few specified circumstances none of which seem to apply in your case. Your idea is a non starter.

My googling of this shows that it can be re-assigned in this case at the discretion of the council.

Though no-where did it explain whether the new tenant kept the old tenant's accrued discount, I suspect not.

squinty

tim123456789 wrote: »

My googling of this shows that it can be re-assigned in this case at the discretion of the council.

.

No. Section 91 of the 1985 Housing Act is very clear. A secure tenancy is on that is not capable of being assigned apart from a few circumstances. These are:

a. As a mutual exchange

b. As part of a seperation of child custody, or

c. To someone who would be entitled to succeed if the tenant died.

None of these appear to apply

tim123456789

squinty wrote: »

No. Section 91 of the 1985 Housing Act is very clear. A secure tenancy is on that is not capable of being assigned apart from a few circumstances. These are:

a. As a mutual exchange

b. As part of a seperation of child custody, or

c. To someone who would be entitled to succeed if the tenant died.

None of these appear to apply

(c) would apply to a sibling if they had resided (as their main home) in the property for the previous 12 months, which ISTM is the scenario suggested.

tim

squinty

tim123456789 wrote: »

(c) would apply to a sibling if they had resided (as their main home) in the property for the previous 12 months, which ISTM is the scenario suggested.

tim

No. The OPs plan was to have her name added to the tenancy agreement.

If the OP was to move into the property, live their for 12 months, there has been no previous succession, and the property is the right size, it is possible for the sister to assign the tenancy to the OP. The sister will need to give up all rights to the tenancy

This would put the sister at considerable risk - unless she was planning on leaving social housing for good.

However it is not possilbe to assign from a sole tenancy in the sisters name to a joint tenancy with the OP.

tim123456789

squinty wrote: »

No. The OPs plan was to have her name added to the tenancy agreement.

If the OP was to move into the property, live their for 12 months, there has been no previous succession, and the property is the right size, it is possible for the sister to assign the tenancy to the OP. The sister will need to give up all rights to the tenancy

This would put the sister at considerable risk - unless she was planning on leaving social housing for good.

However it is not possilbe to assign from a sole tenancy in the sisters name to a joint tenancy with the OP.

I answered on the basis that you had already said that having the sibling's name added to the tenancy was impossible (though I suppose I should have made that clear)

And the OP said that the sister wanted to move on anyway.

I took it as read that this meant out of social housing because timing a move within social housing is next to impossible

tim