AIBU to question Reform's plan to prioritise married couples for social housing?

Well he's not hurting anyone, is he? It's not like a one bedroom flat is suitable for a family with children so he's depriving them. It was built for a single person, and he's a single person.
Average SH rent in SE for a one bed flat is £480 to £585, so if he told you his rent a while back that's about right.

They do if it's a flat and building has that cladding and safet windows? Even houses have to have fire door if over certain floors.

I’m just assuming she has no experience private renting or paying a mortgage (unless she’s a lot older and paid her mortgage years ago) based on what she’s saying. I haven’t actually asked her to prove or verify it and yeah I might be wrong

It’s one man in a one bed flat. Built decades ago. Been a couple years since he told me his rent. If you’re on the list you can still move into an old council home they have even cheaper rent than the new build ones. People die not everyone moving into a new social home is a new housing association one some are old council houses built ages ago

You have been told your assumptions are wrong, why not accept that and respect the posters own privacy?

I’ve been on mumsnet for over a year. I name change regularly to protect my identity and my kids

If someone pays £100 a week in the (expensive parts of) the south east they have lived there for decades.
New renters pay far far more than that and even for legacy tenancies I recall the minimum rent target being £106 a week before service charges over 10 years ago.

Really annoying for those of us posting in good faith.

Probably using AI to come up with a profile.

This has been happening on other threads.

You shouldn’t speak on something you have no experience with

Ah. I was starting to wonder. Thank you.

Well. Here's a list of possibilities.

(a) I rent privately in the south east of England.
(b) I own outright in a devolved nation.
(c) I have a socially rented flat in Andy Burnham's North.
(d) I have a string of luxury properties in London, New York, Sydney and the Bahamas. Plus yacht.
(e) I have an extensive rental portfolio and live in whichever is empty at any one time.
(f) I queue up for a bed in a homeless hostel every night.

None or any of these could be true. Why does it matter so much to the pp? The internet is anonymous and anybody could say anything they liked. It proves nothing except you should listen to someone's argument instead of inventing a backstory for them.

In My utopia all rents would be social rent also.

mortgages only feature because the model is small landlords who can’t afford to fund properties taking out very high loans against them. If you eliminate private landlords that goes.

maintenance is pretty minimal on a professionally maintained asset (proper servicing, adhering to standard replacement cycles) but most landlords don’t work to this optimum model. Also because they’re so small scale they pay significantly more for maintenance than ie a housing association does

It’s not a small minority. If she had to pay private rent or a mortgage she wouldn’t be acting like £100 a week rent is anything

I never claimed to know anything except that you’re obviously a social tenant who’s never had to pay private rent or a mortgage. It’s obvious from how you talk

They have only signed up today and already claim to know everything about you

she very likely does have a mortgage or private rent. It’s a minority of people who don’t.

i agree with this poster and im a home owner, no one in my family has ever rented

If you don’t care why are you responding?

You know nothing because I don't give out personal information online. You're making lazy assumptions because you think that they somehow prove a point that nobody even cares you're trying to make.

I’m not asking you to give out any information I already know you don’t private rent or have a mortgage

Would you prefer “ridiculously cheap and living life on easy mode” instead of “free” it’s more accurate I suppose. You clearly have no idea how much private renters and mortgagees pay and I’m not even just talking about the pure monthly cost but deposits and stuff plus every time you move another deposit or a whole tax for home owners. Council tenants trade homes on facebook like Pokémon cards

I agree that rental accommodation should be owned and run by the state. In my utopia there would be no private rentals! In reality I don't see why their role should be anything other than minimal.

I suppose in some cases market rents can reflect mortgage and rental costs but then again, should the user of a service be responsible for ensuring that service turns a profit? It's another argument for a massively increased social sector that would benefit us all (not least because the housing related benefits bill would shrink and what was still paid would go back into the public purse rather than private pockets!).

Why are you so desperate for this personal information? Why do you think it's any of your business? You're clearly happy to give out an awful lot of personal detail online but you have no right to demand others do the same.

"It obviously is" isn't an argument, it's an uninformed opinion. Nor is somebody pointing out that you don't have any evidence for your claims "literally just semantics".
Your original point wasn't that your imaginary man lived "for free". You claimed social housing is free. It isn't.

It would be better if the state just took charge of most rented housing. Seems unfair that some groups cannot escape the punitive private housing market just through circumstance. I would never qualify for social housing in a million years but private rents are obscene!

Also I am not sure that private rents are massively inflated when mortgage and maintenance costs are factored in.