right to buy housing association tenants

Marie2015

restless6 wrote: »

have had the Right to Buy for the past 13 years and still haven't managed to do it!

So even if lots of new tenants are given that right, it doesn't mean they are going to be able to fulfil it!

Even though I have always worked, I am a single income with 3 children so cannot get a mortgage to the amount I need.
I expect there are many in a similar position.

I think most will be in a similar position, 95% of tenants, if not more. This is why HA's won't put up much resistance as the impact to their stock will be minimal.

fairy_lights

Marie2015 wrote: »

There is no way it would be in their manifesto if they did not think they could push it through.

Because politicians never lie...

giddypenguin

Marie2015 wrote: »

There is no way it would be in their manifesto if they did not think they could push it through. They have far too much to lose. As someone has mentioned earlier the number of tenants that could actually afford to take this up will be minimal so HA's resistance won't be as high as predicted. HA's are already obliged to sell their stock to former council tenants so there really is no difference.

I was reading a quite interesting article yesterday - essentially saying that they fully expected to be in a coalition, and could therefore easily blame their partners for any unmet 'promises'. Now they have a majority, its a slight disaster for them... £12bil from welfare bill, balancing the books, no tax increases for 5 years... all looking a bit difficult to obtain now - with no one to blame when they can't achieve it.

Malmo

Marie2015 wrote: »

There is no way it would be in their manifesto if they did not think they could push it through. They have far too much to lose. As someone has mentioned earlier the number of tenants that could actually afford to take this up will be minimal so HA's resistance won't be as high as predicted. HA's are already obliged to sell their stock to former council tenants so there really is no difference.

Really...

Source 1 - independent.co.uk
Source 2 - socialhousing.co.uk
Source 3 - civilsociety.co.uk

Cheeky_Monkey

Marie2015 wrote: »

There is no way it would be in their manifesto if they did not think they could push it through.

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

ScorpiondeRooftrouser

Marie2015 wrote: »

There is no way it would be in their manifesto if they did not think they could push it through. They have far too much to lose. As someone has mentioned earlier the number of tenants that could actually afford to take this up will be minimal so HA's resistance won't be as high as predicted. HA's are already obliged to sell their stock to former council tenants so there really is no difference.

What have they got to lose?

ScorpiondeRooftrouser

giddypenguin wrote: »

I was reading a quite interesting article yesterday - essentially saying that they fully expected to be in a coalition, and could therefore easily blame their partners for any unmet 'promises'. Now they have a majority, its a slight disaster for them... £12bil from welfare bill, balancing the books, no tax increases for 5 years... all looking a bit difficult to obtain now - with no one to blame when they can't achieve it.

For this issue at least they will blame the Housing Associations and the Local Authorities. It will make no logical sense but they know the press will run with it.

kissinger

fairy_lights wrote: »

Because politicians never lie...

It's not so much that politicians never lie, it's just that the credibility of the Tories is now at stake, and because they want to maximise their votes at future elections they will try their best to implement RTB for HA tenants.

All they will need to do is to pass the appropriate legislation and it's more or less a done deal. The HAs might try to mount a legal challenge, but it would be on shaky ground, and besides the Tories are also planning some big changes to the Human Rights Act which would make it even harder for the HAs to win a case anyway.

ScorpiondeRooftrouser

kissinger wrote: »

It's not so much that politicians never lie, it's just that the credibility of the Tories is now at stake, and because they want to maximise their votes at future elections they will try their best to implement RTB for HA tenants.

All they will need to do is to pass the appropriate legislation and it's more or less a done deal. The HAs might try to mount a legal challenge, but it would be on shaky ground, and besides the Tories are also planning some big changes to the Human Rights Act which would make it even harder for the HAs to win a case anyway.

So I assume if the government passed legislation forcing you or your business to sell assets you legally own and telling you what you can spend the money on, you wouldn't make much of a fuss about it? What would be shaky about the HAs' ground?

Maggie.Moo_2

leveller2911 wrote: »

Houses built by a Housing Associations between 1989- 1997 would mean that the tenants wouldn't have the RTB so its a bit strange that the HA would offer the house for sale with a discount given the fact that they were under no obligation to do so. It was Labours policy post 97 to allow HA tenants whose houses were built post 97 to have the Right To Aquire but this was at full market value....

The ex council housing stock taken over by HA's, the tenants would have kept their discounts so it seems your mothers house doesn't fall into any catagory where she would be entitled to a discount unless it was ex council housing stock taken over by a HA.

lighting_up_the_chalice wrote: »

HA's, who are in the business of renting properties, not selling them, do not tout for potential buyers among their tenants. If your mum got such a letter, it would be because she applied for RTB.

Unless your mums home is all but worthless, the maximum discount is well below your 75%.

Being generous, I think you may have misunderstood the letter.

I actually only recently realised that RtB was only for council tenants because of the letter we received (and never needing to look into it). When I did look into RtB and RtA, I became confused about why we'd received the letter at all.

However, I think our original HA went under and eventually sold to a new HA just after this letter, so maybe that has something to do with it (never looked into it as we were never gonna buy this house). I also know that our entire cul-de-sac (13 houses) was originally all HA rented but I believe we're one of two (maybe three) left which aren't owned now (with the majority of them being bought around the same time as we received the letter). In addition to that, they started building new houses just outside of our cul-de-sac around the same time too which may have effected things. It's possible this was a one-off offer which we'll never see again due to the HA going bust but I just didn't look into it or give it more thought - i's only now I'm really thinking about it and making connections as I was oblivious to so many things pre-university

A misunderstanding is very possible as, like I said, it was definitely a few years ago but I remember being shocked by the massive discount she was offered (there was a table displaying eligible discounts for different lengths of tenancies and at the time we were in the 10 to 15 years range which said 70% to 80% - so I've clung to 75% as a figure). Unfortunately we threw the letter away almost instantly as my mum has never been interested in owning her own house and has never been in a position to do so.