Right to buy to be extended

TheBlueHorse

If I were the Torise, all my campaign pictures would simply be a large picture of Ed Miliband eating a bacon sandwich with the Slogan "Really? As PM? Really???? You want this negotiating with Putin??"

Slinky

I was going to vote Tory, but I'm seriously having a rethink based on this announcement, and I never thought I'd be saying that.

It's just utter madness.

princeofpounds

Who pays for Housing Associations to provide housing at below market prices? Do they get preferential access to land or planning permission for example?

Is that a rhetorical question? Nowadays they get a lot of supply by being given the 'affordable' i.e. social housing quota from new private developments. I.e. everyone trying to buy houses pays for these ones to be built. It's not small money either, something like 20-40k per private property.

mystic_trev

Slinky wrote: »

It's just utter madness.

If you think that's mad, next week he's announcing a scheme where you can buy a House using Clubcard vouchers.

Generali

princeofpounds wrote: »

Is that a rhetorical question? Nowadays they get a lot of supply by being given the 'affordable' i.e. social housing quota from new private developments. I.e. everyone trying to buy houses pays for these ones to be built. It's not small money either, something like 20-40k per private property.

Not at all. It's an actual question. I know how councils provide housing at below market prices but have never known how HAs do it.

cells

I have never voted for them but this is a policy I can and might support

So far I was leaning towards a vote for Ed because he stopped the UK getting into another ten year war

purch

I would be perfectly happy if the Government gave Housing Associations the Right to sell their properties giving the tenant first refusal, if they so chose, especially if it fiited into their strategic plans and allowed them to raise funds to build houses elsewhere, maybe where there is more demand for social housing.

I can't for the life of me see a reason to give a social housing tenant the Right to force a HA to sell them the property, whether at a discount or even full value.

I couldn't see why it was the right thing to do in the 1980's and I certainly can't see why now.

cells

vivatifosi wrote: »

As I said on the who will win thread, it's mad.

CLAPTON is right, the supply is unchanged. So why take a scarce resource out of housing association hands?

We've recently been in the position of handing back a council house due to the death of a close family member. We know from talking to the council that they could fill it more than 100x over, so why change supply going forward? Why pay more to private landlords to house the same families?

Also, how do they force the housing association to sell? What if someone had gifted their house to an association to benefit future tenants in perpetuity, could that actually be sold against the donor's wishes?

It just doesn't make sense at this point in time.

of the three types of housing

owners
private renters
social renters

the lowest occupancy rate is in the social reentered sector. what that means is, on average, if you sell a social house you will find that more people live in it post sale.

the housing works more efficiently in housing people.

cells

purch wrote: »

I would be perfectly happy if the Government gave Housing Associations the Right to sell their properties giving the tenant first refusal, if they so chose, especially if it fiited into their strategic plans and allowed them to raise funds to build houses elsewhere, maybe where there is more demand for social housing.

I can't for the life of me see a reason to give a social housing tenant the Right to force a HA to sell them the property, whether at a discount or even full value.

I couldn't see why it was the right thing to do in the 1980's and I certainly can't see why now.

why should right to buy be only for council owned homes?

it should be for both or for neither.

cells

princeofpounds wrote: »

Is that a rhetorical question? Nowadays they get a lot of supply by being given the 'affordable' i.e. social housing quota from new private developments. I.e. everyone trying to buy houses pays for these ones to be built. It's not small money either, something like 20-40k per private property.

I was reading one of the local plans last night for a London council and it seems the default option now is to go with 50% for what they call "affordable homes" which is propaganda for "social homes"

A development of say 100 homes now needs to sell 50 of them to a HA or the council at a price where they can then rent them out at a profit/break-even to social tenants.

From memory of reading the annual reports of one of the big builders I think the sum they sold the social housing for to HA was £130k


So if the development is in a cheaper part of London where homes are £500k......the difference is the cost/subsidy in this example that works out to £370k a house