Council selling flats

Norman_Castle

da_rule wrote: »

Also, whilst some of the works to the property are funded by leaseholders and through rents, any shortfall has to be made up out of council funds (i.e. council tax receipts).

Council tax does not fund council housing. Council housing is self financing with all costs being covered by rental income. By law all councils must have a housing revenues account which is ring fenced. It cannot fund or be funded by other council revenues.

-taff

You live in this flat, you don't own it. You rent it. You have the right to rent it as long as you are not in arrears, but you have no say over who moves in, who moves out, who a flat in the block is sold to.

You have no right to live there indefinitiely, you are a tenant, it is not, despite your belief, your home, because while you may see it as such, you have no legal rights that come with ownership.

You are probably better off or would be because the flats are being sold individually, because those people will have a vested interest in keeping the block working as it should, otherwise they will lose money.

If the flats are being sold off to the same developer, then you will have something to worry about.

Somniac

lincroft1710 wrote: »

Where have I assumed you are on HB?? As a council tenant you do not have to contribute towards council's maintenance/upgrading of your home and communal areas/features of your block. Owners of flats have to contribute

Council tenants that pay rent ( which is many of the tenants here) are contributing by paying that rent. It seems quite perverse to me to not see that as contributing to the cost of maintenance.

Somniac

da_rule wrote: »

The biggest thing from my perspective is that this block isn’t in the borough that the council is responsible for. From a practical point of view this must create a lot of issues when it comes to housing social tenants, i.e. who takes priority, the council it belongs to or the council who’s area it’s in?

Also, whilst some of the works to the property are funded by leaseholders and through rents, any shortfall has to be made up out of council funds (i.e. council tax receipts). I can’t imagine too many people would be happy that their council tax funds are being used to fund housing in another borough when their borough may have problems of its own.

Also, there is the cost of sending council officers out of their area to inspect/manage the property.

Selling the flats (and maybe eventually the freehold) would benefit the people in the borough that the council is responsible for as they will have additional funds from the sale and reduced liabilities as maintenance costs can be recovered to a greater extent from leaseholders. Also, leaseholders and generally easier to manage than tenants.

Councils are under financial and political pressure. I can’t imagine many councillors will be worried that someone from outside their borough (who therefore can’t vote for or against them) has an issue with it.

I absolutely see your point and agree with it. My problem is the council have made a considerable amount of money from the sale of flats here whilst allowing the block to fall into disrepair.

Somniac

-taff wrote: »

You live in this flat, you don't own it. You rent it. You have the right to rent it as long as you are not in arrears, but you have no say over who moves in, who moves out, who a flat in the block is sold to.

You have no right to live there indefinitiely, you are a tenant, it is not, despite your belief, your home, because while you may see it as such, you have no legal rights that come with ownership.

You are probably better off or would be because the flats are being sold individually, because those people will have a vested interest in keeping the block working as it should, otherwise they will lose money.

If the flats are being sold off to the same developer, then you will have something to worry about.

I am under no illusions regarding my security believe me. That does not mean I should have no say in the way the estate is managed. In fact my tenancy agreement says I should have a say.
I believe selling flats and the way the resulting income is spent or not is a management issue.
I appreciate what you say about the single developer though.

-taff

It's not a mangement issue. Management issues are communal upkeep, upkeep of the fabric of the building, and depending on who owns a flat upkeep of the interior of the flat, insurances, waste management, grounds upkeep, and any additional work that contributes to the running of the block.
As long as the fees are being paid by the individuals who have bought flats, and the transfer of ownership and registration fees are paid, there's no input from the block managers required regarding the selling of flats.

The council who own and sell the flats can be seen more or less as a company that is deciding to relinquish their stake in the block slowly, to invest the money elsewhere.

The council can also be seen as a separate company that manages the block.

They are acting as two different entities and you don't have the right to have a say in what they do with their property as long as they are acting within their guidelines when selling.

Crashy_Time

-taff wrote: »

You live in this flat, you don't own it. You rent it. You have the right to rent it as long as you are not in arrears, but you have no say over who moves in, who moves out, who a flat in the block is sold to.

You have no right to live there indefinitiely, you are a tenant, it is not, despite your belief, your home, because while you may see it as such, you have no legal rights that come with ownership.

You are probably better off or would be because the flats are being sold individually, because those people will have a vested interest in keeping the block working as it should, otherwise they will lose money.

If the flats are being sold off to the same developer, then you will have something to worry about.

Imagine the nightmare if you had actually BOUGHT the thing!

Red-Squirrel_2

-taff wrote: »

you are a tenant, it is not, despite your belief, your home, because while you may see it as such, you have no legal rights that come with ownership.

Hang on a minute, that's total rubbish. Of course rented homes are homes for the people that rent them!

-taff

OK, I'll make it a bit clearer then

If you own a house, it's your home, you can do what you like in it within reason, no-one will eject you from it unless you want to be ejected, or you lose the means to pay the mortgage.

If you rent a house, you live there, you can do what you like within the bounds of the lease, but you can be ejected from it whenever the landlord likes as long as they are acting with the boundaries of the law.

So no, it's not a home. It's a place that can be taken away at someone else's will.

Norman_Castle

-taff wrote: »

So no, it's not a home. It's a place that can be taken away at someone else's will.

It may be less secure than others but it is still a home.