All old people should sell up family homes for families.

ginger mentioned people being emotionally attached to their home. I feel like that. I think lost of people do. The people who came to visit last weekend and I let them look around this house one lived in 25 years ago still had an emotional attachment to it.
Wehn we cleared our parents' house of 50 years where we siblings grew up it was very emotional - as where you spend your childhood is important. In my current house where I hope to die one of my children was born upstairs and still lives here.

I still feel a huge emotional attachment to my childhood home even though it was sold nearly 10 years ago when Mum had to go into a home. I still very occasionally go to have a look at it. I feel a great emotional attachment to my current home too, the first DH and I bought together.

ginger mentioned people being emotionally attached to their home. I feel like that. I think lost of people do. The people who came to visit last weekend and I let them look around this house one lived in 25 years ago still had an emotional attachment to it.
Wehn we cleared our parents' house of 50 years where we siblings grew up it was very emotional - as where you spend your childhood is important. In my current house where I hope to die one of my children was born upstairs and still lives here.

For a lot of people an "Englishman's home is his castle" still holds true.

Social / council housing on the other hand is certainly a very difficult topic. In North Korea the long standing older female newsreader fairly recently was allocated (you never own them) a luxury flat in the capital by the state for her services to newsreading. I think our current UK system is better.

The problem with the McCarthy and stone type gaffs are the clauses that prevent them being rented if the elderly go into care. DH looked at them for MIL and once the elderly person was in care or died, they turn into money pits which are hard to get rid of.

Many are empty and there's a significant argument that they could be used to temporarily house people on waiting lists, fleeing abuse, etc., but the elderly who have purchased there would be rightly upset and feel betrayed.

It was a good idea but it hasn't worked.

What we actually need is an expansion of the old "almshouses" type arrangements. Once Local Authorities get involved however it all becomes a race to the bottom.

@RosesAndHellebores we all want different things at different stages of life too. I wouldn’t buy a McCarthy and Stone type of retirement property, however I’d happily sell up and rent securely, at a reasonable cost. More of the right kind of housing for older people could free up larger homes, hopefully before they fall into disrepair.

@Seymour5 I'm approaching my mid 60s. Living in a "retirement village" would be my 7th circle of hell, on a par with an AI holiday in a tourist resort.

My knowledge of retirement housing locally is that it hasn't really worked. When the elderly die, the properties don't sell, the charges are set against the value of the flat and the estate dissolves away.

Perhaps the answer is for local authorities to buy them up for their tenant s who need a smaller place/a little more oversight. Something for Kier to think about.

I was a housing worker in 1997 when Labour returned to government, and expected it to be greatly reduced if not withdrawn. Scotland and Wales have withdrawn the Right to Buy, but its still available in England. Perhaps Sir Kier will have the bottle when he takes over next year.

@PurpleButterflyWings certainly in our area, if Nora wished to downsize from a large council house, she’d get priority to move into appropriate older people’s housing. I recently visited a new complex for independent living built by our local authority. It’s mainly two bedroom balconied flats, totally accessible for anyone with mobility issues. Lovely, well kept gardens, a cafe, and 24/7 security. If I was on my own, I’d love one. But as a homeowner, its unlikely I’d qualify. Perhaps someone should tell Nora about her options? No more garden to maintain, a walk in shower, her heating costs reduced, and company if she wants it.

One thing I vehemently disagreed with the thatcher government over was their policy on the sale of council houses. It was a retrograde step.

I don't know who Nora is but if she wanted to have a larger house just for her in her older years, she should have bought one.

Are you on crack? If Nora wanted to KEEP her big house she should have BOUGHT one or RENTED one...JUST like how you suggested the younger people do...except she didn't because she had a young family and could not afford it, much like the young families nowadays. Nora owns nothing, least of all a huge gaff owned by the council.

Ha ha ha Nora was once a "young family who chose to have kids with no secure housing in place". She gets a council house when all her kids are young but when her kids are gone and she has a big gaff to herself that she doesn't need except for "holiday memorabilia, "ornaments" and "CD's" and yet you villify a family who are in the same situation as Nora only it's 50 years later?

How hypocritical. Sleep well on that particular cactus. Night!

You have literally just taken what I said .... 'why don't the young families get private let like they expect the older people to do?' and turned it around! 😆

You have no argument. You're literally repeating what I am saying! 😂

Go to bed. You need sleep.

If I get to the point that I'm an elderly widow living on my own, I'll be happy with a one bedroom. Who wants to maintain larger properties if old and infirm? I'll move out and downsize when I'm good and ready. I've built a life in this neighbourhood, maintained the home, made it my own. It's my home, not just a house.

@changeyerheadworzel

WTAF are you banging on about?

Time for your bed I think. You're over tired.

And yeah you absolutely ARE one of the 3 categories I mentioned. You wouldn't be so salty and wound up about all this if you weren't.

Now night night, don't let the bedbugs bite. Go and dream about fictional NORA and her lovely big 4 bed council house, and all the lovely OLD people 'rattling' around in their massive over sized homes with LOADs of bedrooms.. Ooooooh those evil individuals. Mwah ha ha ha ha ha. 😆

Moreover, maybe no-one WANTS a one bed anyway. Many people, after many many decades will have tons of stuff.. Memories, collectibles, family heirlooms, collections of things they had when they had a hobby, photos, old stuff from their childhood, stuff their parents owned, stuff from their childrens childhoods, holiday memorabilia, valuable (and sentimental value) ornaments etc etc.. Along with DVDs, CDs, Vinyl, video games, books, and all their furniture and white goods... Where are they meant to put it all? On the skip? So they can make way for 'another family?' Dump 50 to 80 years of memories or more on the skip?

Nora should have bought her own house then or privately rented like you want the larger families to do.

