PLEASE READ BEFORE POSTING: Hello Forumites! In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non-MoneySaving matters are not permitted per the Forum rules. While we understand that mentioning house prices may sometimes be relevant to a user's specific MoneySaving situation, we ask that you please avoid veering into broad, general debates about the market, the economy and politics, as these can unfortunately lead to abusive or hateful behaviour. Threads that are found to have derailed into wider discussions may be removed. Users who repeatedly disregard this may have their Forum account banned. Please also avoid posting personally identifiable information, including links to your own online property listing which may reveal your address. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!

Right to buy denied

Options
124

Comments

  • Norman_Castle
    Norman_Castle Posts: 11,871 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Photogenic Name Dropper
    edited 24 July 2021 at 9:03AM
    Apply for a transfer to a property which is eligible for the rtb. For your current property to be eligible the housing department would have to buy it at market rates. The discount would then be affected by the cost floor rule.
  • Section62
    Section62 Posts: 9,851 Forumite
    1,000 Posts Fourth Anniversary Name Dropper

    They should be reserved for those in need, as intended originally. 

    Does that also mean that people who are no longer 'in need' should be evicted, and their council home given over to someone more desperate?

    I'm not sure the original intent had much to do with being 'in need' in most cases.  In rural areas council housing was often built simply to provide better housing than the existing stock, and to give local people an alternative to living in a tied rental.  In urban areas the construction of estates was typically associated with 'slum clearance', aka 'regeneration', aka freeing up prime land in urban centres for more profitable development such as retail or office, or for transport schemes.  The people living in those homes weren't 'in need' as we think of it today.

    The 'in need' part usually arrived later - sometimes inadvertently as it became a norm that only those who were most desperate for a roof over their head would be willing to live on some crumbling estate with no facilities and surrounded by vandalism, drunks, drugs, and violence. Hence the emergence of the 'sink estate'. Planners generally regard the 'council estate' as a failed social experiment, with mixed tenure being a far more suitable approach.

    In which context, RTB can help drag existing or prospective 'sink estates' back towards being places people want to live, rather than homes of last resort. It isn't as simple as RTB being pure unadulterated evil.

    'Right to co-own' could be a better approach though.
  • Norman_Castle
    Norman_Castle Posts: 11,871 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Photogenic Name Dropper
    Trynsave2 said:
     If you can afford to get a mortgage you can afford to get out and leave the property for someone who is in the situation now that you were when you qualified for the property. Imo all Council tennant's should be reassessed every 5 years to ascertain if they would still qualify for the house they're in and asked to jog on if not.
    Presumably mortgage affordability takes into account the purchase price.
    Council housing is designed for long term security, it was never designed to be temporary accommodation.

  • AdrianC
    AdrianC Posts: 42,189 Forumite
    Eighth Anniversary 10,000 Posts Name Dropper
    Section62 said:

    They should be reserved for those in need, as intended originally. 
    Does that also mean that people who are no longer 'in need' should be evicted, and their council home given over to someone more desperate?
    Given how short supply is, I don't think that would be a bad thing.

    Just look back to the headlines over the late Bob Crow.
    I'm not sure the original intent had much to do with being 'in need' in most cases.  In rural areas council housing was often built simply to provide better housing than the existing stock, and to give local people an alternative to living in a tied rental.  In urban areas the construction of estates was typically associated with 'slum clearance', aka 'regeneration', aka freeing up prime land in urban centres for more profitable development such as retail or office, or for transport schemes.
    The world has moved on a lot since then, of course.
    The people living in those homes weren't 'in need' as we think of it today.
    They were.

    They needed secure, affordable, good-quality housing. They still do. 
    The 'in need' part usually arrived later - sometimes inadvertently as it became a norm that only those who were most desperate for a roof over their head would be willing to live on some crumbling estate with no facilities and surrounded by vandalism, drunks, drugs, and violence. Hence the emergence of the 'sink estate'. Planners generally regard the 'council estate' as a failed social experiment, with mixed tenure being a far more suitable approach.

    In which context, RTB can help drag existing or prospective 'sink estates' back towards being places people want to live, rather than homes of last resort.
    As, of course, can redeveloping those areas... Which becomes a LOT harder when they're in mixed tenure - the council as freeholder gets into a lot of CPO issues.
    It isn't as simple as RTB being pure unadulterated evil.

    'Right to co-own' could be a better approach though.
    RtB certainly did a lot of good in the past - but its time has gone. The main problem was also that the monies raised did not go back into replacing the lost provision of social housing, which is why we're in the position we are now in.
  • Norman_Castle
    Norman_Castle Posts: 11,871 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Photogenic Name Dropper
    edited 25 July 2021 at 8:37AM
    Trynsave2 said:
    Trynsave2 said:
     If you can afford to get a mortgage you can afford to get out and leave the property for someone who is in the situation now that you were when you qualified for the property. Imo all Council tennant's should be reassessed every 5 years to ascertain if they would still qualify for the house they're in and asked to jog on if not.
    Presumably mortgage affordability takes into account the purchase price.
    Council housing is designed for long term security, it was never designed to be temporary accommodation.

    Agree on both counts. In an ideal world a tennant should be able to make the property their own for as long as they want. However, the property isn't their own and we don't live in an ideal world.
    No agreement needed, they're facts.
    Tenant. Count the n's.

  • tara1970
    tara1970 Posts: 14 Forumite
    Ninth Anniversary 10 Posts Name Dropper Combo Breaker
    Update: having some excellent suggestions from @Section62 @theartfullodger and few others. Thankyou. After a series of emails in which council failed to mention the clause which make me not entitled to rtb, i received another rtb2 today that my rtb is admitted and a separate letter from surveyor. 
    I have another question. After the first rtb2 (denied) in July, i sent them rtb6 on 25th August. But next day received email that rtb6 is invalid because its denied and not delayed. 
    Now the second rtb2 (admitted) received which showing the same date of application (in june).
    Is my rtb6 is still invalid????
    Thanks
Meet your Ambassadors

🚀 Getting Started

Hi new member!

Our Getting Started Guide will help you get the most out of the Forum

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 351.1K Banking & Borrowing
  • 253.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 453.6K Spending & Discounts
  • 244.1K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 599K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 177K Life & Family
  • 257.4K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
  • 37.6K Read-Only Boards

Is this how you want to be seen?

We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.