To think that there is a misunderstanding about social housing.

About 15 years ago, me and the DP were house hunting to buy and viewed a property that was about £130k. That very same house is on the rental market right now and they want £3k for it. It is a piss take.

No we pay rent most people are not on full benefits 😒

Nope we are no longer subsidised we were in the initial transfer from council to housing association after a set number of years we turned independent part of the company is run as a charity the rest is not

My point is not all areas will be run the same

Many years ago. Now a single working man with no disability/vulnerability doesn’t stand a chance in getting social housing.
My LA has a criteria on income too, I think it’s household income of less than £23,000. Anything over this, you simply can’t apply for social housing.

It is seen as free housing as if you don’t work, your rent will be covered by either UC or housing benefit. If you own a property, your mortgage is not going to be paid if you don’t work. The security in not comparable.

The lifetime tenancies concept is weird. While it is great for the person living there, it means that one home is blocked for ages, even if the tenant would be able to live on their own and someone else could benefit form the leg up of lower rent and temporary stability.

Lifelong tenancies are increasing the discrepancy between those lucky to get this opportunity and those who didn't.

Sounds more like selfish than determined

It is below market rate. That is a subsidy, simple definition. And not for profit is another word for charity. No amount of wierd double think or assertion is going to change the facts.

Your point is wrong. It's not charity, it's not subsidised.

Depends on the area mine was virtually the same until recently now I'm only a little cheaper than my private neighbours but my tenancy is secure

There is no difference. But if you’d prefer to call it charity that’s fine. My point still stands.

Before they ran out of money, councils used to build council houses, and rent them out extremely cheaply.

Councils then transferred the majority of their stock (which hadn’t already been sold by the tenant under right to buy) to housing associations. In the 80’s and 90’s housing associations used to receive up to 100% of the cost of building new homes, so HA’s could also rent their properties out cheaply.

Grant rates have been cut to the point that housing associations these days may receive as little as 10% of the cost of building a new homes, and with all their other priorities (building safety, customer satisfaction, damp and mould), building homes for new tenants isn’t high on their agenda.

As so few homes are now being built, demand for housing is currently at a high and tenants who no longer need their home vacated very slowly, people who aren’t on the receiving end of these subsidised home, seem to try and take it out on those who are living in one.

The focus should be on the government, and how they are going to get reasonably priced homes built for people who need them.

It's not subsidised, it's just not for profit. Big difference

We live in a housing association house (I've been a tenant since I was a single mum before I met my husband) we both work full time in demanding jobs, pay all our taxes and don't receive any benefits apart from child benefit. Technically, yes, we could afford to rent a house privately although we'd be massively pushed financially to do so (we have never been and never will be in a position to buy, the house prices where we live far outstrip what we earn as it's a touristy area with lots of second homes) but where we live there's a massive shortage of housing and rental prices are really high and competition fierce. Basically we'd be putting ourselves in a massively worse situation by doing so (the insecurity of private renting) when as it stands we have a secure home in an area we've always lived in, that we can stay in forever as long as we pay the rent. It would be insane of us to give that up.

The solution here is, obviously, to build more social housing, and lots of it. Ordinary working families also deserve security of tenure at an affordable price especially when they're just perfectly average working households raising their families (like us).

I'm sure that's just someone being goady. All the faux 'but I just want to be educated' 🙄

Yep. Not saying their isn’t but that’s just how much it is here.

so, say I’m a teacher on £2000 per month - how annoyed do you think I’d be that I can’t afford to live near the school I teach at yet a family that don’t work and have no need to be in zone 2 get a free house in central London?

Landlord problem right there….over £3 grand a month??

Mine is about 25% of private rent in same street and its covered by housing benefit/UC so I suppose it is free for me as I don't have to worry about rent. I get it paid directly to UC because of my disability.

I'm extremely lucky to have it as theres not many 4 bed houses available.

It was a house swap and I plan to do the same when I no longer need such a big house.

That depends on how much of it there is.

Where I have my rental properties there has been a shed load of house building by three HAs

Private rents have come down considerably due to their being less demand for it because of all the new HA stock.

It's also meant a lot of the shit landlords have sold up because there is no demand for their properties as rentals.

It's been a great thing for the area.

Because she was the most stubborn/determined person I have ever known. She was offered a lovely 1 bedroom bungalow in the same village as her 4 bed house several times, but refused and I don't think the council could force her.

Near me, it’s £550/£575pm for a 2 bed HA or £800-£900 for a private rent. Ao definitely cheaper.

My Mum and stepdad are still in the same 3 bedroom council house that they raised me in. They are now in their 60s and 70s, with mobility and other age-related issues, and have tried several times to down-size to a smaller and easier to manage property. The problem is that there are no available properties that would be suitable for them!

Yes that was the point!

We're talking about council/social housing and whether the perception of 'free' is accurate.

Exactly?

In my area the LA rate is £176 per week

the cost of a 3 bed private rental house on my street (disadvantaged zone 2) is £3400

Only if they are in council housing. If they are in private, they will have to make up the shortfall themselves.