Council houses owning brand new cars?

It wasn't me who said they're subsided, @SquashedSquid - maybe you linked the wrong poster? - but FWIW the "reason why" has already been answered a number of times

As for PP's question as to why those now in good financial positions can't save a deposit for their own place and make the home available to someone who can't, I'd say that comes from the same mindset as those who moaned like hell about right to buy while on the waiting list, only to grab the opportunity with both hands when they had the house

When you apply for PIP, you list all the conditions you have. You may not even be claiming for that particular condition, but it will be listed in the stats anyway.

Lived in council estates my entire life. My dad worked 60+ hour weeks!!

We bought our current home and the two houses either side of us are council. Both families work and have lived there 20+ years.

My in laws have also lived in their council house for 20 years. Both working. If you can get one it’s clearly a much better option than private renting, where you’re essentially buying someone else’s second home for them. Council homes are rented but you have real security.

Many people who are housed by the local authority at a very vulnerable point in their life go on to improve their financial circumstances once they have the security of a stable home. Not necessarily enough to afford a mortgage, but enough to get a few nice things. Which is excellent and yet another reason we should all be campaigning for a lot more social housing rather than sticky beaking into the lives of existing tenants, speculating about their finances and mithering about whether they should be occupying their homes or not.

Do you pay the open market rent?

Unless you are a single person with no children or a high earner, most people in the UK receive some form of State Benefit.
Most who work can afford a lease car. Some are company cars.

The real scandal of council housing, is those who are able to jump to the top of the queue due to contacts.

WorthyOtter · Yesterday 21:29

"Anyone can get a council house. I had one a few years ago in a new build, we had money just weren't interested in buying a house (I have now). We were surprised when we got it because we didn't have kids at the time and didn't seem a priority but it was a bit out the way and there wasn't much interest in it. If I was renting, I'd rather go council in all honesty it's alot more reliable, your house won't be sold and they're pretty good at repairs"

The council in my area re Council houses stipulates the following :

Households who have a gross household income including benefits of more than £38,000 (per annum) will not eligible to join the register. Households who have assets, equity, savings or capital of over £60,000 and are assessed as able to compete in the private market will also not be eligible.

How are they subsidised? My rent is three times what my mortgage was.

Can see the ignorant posts are out about them being subsidised again. Still it's an improvement from free you saw on here a few years back.

Progress of a sort

I have to agree, Portakalkedi

Of course I realise they're lifetime tenancies; I'm just not sure how this can be justified beyond "people like having them", which doesn't seem much of an argument when there are so many who really can't afford to buy and are desperate for a home

This is simply preposterous. Social housing is not emergency housing. People actually build lives in their communities. They have to furnish and carpet the homes themselves. They don't have the money to just up sticks and invest in a new place one they reach some arbitrary threshold.

My sister in law was a single parent living in a council house. She wouldn't have bothered getting a job if it meant her having to give up the house. She and her three kids would hardly find somewhere to rent in London on a Tesco salary.

One day I'll start a thread about the increasing numbers of owner-occupiers claiming benefits.

Yet again so many MNetters falling for an obvious troll.

Very succinctly put. I don’t think council housing or housing association properties should be allocated for life to anyone. The state cannot afford it.

@PluckyCheeks
Are you aware that you just can’t “ ham it up”?
you have to include detailed evidence, also that your “ worst day” applies for at least 50% of the time and what do you mean “ approved list”? As I and many others have stated it is not granted on diagnoses but how they affect you.
The proposed changes mean you won’t gain 4 points on one descriptor if you’re able to wash, dress and feed yourself(ie be ineligible for LCWRA)

I totally agree we need more social housing , too much was sold off cheap under right to buy policy. Some of those are now property landlords making money out of charging “market rate” on ex council houses that would be unaffordable for those on low income.

However, social housing is so limited it needs to be for those who really need it. I.e. not those who think they’re entitled to low rent and a new car. Whilst many low and middle income earners have high rent and can’t afford a car or have an old one. Am sure they’d love low rent so they can afford a car! So this PoV is about what’s fair.

@PluckyCheeks
For reasons of both geography and profession I would hazard a guess that I know a lot more about it than you do.

Keen to hear what you mean by "sunlight is the best disinfectant" and "the shit that went on".

Were you involved in the local relief efforts either personally or professionally? Did you read the inquiry reports? Have you been following all the regulatory reforms since then? Do you understand why they were needed?

You are very flippant about an event that took so many lives in horrific and avoidable circumstances and deeply reshaped fire, building safety and social housing regulation.

I can't buy a house because when I had to flee terrible domestic violence with a toddler, my abuser took out hundreds of thousands of pounds worth of debts in my name and my house was repossessed. My credit rating has never recovered.

I can't privately rent, because finding an affordable, wheelchair adapted bungalow on the private rental market is completely impossible.

My DH and I both work in full time, professional careers. We live in social housing because it was literally our only option. Sorry you think that's, "All kinds of wrong", but perhaps you should check your ableism.

My brand new car is because I'm so disabled, I get higher rate PIP. Is that wrong too?

This isn't quite accurate. If you have the money to buy a car outright then you're daft to do that. A large lump sum of cash, enough to buy a luxury car, will work much harder for you (properly invested) than just sitting, doing nothing, sunk in to a new car.

I drive a RR Vogue which we could have bought outright. But instead we invested that large lump sum in buying/renovating a property. When we sold it made us a much, much larger return on our money.

I do think that properly managing/investing your money should be taught in school. A damn sight more useful than bloody algebra or calculus.

I already know this. My point was to the pp who assumed she'd be entitled to enhanced rate of both elements at the first time of asking.

My grandad lived in his council house for 60 years - it was his home, regardless it being council. My neighbours opposite all live in a fancy council flat but have ‘decent’ brand new cars - because they work. The flats were allocated only to working residents. I have a ‘decent’ brand new car, but I’m physically disabled and it is a mobility car.

council homes are people’s homes and you cannot judge every situation. Most people get in debt to have a reliable car. Some people like my sister live at home with my parents so can afford to have a decent car on the drive. You don’t know the ins and outs of peoples lives

Me too.

And some people are claiming things, with the help of websites and the PIP system that are not true. Based on the false idea of "talk about your worst day" when that worst day may occur extremely rarely but to claim for PIP, it should be at least 50% of the time.

Which is why tit needs reform with particular focus on psychiatric/ND conditions as a benefit designed to compensate people for the additional costs of a functional disability is now being primarily claimed by people who don;t really experience that.

When I was helping people claim it was just a matter of course that we helped people apply for DLA and then PIP when it came in and based it on the worse possible day and I 100% led people in their responses because I thought that was what they were entitled to.

It was once I started looking into what the benefit was supposed to be for that I questioned it and was accused of being a UKIP voter (it was that long ago) and why did I care about people getting benefits when it wasn't my money?

I've known mentally ill people who could not work and are functionally disabled and probably never could. i know people with ADHD who are so disabled they would struggle with lots of things but not the things on a PIP claim but they get awards.

And when I was involved in the ADHD world, there were a lot of people claiming PIP and lying out of their arse to get PIP so they could drop to part-time or not work at all.

They advise no to.do that anymore as it could be considered fraud and answer it truthfully .

Im.not sure what your trying to say really I I used to be a mental health nurse and have known some people be so severely depressed they are catatonic
And conditions such as ADHD are spectrum conditions,some people with the diagnosis can function very well with and some not so much.

Wel! That is literally the criteria so why do you think it's not true?