To think that there is a misunderstanding about social housing.

I’m in a 4 bed. I’m not going anywhere

mutual exchange is very stressful…. Just done it myself.

Imagine that there’s a single mother out there with 2 children, just like you were when you got your flat. Because of the housing shortage there is no social housing for this mother, and she has to rent a private flat that she definitely cannot afford.
So why should you (on a good wage and with no childcare responsability) be allowed to rent a cheaper housing association property whilst this single mother is forced to rent a privately rented flat?
How would you feel if, when you were applying for social housing for yourself and your 2 children, the council told you that none were available as all the properties were occupied by healthy individuals with grown up children?

Sorry, I don’t want to be mean, just to show you a different perspective.

What’s a ‘good job’?

most people in social housing work you know

Absolutely this! I'm rattling around in a 3 bed HA property. I asked to downsize and was told there's no option to in my area. I can't transfer area without finding someone else to do a swap. There's nobody seeking to do this in my area who are in a suitable swappable position. I've tried that twice before.

I've always worked and paid the full asking rent so I'm effectively regenerating money back vs HB covering my rent and effectively taking money back out of the system. If I move area (which isn't an option offered anyway). Then I'd be further away from disabled DM & away from DD and DC.

I'd say I've paid my dues back into the lower priced rental system, as I can tally up that I've paid over the current asking price of houses sold within my street across the years I've rented here.

I'm always amazed by the assumption that everyone in a larger house should "just move to free up space" 😄 It's not that I disagree! It's just where exactly am I suppose to be moving to? A property that doesn't exist? Or should I just not be selfish and go and live in a hole I've dug in the ground somewhere so somebody more "deserving", can live in my current property?... It's not that simple!

Even if she were in a 4 bed, she can only downsize if there is somewhere to downsize to. This is the issue.

Correct. Single children or carers. Can’t remember if there are any other exceptions

I think that’s fine for you to keep - it’s a 2 bed flat, not a 4 bed house. If there are loads of singles/couples rattling round in bigger houses (having brought up children) and loads of families without homes, then it’s a problem.

I grew up in council housing. My Dad worked three jobs, then had to retire early due to poor health and my Mom died so he had to look after me on his own. He still had to pay some rent although he got benefits. Then I left home and he lost some of them. As a very old pensioner he was still paying rent until he got very poorly and needed specialist dementia care. It’s not necessarily the golden ticket some people say it is. The golden ticket is being lucky enough to get on the housing ladder and pay a mortgage off by the time you’re not working anymore. I know this is slightly off topic but my point being that it’s not that great in later life.

I think London is different... It's like an economy of its own compared to most of the UK.

There’s very few smaller properties though…

What you are quoting literally refers to the subsidy. Tax payer money contributes to the construction of new social housing. And tax payer money, in the form of benefit does cover some or all of the rent for SOME social housing tenants.
And yes, some HAs do make a profit but it’s referred to as a “surplus”. I think it was £87m last year for Clarion, biggest HA in the UK.

This is the problem. I’ve no issue with social housing for those that need it. I don’t think it’s right if someone gets social housing then gets a good job and can still stay in social housing.

In my area a 3 bed social housing is £170 per week
= £8,840 p/a

Cheapes 3 bed private rental is £1200 per month and they go within a day of being listed.
= £14,400 p/a

This is correct! Finally! Social housing is not subsidised it’s only cheaper because there is no landlord making a profit from it, no one is getting anything for free.

Social housing is not subsidised there’s jusy no landlords making a profit

Ok maybe but I don't think it's straightforward if they are not already on the tenancy

Most tenancies nowadays allow succession to a spouse/partner in occupation but it's at the HAs discretion whether or not they allow a child or other family member to succeed.

Think there always has been one succession. But if a single parent is the tenant then and adult child could succeed if they were living there

Yeah it doesn't work that way anymore when I got a housing association house ten years ago it was made abundantly clear there is one succession of tenancy ,so I have a joint tenancy with my husband whoever dies first the surviving,partner inherits the tenancy as a single person ,neither of us can allow our children to.continue to inherit the tenancy

It varies quite a bit. Older housing stock often built in the 50’s and 60’s is good quality usually and whilst you do pay rent (or claim uc housing allowance) it was built on land allocated by councils so far cheaper than private. Housing association housing built more recently isn’t always that much cheaper because whilst the developers are made to include social housing, they do charge the housing associations for the land. Rents can be pretty high

Define alot?
Private rents have gone up in most areas of the UK
A few years ago.My social rent was comparable to private rent rent in the same area ,now I can see a difference but it certainly isn't double or treble it really is area dependent.

Council housing is a lot cheaper than private renting.

I do agree with this, eligibility should be reassessed because, while a single mother escaping domestic violence should be considered ‘’in priority need’’ and be given social housing, when her children are grown up and she has a full time job she is no longer vulnerable.
What’s worse, social housing can pass to children (or other adults) when a social tenant passes away and I know a few such children wirh great jobs in the city who inherited 2-4 beds houses in central London. They can then buy the council houses with 1/3 discount….

Given that the country and especially London is so badly affected by homelessness, why did nobody think to change the law??

This is a common but idiotic viewpoint.

So a person has a council house. Then they get a job (or a better job) and earn just enough.ti pay private rent. So you throw them out of their council house, away from their friends and family and the children move school. Then the landlord wants to sell, or the rent increases, they can't afford a new private rental and, oops, back on the housing list, in an expensive temporary b and b.

OR, more likely they don't take that job, or the better job, because what's the point? Why should they try when ambition just means they'll lose their home and have less money overall? Would you?

Plus you end up with a revolving door of tenants, no continuity, no pride or sense of community, no stability.

So short sighted. It's not the answer.

So how would you make them leave?