This young family chose to have kids with no secure housing in place. How stupid is THAT?

Did Nora do the same when she was given a council house in the first place?
WHY should Nora have a 4 bedroom house GIVEN to her by the council 50 years ago and stay in it when she only uses 1 bedroom? This is NOT Nora's home, she doesn't own it, the council does.

The only thing I will agree on is that there is a lack of suitable housing for Nora but maybe she could do a swap to a 2 bed that larger families are cramped into.

I don't fall into any of the categories you mentioned, not even close.

Some people (especially those who want social housing, and people who are buying a home) seem to think this... that people who haven't got kids at home anymore should give up their 3 bed houses for a 'family in need.' As has been asked before, where are these people supposed to go?

The amount of decent one-bed social housing properties is minuscule, as is the amount of bungalows. Bungalows are as rare as Hen's teeth. Nobody really moves out of them unless they die, and they very, very rarely come up. If you go on the housing list, when there's a nice, decent 1 to 2 bed bungalow on the there, you'll get 150 to 200 people going for it ... every single time. In some authorities, you'll probably get 400 to 500 going for it.

Moreover, maybe no-one WANTS a one bed anyway. Many people, after many many decades will have tons of stuff.. Memories, collectibles, family heirlooms, collections of things they had when they had a hobby, photos, old stuff from their childhood, stuff their parents owned, stuff from their childrens childhoods, holiday memorabilia, valuable (and sentimental value) ornaments etc etc.. Along with DVDs, CDs, Vinyl, video games, books, and all their furniture and white goods... Where are they meant to put it all? On the skip? So they can make way for 'another family?' Dump 50 to 80 years of memories or more on the skip?

It seems that the people who think that folk should move out of their three bed properties (to make way for them) are assuming they should go for some shitty one or two bed private let property with extortionate rent and absolutely no security of tenure. So I'll ask you this, why don't you go for these shitty private let properties with no security of tenure?! Why should your need trump this other person? Just coz they got perhaps one or two extra bedrooms? Why should they give you THEIR home and languish in a private let? Why don't YOU get a private let?

Also, as I said, how stupid does someone have to be to have children when they have no secure housing? Seems to me like SOME people have children, when they have no secure housing in place, in the hope they will be allocated social housing. YEAH don't try and deny THIS either. Happens every fucking day!!!

Why don't you - as I said before - blame the councils, the authorities, and the government for this ... not the people who are sitting in a house with one or two extra bedrooms, that's been their home for the last 50, or 60 years or more. With everything they own in it, and all their memories? And room for their grandkids to stay?

No way should they move for your convenience. Maybe... if the councils could offer them a lovely little bungalow in a similar area with another permanent tenancy and affordable rent, only five or 10 minutes walk away from their old house and everything they know then yeah... But they never do do they? They boot them out - and expect them to find their own place ... And there's just nothing there, except shitty insecure private let, and even THEY are becoming hard to get now, with each property having 25 to 30 people going for them!

SO... Where are they supposed to go? Like fuck should they move out because someone made poor life choices, and wasn't responsible enough to get secure housing before bringing children into the world!

I despair.

But NORA will not be offered a lovely little bungalow by the council will she? NORA will be chucked out on her ear and expected to find a shitty little insecure private let flat. Or a private let bungalow (if she can find one!)

Let the 'young family' get a private let! Why do their needs trump Nora's? This is Nora's home. With all her memories. And possessions.

This young family chose to have kids with no secure housing in place. How stupid is THAT? So because of their poor life choices and irresponsibility - NORA has to chuck half her life on the skip, and live in a private let dump with no security of tenure? Yeah fuck that! The family made their bed, they can lie in it.

You sound bitter and angry. Are you struggling to get social housing? Or are you struggling to pay the ever increasing mortgage payments and for the repairs on your house? OR have you got a daughter or son (or other family member) with kids who can't get social housing because 'all the old people are hogging them?' 🙄

It's one of those 3. THAT'S for sure!

Nora who is 78 should be not rattling round a 4 bedroom social housing dwelling on her own. She doesn't own it, her kids are gone and there are 3 bedrooms falling into disrepair and a huge garden she cannot namage. Nora SHOULD be moved into a smaller place that suits her needs and let a young family start the cycle again.

'This happened to my mum's house . Gorgeous garden house well looked after inside and out . I can't even walk past it now it's too upsetting. Who ever is in there now well they are fucking animals and that is an insult to animals ! Full bin bags piled high in the front garden all down the side of the house, shit and junk everywhere Christ knows what the inside is like.'

That is deeply annoying. Years ago the council authorities where I am did annual inspections of council houses and gave the tenant a rocket if it was neglected or there was any damage. I think the rules around council tenancies used to be far stricter. They seem to have given up now.

It's interesting to me how emotional people are about their houses. I've lived in my current house for 20 years but I'd move on quite happily if I found somewhere I wanted to move to and could afford (and, in the current market, could sell it at all!)

I am not attached to it at all, it's just a roof over my head in a decent area.

This happened to my mum's house . Gorgeous garden house well looked after inside and out . I can't even walk past it now it's too upsetting. Who ever is in there now well they are fucking animals and that is an insult to animals ! Full bin bags piled high in the front garden all down the side of the house, shit and junk everywhere Christ knows what the inside is like .

My dad lives alone in a large 3 bed detached house with 3 reception rooms and a massive garden. He would love to downsize to a 2 bed but hasn't found anything suitable so has decided to stay put. I'd like him to be more comfortable and to have something will suit him for years to come but the lengthy process and costs associated with it have led him to refusing everything but the non-existent perfect place. Maybe if there was some support in place to do this it might be easier?

Older folk should stay if they want. Inheritance tax is the means to redistribute wealth through taxation and benefits.