Social housing priority lists

LinLui

BarelySentientAI said:

LinLui said:

BarelySentientAI said:

LinLui said:

Grizebeck said:

LinLui said:

Did the kitchen need doing or not? I honestly don't think her position vis-a-vis the housing list (or anything else) is any of your business. A new kitchen (or a new anything else) should not be a condition of her giving up things to which she is entitled. Her flat, and her position on the housing list, is between her and the council / HA's and nothing to do with you. 

The kitchen will need doing in due course.  If she wasn't prepared to give up the flat then i wasn't prepared to put a new kitchen in.  She has agreed to me.  So yes it is my business because i wouldn't spend money on something which i dont need to for someone to just go and get a council place
Its called a captive audience and a condition of having things done which dont really need doing at the moment.

I disagree - still none of your business. You could have not put her on the tenancy. You could have said love it or leave it over the rent, the kitchen and anything else. And they can leave anyway. But whilst nobody shoudl be "hogging" social housing, there is some sense to having a bolt hole in a fairly new realtionship. If they split up, will you be housing her? Will you care what happens to her? No, you won't. What happens to her is not your business, just as other parts of her life are not your business. You rented to your friend - not to her - so it is clear where your loyalties would lie. And there are phrases other than "captive audience" you could use - blackmail comes to mind for example. The kitchen needed doing or not. That should have been your only consideration. You have overstepped the mark for a landlord, you are too involved in this relationship as a friend to one and not their landlord, and you have potentially trapped her by a mechanism of your making and not hers.

Oh don't be silly.  It's not blackmail and it's not overstepping.

"I need to do the kitchen at some point in the next few years - if you're staying long term I'll get on with it, if you're not sure how long you'll be my tenant I'll hang on and do it when next vacant"

Essentially exactly the same conversation, but you wouldn't call that blackmail.

"The kitchen needed doing or not".  Everyone is extremely quick to jump on the back of landlords if they suggest they will do things only when they need doing.  Wanting long term commitment before starting on discretionary spending seems like a perfectly sensible business decision.

No it isn't " exactly the same conversation". You bought a house a few months ago to rent to friend. Your choice. In those few months he's moved in,  got a girlfriend and she's now pregnant. Have you any how unstable that all sounds?  And you are telling her that she MUST come off the housing list and she MUST give up her flat.  You can't guarantee a long term relationship but you think you can guarantee a long term tenancy? You are attempting to force a long term commitment by trapping her in the property. If you don't want to do up the kitchen or it doesn't need doing,  then simply say that. That is the "perfectly sensible business decision" - to not interfere with your tenants lives. If you are a good landlord a tenant wants to stay. But I'd be telling her to run like hell from this level of interference in her life from a landlord. Are you as controlling with your friend? 

Did you look at who you were replying to before you started to rant?

It's not my house.  I'm not doing anything.

Oddly you sounded just like the OP, so I can see why I confused the two of you. And it is still controlling behaviour that is inappropriate in a landlord. I don't "jump on" landlords who are acting appropriately as good landlords. That isn't the case here. Peoples personal lives and decisions are none of a landlords business. 

Grizebeck

LinLui said:

BarelySentientAI said:

LinLui said:

BarelySentientAI said:

LinLui said:

Grizebeck said:

LinLui said:

Did the kitchen need doing or not? I honestly don't think her position vis-a-vis the housing list (or anything else) is any of your business. A new kitchen (or a new anything else) should not be a condition of her giving up things to which she is entitled. Her flat, and her position on the housing list, is between her and the council / HA's and nothing to do with you. 

The kitchen will need doing in due course.  If she wasn't prepared to give up the flat then i wasn't prepared to put a new kitchen in.  She has agreed to me.  So yes it is my business because i wouldn't spend money on something which i dont need to for someone to just go and get a council place
Its called a captive audience and a condition of having things done which dont really need doing at the moment.

I disagree - still none of your business. You could have not put her on the tenancy. You could have said love it or leave it over the rent, the kitchen and anything else. And they can leave anyway. But whilst nobody shoudl be "hogging" social housing, there is some sense to having a bolt hole in a fairly new realtionship. If they split up, will you be housing her? Will you care what happens to her? No, you won't. What happens to her is not your business, just as other parts of her life are not your business. You rented to your friend - not to her - so it is clear where your loyalties would lie. And there are phrases other than "captive audience" you could use - blackmail comes to mind for example. The kitchen needed doing or not. That should have been your only consideration. You have overstepped the mark for a landlord, you are too involved in this relationship as a friend to one and not their landlord, and you have potentially trapped her by a mechanism of your making and not hers.

Oh don't be silly.  It's not blackmail and it's not overstepping.

