Working families £18k worse off than benefits claimants after budget

Yep.

I'm in a cheapish town in Yorkshire. Rents are through the roof in a few certain highly desirable areas on the outskirts of the town but I literally moved 5 minutes away to social housing from where the rental property is and this part is closer to the town centre and isn't desirable at all so rents aren't expensive either including private rentals.

Normally it is cheaper

Security, mostly.

My HA is cheaper than similar private rents but not by much, because I live in the arse end of the NE. Everything here is cheap in comparison to the South and Southeast. My BIL is constantly in awe at the price of our takeaway pizzas. I swear he visits us just for the cheap pizza.

I wouldn't move back to private letting even if it was cheaper. I've been stung too many times by LLs selling up or evicting me to raise the rent and also by rogue LL who think it is fine to leave their tenants with no hot water for weeks on end while they pocket the rent money.

I always assumed social housing was subsidised and lower than private

As @Novemberstorm says

If it isn’t then whats all this info on it

’UK social housing is subsidised through government funding for building and by keeping rents below market rates
. Housing associations and local councils receive grants and funding to build homes, and tenants pay lower rents, with social rent homes often costing around 50% of the local market rent and affordable rent homes costing up to 80%.

How it is subsidised

• Government funding: The government provides grants through programs like the Affordable Homes Programme to support the development of social and affordable housing.
• Below-market rents: Social rented homes are typically let at significantly lower rates than private market rentals to help people on lower incomes.

• Linked to affordability: The formula is designed to be affordable, with rent set based on 30% of a property's relative value and 70% of relative local income levels, both using data from 1999.
• Rent caps and predictable increases: The rent is subject to a rent cap, and annual increases are predictable. For example, from 2024-25, increases are tied to CPI plus 1 percentage point.
• Government and local authority involvement: Councils and housing associations manage social housing, and their ability to keep rents low is supported by public funding and policy frameworks.

Well that's obvious surely
You have far more security in social housing, and you can decorate etc.

I am not saying that. I thought social housing tenants pay less than private rentals but other mumsnetters have corrected me.

Taking that as gospel I am saying we need uniform equal rent rates for all? Social housing rent charged at the same level as private rent and the whole system renamed.

That's an easy one for me.

My private rental property was unsuitable for my disabled child which is the reason why I was able to get social housing in the first place.

???

None of that is at all relevant to social housing?

FWIW, my social house has always been owned by the council or HA, since it was built in the 60s. The cost of building it has been repaid many times over. My rent is based on the actual cost of maintaining a property of this size. That means the rent I pay after maintenance costs have been accounted for goes towards buying more housing stock and paying wages of the HA staff.

I'd love to know how that is subsidised by the taxpayer?

And why are people so keen to get social housing if it is the same cost as private?

Are we getting hung up on terminology. We need a uniform rental system that charges everyone equally. No increases for some and no subsidies for others.

I think it would be great if those who couldn't buy a house for whatever reason were all able to access social housing.

Mine was comparable for years ,
Private rent has gone up though in the last few years in my area not by the massive amount some posters seem to think though.

OK. So why not scrap social housing or private housing. Just have one rental option for everyone?

The bottom line is always how much a person pays. If you pay a mortgage you are interested in what goes out of your bank account each month. The pedantics of how you get there, not important.

Maybe if you are reliant on tax payer funding you are not interested in either sum? Or is there another reason?

My social housing rent is the exact same amount as the private rental I moved from. It isn't automatically cheaper.

Private rent is for profit, social rents are charged at cost. That is the difference.

Not taking a profit is not the same as being subsidised, but this has been explained, with evidence, almost weekly on MN, so I suspect you already realise this, but it does not fit your agenda, so you opt to ignore it.

I've just looked it up and it does seem as though becoming a caregiver, which I'm assuming means a child under 3 falls under their good cause requirement for leaving a job which would mean no sanction.

You're correct.

Are you saying Private rent is identical to social housing rent?

If so, why not abolish social housing?

But you aren’t sanctioned if you have a child under three?

@Coffeeandbooks88my friend has the 30 hours funded and nursery still costs her £1200 a month for one child. This lady refers to £800 nursery, so I’d assume that it is including the 30 hours funded.

My nursery for two children (I don’t receive funding) is over £5k a month. Just for context, childcare currently is high. The bills went up significantly after the NI raid from labours budget (30% more for me, raised in April)

Not to mention she probably hasn't factored in that she may be sanctioned for purposely leaving her job.

It won't cover the wage she will lose or the 30 hours she would have got at nine months (presume in England). I suspect she is also using the unreliable calculators you get online. She also has a mortgage so less help as well there. She will be worse off.

@Frequencybut working costs money, transport, parking, childcare extras etc. That money each month you can just put into a self invested pension. She’s band 5 NHS and so believes she can get back into it. Either way, you get three years UC with no work requirements, maybe have another baby and get three more years etc.

The whole system needs overhauling

How long is her child going to be in full-time nursery, though?

If that poster is actually considering this and not just rage-baiting, she is lacking in common sense. Firstly, she will lose her workplace pension contributions and career progression. Secondly, the job market is dire right now and only likely to get worse. The chance of her getting back into her career at the same level, on the same pay after a 3-year break is slim to none. If she goes ahead, she is setting herself up for either a life of poverty or a long, hard slog to climb back up the ladder.

@Coffeeandbooks88how will it be less? She said she won’t be worse off and so is looking to claim UC and not go back to work