Help with right to buy mortgage

Icikle

FitzWilliams wrote: »

So do you think £10,000 is an unreasonable figure for the maintenance and modernisation of a property over a 15 year period? It seems pretty cheap to me.

Actually theyre saying 39950. My price wont go below that because thats what theyre saying theyve spent. Otherwise the discount my mother would be entitled to would take the price to £29000.

Look, I dont have a problem if theyve spent this. They should just evidence it. And in reference to the most recent post, you're right, theyre not legally bound to evidence it. But then my question the becomes, should they be? In my opinion yes or what is to stop them quoting any figure they like?

Would it change your opinion if i said i looked into buying the same house 3 years ago and the offer then was £29000 with zero mention of the cost floor or maintenance costs. I have queried this and they refuse to explain. The cost floor is not a new rule and was certainly around back then so either they messed up or theyre saying there were no costs then and Im now to believe theyve spent 39950 in the last 3 years.

Ive lived in this property for the last 15 years, therefore Im in a pretty good position to know whether theyve spent 39950 in maintaining it. I dont believe they have. If I was a tenant of some private landlord saying this you guys wouldnt have a problem. You have a bias against the RTB scheme therefore you are not looking at this objectively.

System

Good on you mate. You have doubled your wealth via the tax payer. Like I said before we are jealous. Make sure you sell it for a massive profit in the future and think of us at the same time.

Icikle

mrlegend123 wrote: »

Good on you mate. You have doubled your wealth via the tax payer. Like I said before we are jealous. Make sure you sell it for a massive profit in the future and think of us at the same time.

Loving your passive aggressive sarcasm.

In all honesty, I am not uber pro right to buy. But I think there are two problems to the social housing crisis, the major being they just arent building any.

But I would be foolish to let a principle get in the way of providing security in my parents' later years, and yes, myself. It would be cutting my nose off to spite my face.

Pixie5740

Unlike a lot of children on here trying to exercise their parents right to buy you are actually able to make a joint application with your mum. I'm not 100% sure though if you buying will mean that your parents are more secure later in life. Would home ownership affect any of the benefits that your parents might be able to claim? How will repairs and maintenance be funded? What happens if you get married or divorced? Buying might well work better for you all in the long run but then again it might not so it's important you understand the consequences now.

glentoran99

Icikle wrote: »

You can be on the deed and have 0% equity. Also my mother is also on the mortgage, we just had to find a lender that wouldn't take her finances into account. I can't do this without her. She has a say in everything.

how sure are you? Doesn't sound a plausible or likely scenario where a person named on deeds and mortgage owns none of the house

Detroit

With regards to whether they should be required to evidence costs, opinions from other people on this won't really progress your matter.

The facts are, they appear to be acting within the law and interpreting policy correctly.

There is nothing to stop you requesting the breakdown of costs, and making a complaint when it is not forthcoming.

However, beyond that, I don't think you have any options to achieve your goal of obtaining this information.

If you want to challenge this policy, your local councillor and or MP would be the appropriate route after you have made your initial complaint.

However, this will in reality serve only as a means of airing your discontent. Unless there are significant numbers adversely affected by a policy, change rarely results.

Ultimately, these are the terms of the purchase if this property, and if you are dissatisfied with them, or doubt the integrity of the seller you have the option to reconsider your purchase.

FBaby

I'm after substantiation of the price they've paid in maintenance.

And what most posters are saying is 'why bother' since you've already getting an amazing opportunity which you are only entitled because of the loop in the law (ie, it was never intended towards what you are going to use if for).

moneycantbuyyouhappiness

mrlegend123 wrote: »

We live in broken Britain. I have never understood the RTB scheme......

If we were in his shoes, we would take advantage of it as well. Could say we are jealous.

Well I could have, my parents have been council tenants for the last 30 years. Why didnt I?

Well despite how hard working my Mum and Dad were, we were poor and when my Dad fell terminally ill when I was just 14 and had to quit work we would have been up s**t creek if we were not in a council property.

Well done OP you and the millions of others who have taken advantage of this, and the whole crap establishment that thought up RTB in the first place, have taken that security from millions of hard working young families. This has allowed greedy landlords to charge what the hell they want for below par, badly maintained properties.

What happens if your Mum or Dad has to go into a home at some point OP, will you give up the house then to pay for their care? Or as it's also in your name will you allow the taxpayer to foot that bill too :mad:

chelseablue

As said above is a legal right of council tenants so if you want to do it then go for it.


I can only speak from my experience but I grew up in a council house and my parents bought it using Right to Buy in 1998 (I was 14 then so it wasn't anything to do with me)


They finished paying the mortgage about 15 years ago now, if they had not purchased they would still be paying rent now so it is security for them when they retire.


I guess I will benefit from it one day too as the house is left to me and my brother

JP08

One thing I will agree with the OP on, whatever the moral and legal merits of his case and the policy of right to buy, is their view on Housing Associations and the Freedom of Information Act.

Where they are acting as a de-facto public body, or have taken on the responsibilities of a public body they should have the same legal accountability of that public body.

It once again, based on a quick google of Housing Association and FOI, appears to be a situation where the Scottish Parliament is getting it's !!!! in gear whereas Westminster couldn't find it's with an atlas (or A-Z) !