"I need to do the kitchen at some point in the next few years - if you're staying long term I'll get on with it, if you're not sure how long you'll be my tenant I'll hang on and do it when next vacant"

Essentially exactly the same conversation, but you wouldn't call that blackmail.

"The kitchen needed doing or not".  Everyone is extremely quick to jump on the back of landlords if they suggest they will do things only when they need doing.  Wanting long term commitment before starting on discretionary spending seems like a perfectly sensible business decision.

No it isn't " exactly the same conversation". You bought a house a few months ago to rent to friend. Your choice. In those few months he's moved in,  got a girlfriend and she's now pregnant. Have you any how unstable that all sounds?  And you are telling her that she MUST come off the housing list and she MUST give up her flat.  You can't guarantee a long term relationship but you think you can guarantee a long term tenancy? You are attempting to force a long term commitment by trapping her in the property. If you don't want to do up the kitchen or it doesn't need doing,  then simply say that. That is the "perfectly sensible business decision" - to not interfere with your tenants lives. If you are a good landlord a tenant wants to stay. But I'd be telling her to run like hell from this level of interference in her life from a landlord. Are you as controlling with your friend? 

Did you look at who you were replying to before you started to rant?

It's not my house.  I'm not doing anything.

Oddly you sounded just like the OP, so I can see why I confused the two of you. And it is still controlling behaviour that is inappropriate in a landlord. I don't "jump on" landlords who are acting appropriately as good landlords. That isn't the case here. Peoples personal lives and decisions are none of a landlords business. 

Someone's decision can and does effect a business decision

BarelySentientAI

LinLui said:

BarelySentientAI said:

LinLui said:

BarelySentientAI said:

LinLui said:

Grizebeck said:

LinLui said:

Did the kitchen need doing or not? I honestly don't think her position vis-a-vis the housing list (or anything else) is any of your business. A new kitchen (or a new anything else) should not be a condition of her giving up things to which she is entitled. Her flat, and her position on the housing list, is between her and the council / HA's and nothing to do with you. 

The kitchen will need doing in due course.  If she wasn't prepared to give up the flat then i wasn't prepared to put a new kitchen in.  She has agreed to me.  So yes it is my business because i wouldn't spend money on something which i dont need to for someone to just go and get a council place
Its called a captive audience and a condition of having things done which dont really need doing at the moment.

I disagree - still none of your business. You could have not put her on the tenancy. You could have said love it or leave it over the rent, the kitchen and anything else. And they can leave anyway. But whilst nobody shoudl be "hogging" social housing, there is some sense to having a bolt hole in a fairly new realtionship. If they split up, will you be housing her? Will you care what happens to her? No, you won't. What happens to her is not your business, just as other parts of her life are not your business. You rented to your friend - not to her - so it is clear where your loyalties would lie. And there are phrases other than "captive audience" you could use - blackmail comes to mind for example. The kitchen needed doing or not. That should have been your only consideration. You have overstepped the mark for a landlord, you are too involved in this relationship as a friend to one and not their landlord, and you have potentially trapped her by a mechanism of your making and not hers.

Oh don't be silly.  It's not blackmail and it's not overstepping.

"I need to do the kitchen at some point in the next few years - if you're staying long term I'll get on with it, if you're not sure how long you'll be my tenant I'll hang on and do it when next vacant"

Essentially exactly the same conversation, but you wouldn't call that blackmail.

"The kitchen needed doing or not".  Everyone is extremely quick to jump on the back of landlords if they suggest they will do things only when they need doing.  Wanting long term commitment before starting on discretionary spending seems like a perfectly sensible business decision.

No it isn't " exactly the same conversation". You bought a house a few months ago to rent to friend. Your choice. In those few months he's moved in,  got a girlfriend and she's now pregnant. Have you any how unstable that all sounds?  And you are telling her that she MUST come off the housing list and she MUST give up her flat.  You can't guarantee a long term relationship but you think you can guarantee a long term tenancy? You are attempting to force a long term commitment by trapping her in the property. If you don't want to do up the kitchen or it doesn't need doing,  then simply say that. That is the "perfectly sensible business decision" - to not interfere with your tenants lives. If you are a good landlord a tenant wants to stay. But I'd be telling her to run like hell from this level of interference in her life from a landlord. Are you as controlling with your friend? 

Did you look at who you were replying to before you started to rant?

It's not my house.  I'm not doing anything.

Oddly you sounded just like the OP, so I can see why I confused the two of you. And it is still controlling behaviour that is inappropriate in a landlord. I don't "jump on" landlords who are acting appropriately as good landlords. That isn't the case here. Peoples personal lives and decisions are none of a landlords business. 

They are.  That's kind of the whole point of things like references and credit checks.