What would you do in my situation???

Red-Squirrel_2

Well, a secure tenancy in a council property is a rare gem these days, it has a heck of a lot of value both to the people living there and the council.

I think its far more fair (to everybody) to offer an incentive for people to give back the house so somebody else can use it as social housing, rather than offer a whacking big discount on RTB so that the house is lost to the system forever, not to be replaced.

jimbog

Now that we've all strutted around on the moral high ground all weekend (so high that we are getting nose bleeds) let's go back to the OP who asked:

ruthmt wrote: »

What would you do?

...now be really honest....:undecided

somethingcorporate

Nick_C wrote: »

But public services are not there to make profits for the Government. The cost of providing Council Housing is funded by the rents. Council rents are not subsidised. In fact some councils are using creative accounting to take money from their Housing Revenue Accounts to subsidise Council Taxpayers.

Private rents on the other hand allow profit making private landlords to be subsided through housing benefits, and this is a significant contributory factor to our current budget deficit - an estimated £24.5 billion in 2014/15.

The average housing benefit paid to tenants in council houses is £4,312 a year. The average in the private rented sector is £5,626.

We could save £2 billion a year if we could house private tenants on benefits in council housing.

See https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/benefit-expenditure-and-caseload-tables-2014 and http://www.insidehousing.co.uk/systematic-raiding-of-housing-revenue-accounts/7004227.article

It's a set of interesting points but doesn't actually address what I said. If something is charged below market rent there is the opportunity cost of what you could have charged had it been market priced rent. This is where the subsidy lies, they are undervaluing the market price of the asset to the detriment of the tax payer (they did something similar with the royal mail sell off).

The housing benefit paid to the average private owner is interesting but irrelevent to the point I made and it's kind of obvious due to the difference between lower rents in social housing and the higher rents in the private market.

PixelPound

jimbog wrote: »

Now that we've all strutted around on the moral high ground all weekend (so high that we are getting nose bleeds) let's go back to the OP who asked:

...now be really honest....:undecided

Take the £100K discount. Kids are in decent schools and there is no guarantee the new ex-council home would be better.

That aside, I don't think OP would qualify for £33k as its Workers who want to move to find a job and tenants who can't get a mortgage for the property they are living in will also be eligible. and the OP can get a mortgage of the size needed. Well, RTB discount wound be 35% so are they in a £400K house?

catshark88

Welcome, ladies and gentlemen to the thread that shows in one post, just what is wrong with this country....

I do hope it's a wind up...

Red-Squirrel_2

A timely article:

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jul/05/tories-social-tenant-council-housing

ERICS_MUM

I thank my stars that I voted for George Osborne. My 5 nieces and nephews have worked for 10 years doing crappy dirty horrible jobs to scrape together deposits for their own tiny little homes. Now I find they could have taken the route followed by the OP. Dammit why wasn't this posted 10 years ago ?

Red-Squirrel_2

ERICS_MUM wrote: »

I thank my stars that I voted for George Osborne. My 5 nieces and nephews have worked for 10 years doing crappy dirty horrible jobs to scrape together deposits for their own tiny little homes. Now I find they could have taken the route followed by the OP. Dammit why wasn't this posted 10 years ago ?

You didn't know about council houses?

If they're working class young adults in low paid jobs, they'll have nothing to thank George Osborne for, he doesn't give a damn about them.

AdrianC

ERICS_MUM wrote: »

I thank my stars that I voted for George Osborne.

Umm, you do know that the RtB Social Mobility £30k was introduced by Osborne, who's widening the RtB from LA tenants to include HA tenants, and has reduced the 5yr-35% minimum to 3yr-35%, right?

ruggedtoast

nonnatus wrote: »

I'm a bit gobsmacked to be honest - and probably very naive!

How is it possible that with that kind of income, the Govt will GIVE you £33k towards a private house? I really need to wise up more to how the real world works! Is it just luck?

I'm sure you're a very nice family and you've obviously done very well for yourself, but I don't understand why the Govt should have to pay such a huge sum of money for your lifestyle choice...

She won the council house lottery, apparently. A nice handout from the taxpayer. At least they aren't looking at right to buy closely followed by buy to let mortgages, yet.