Affordable Housing

PasturesNew

cathy2702 wrote: »

phantom asthma, depression or stress.

LOL.. yeah.

PasturesNew

jebervic wrote: »

should they register with multiple local authorities?

You can usually only register in the authority where you live/work.

And, depending where you are in the south west, it might take you up to 4 years if you are a desperate/urgent case, or over 20 years if you're not.

You've not given any information about your age/situation/location to enable people to be more specific.

PasturesNew

jebervic wrote: »

automatically rehouse

Not to be confused with getting a house. Often this just means the local authority have a duty to provide a roof over their head, so they're put into a B&B. Which will be a bog standard one.

Debt_Free_Chick

jebervic wrote: »

Affordable housing seems to be the buzz word at the moment, is it only possible to get rehoused if you go via the single mother route?. Has anyone got any tips on how to get affordable housing to rent or part rent?. I presume the first step is to apply to get on the Housing register?, also are there areas of the country where the waiting lists are shorter?.

You're not confusing affordable housing with "social (Council)" housing, are you?

A_Nice_Englishman

Here's something to discuss.

Social (i.e. Housing Association and Council) housing is allocated according to need. The elderly, sick, vulnerable and unemployed people with children get it. Others don't. Round here, at least, rents are typically half those of private rented accommodation.

What should happen if a social housing tenant's circumstances change? For example, the unemployed parent gets a well paid job once the children are in school and later on the children are earning themselves and the household income is well above the national average.

In this case, should they continue to benefit from subsidised housing? Should the rent be increased to market levels and the extra spent on building more social housing? Should the tenants be made / encouraged to buy or rent privately to free up their house for qualifying people?

jebervic

Debt_Free_Chick wrote: »

You're not confusing affordable housing with "social (Council)" housing, are you?

Yes I probaby am, but they aren't they pretty much the same?

jebervic

PasturesNew wrote: »

You can usually only register in the authority where you live/work.
quote]


Not actually quite true, someone I know has registered in virtually every housing register in the south west.

jebervic

A_Nice_Englishman wrote: »

Here's something to discuss.

Social (i.e. Housing Association and Council) housing is allocated according to need. The elderly, sick, vulnerable and unemployed people with children get it. Others don't. Round here, at least, rents are typically half those of private rented accommodation.

What should happen if a social housing tenant's circumstances change? For example, the unemployed parent gets a well paid job once the children are in school and later on the children are earning themselves and the household income is well above the national average.

In this case, should they continue to benefit from subsidised housing? Should the rent be increased to market levels and the extra spent on building more social housing? Should the tenants be made / encouraged to buy or rent privately to free up their house for qualifying people?

Well I agree with what you're saying, infact I would take it a step further, more often than not a house is allocated on the needs of the applicant, for example a couple with 3 kids have 3 bedroom house, the kids grow up and start their own families and move out, this means a couple (or if a death of a partner occurs) or single person is occupying a 3 bedroom house !. This has to wrong?.

jebervic

PasturesNew wrote: »

Not to be confused with getting a house. Often this just means the local authority have a duty to provide a roof over their head, so they're put into a B&B. Which will be a bog standard one.

Eventually leading to a flat/house

Debt_Free_Chick

jebervic wrote: »

Yes I probaby am, but they aren't they pretty much the same?

Ah, well ...... there are no "hard & fast" definitions, but Social Housing generally refers to the council-subsidised properties you were referring to. These can be "council houses" (a dwindling number with RTB) or run by housing associations or social landlords. With the latter two, you still have to qualify under the points system, but rather than you getting a council house, you get a "private" or HA house and the council pays (or hugely subsidises) the rent.

Affordable Housing - at least these days - typically refers to an arrangement for lowering the cost of buying a property e.g. for those on low incomes and/or "key workers" in areas where they're priced out of the market.

With the key-workers scheme, central Govt is stumping up some cash to help teachers, nurses, police etc to buy e.g. in London . Even London needs key workers and if they can't live remotely close to work (and many still commute a considerable distance), then essential services could not be staffed.

In addition, Affordable Housing for non-key workers usually refers to "shared ownership" or similar schemes, to help get people on the property ladder.

In my village, the cheapest house would probably set you back £400k :eek: (other than the ex-Council houses, all but one of which is now privately owned under RTB). This is a rural area with practically no local economy :eek: There's no way local kids can buy. They can wait for one of the ex Council houses to come on the market - the first one in 10 years did, about 2 years ago - but asking price was £190,000, which is still unaffordable. Understandably, those currently in the ex-Council properties are in no hurry to sell. They know they can't get a comparable property in a similar location for anything like £190k.

Anyway, I ramble enough .... I think in the context of your OP, you're meaning Social Housing.