Moving away from rural area, into social housing

BigAunty

j.e.j. wrote: »

It's actually worse than I thought, it's now gone up to 18 000 people! The area isn't that big, geographically, but it's a city and we have a lot of outsiders coming in and taking up resources, which doesn't help.
.

But presumably not directly affecting social housing supply as there is usually a local connection condition to being accepted on waiting lists?

BigAunty

j.e.j. wrote: »

The trouble it will cause will be mainly social, namely social housing is going to become ghettos of low-earners and non-workers.
..

I disagree.

The switch from the waiting list principle to needs based allocation was a policy that was initiated in the late 70s (perhaps 80s?) so the mixed nature of allocation went out the window decades ago.

It was also accelerated by the Right to Buy, though, where the more affluent cherry picked off the best of the housing stock.

Stats show that social housing tenants have long had the lowest rates of employment out of any housing tenure.

missbiggles1

BigAunty wrote: »

But presumably not directly affecting social housing supply as there is usually a local connection condition to being accepted on waiting lists?

Some places may still do this but it isn't the norm everywhere.

BigAunty

missbiggles1 wrote: »

Some places may still do this but it isn't the norm everywhere.

Local connection is probably the most common condition for social housing and is very long-standing. It has been a core condition for social housing allocation under emergency/homeless rules but also routinely part of general allocation policies, too.

That rule tended to pre-date the extra discretionary conditions that local councils in England were allowed to introduce a few years back. It means while social housing landlords allocation policies change from area to area, they probably already had the local connection rule in place for years anyhow.

j.e.j.

BigAunty wrote: »

But presumably not directly affecting social housing supply as there is usually a local connection condition to being accepted on waiting lists?

Kip on a mates sofa for 6 months and bingo, they've got a 'local connection'. They should really tighten up the rules on that, imo.

BigAunty wrote: »

I disagree.

The switch from the waiting list principle to needs based allocation was a policy that was initiated in the late 70s (perhaps 80s?) so the mixed nature of allocation went out the window decades ago.

It was also accelerated by the Right to Buy, though, where the more affluent cherry picked off the best of the housing stock.

Stats show that social housing tenants have long had the lowest rates of employment out of any housing tenure.

That's because in the vast majority of cases the usual riff-raff (single mums, teenage runaways, druggies, and various other people who've never done a day's work in their lives..) jump to the top of the queue and others don't get a look in.

To be fair to the council, they are now trying to implement measures where the prospective tenant has to be "contributing to the community" or in paid employment. Before, they just had to house whoever was in Band A first, regardless of their past record.

BigAunty

j.e.j. wrote: »

Kip on a mates sofa for 6 months and bingo, they've got a 'local connection'. They should really tighten up the rules on that, imo.



That's because in the vast majority of cases the usual riff-raff (single mums, teenage runaways, druggies, and various other people who've never done a day's work in their lives..) jump to the top of the queue and others don't get a look in.

.

Though I'm not an expert in this area and policies are different for each social housing landlord, the local connection rules I have seen are usually measured in years.

There are no changes to the social housing allocation when it comes to homeless cases - social housing landlords are obliged by law to prioritise those with dependents or disabilities. However, in England, they can offer them a private tenancy whereas in the past, the councils had to provide social housing.

Social housing landlords have much more discretion when it comes to their general housing allocation systems (i.e. not homeless cases) but I imagine the high shortage of properties mean most lets are given to those in priority need (homeless) where they can't demand employment as a condition of the tenancy.

fierystormcloud

BigAunty wrote: »

Local connection is probably the most common condition for social housing and is very long-standing. It has been a core condition for social housing allocation under emergency/homeless rules but also routinely part of general allocation policies, too.

That rule tended to pre-date the extra discretionary conditions that local councils in England were allowed to introduce a few years back. It means while social housing landlords allocation policies change from area to area, they probably already had the local connection rule in place for years anyhow.

I disagree that this is the case. Unless it is a very nice, highly sought after area (like a village or small rural market town) the 'must have a local connection' thing rarely applies. On the rough council estates in towns and cities, where they find it hard to let the properties, or even on normal 'council estates' where the homes aren't necessarily hard to let, they rarely say 'local connection required.'

Although I do agree that social housing is not always give to druggies, single moms, or general 'riff raff.' Several housing associations in my county have a policy in many of their areas that does not allow a tenancy to go ahead, unless at least one person in the family is working - particularly if it's a nice area.

And I'm not being funny but the Housing Associations and councils generally let the homes in the nicer areas to people with jobs, and keep the skanky areas for people on benefits. They won't admit they do this, but they do.

j.e.j.

BigAunty wrote: »

Though I'm not an expert in this area and policies are different for each social housing landlord, the local connection rules I have seen are usually measured in years.

There are no changes to the social housing allocation when it comes to homeless cases - social housing landlords are obliged by law to prioritise those with dependents or disabilities. However, in England, they can offer them a private tenancy whereas in the past, the councils had to provide social housing.

Social housing landlords have much more discretion when it comes to their general housing allocation systems (i.e. not homeless cases) but I imagine the high shortage of properties mean most lets are given to those in priority need (homeless) where they can't demand employment as a condition of the tenancy.

I think it must vary from place to place. I don't know where the OP is living but it sounds like the opposite of where I am, lol.

Where I live anyone can apply for housing, even if they have no local connection, but they won't be put into the higher bands, so stand less chance of getting a place.

j.e.j.

fierystormcloud wrote: »

Although I do agree that social housing is not always give to druggies, single moms, or general 'riff raff.' Several housing associations in my county have a policy in many of their areas that does not allow a tenancy to go ahead, unless at least one person in the family is working - particularly if it's a nice area.

Yes I think they are starting to do this now. My HA has been trying to enforce these criteria, since we had some awful dodgy tenants who they had to take to court to get rid of them.

And I'm not being funny but the Housing Associations and councils generally let the homes in the nicer areas to people with jobs, and keep the skanky areas for people on benefits. They won't admit they do this, but they do.

Ha ha that's interesting..

I find if it's a newly-built block of flats they try to fill it with people from all different backgrounds so that it doesn't become a ghetto, but later on when people are moving in and out of individual flats they don't have as much control over who they take on.

Savvy_Sue

This is my local council's policy:

In May 2015 changes were made to the council housing allocation policy. Changes affect who can be included on HomeChoice Bristol (the housing register or ‘waiting list’), who can bid for homes, and who gets priority.
In order to be included on HomeChoice Bristol, applicants will need to be meet one of the qualification conditions:

• Residency. You will need to have lived in Bristol for the last two years.
• Income. No applications accepted from people with income over £40,000.
• Savings. No applications from people with savings over £40,000.
• Home owners. No applications from those who own their own home.
• Behaviour. No applications from those with a history of serious unacceptable behaviour.
• Age. You will need to be 16 years of age or over

There are more details on their website, as there would be on any council's website.