Lifetime Social Housing Tenancies

WOW, 😂 Your mask is slipping now dear.

The reason the current system is broken is because the idiots in charge sold off the HA stock. That is why there are waiting lists miles long. We need more social housing. It should be there for anyone who requires it for as long as they require it. Very few people who have the means to actually buy their own home will stay in social housing. Me being a perfect example of that.

Its certainly not the pp who needs to educate themselves.

😂

If you own a house in the SE, one of the most expensive areas in the country, the you’re privileged. I am too as a London homeowner. I don’t find it difficult or upsetting to own that. Rather than wish away one of the last secure housing frameworks we have, I’d rather we forced correction of the housing market so anyone who wanted to buy a home could. House price caps, banning second home ownership, laws against properties being unoccupied for long amounts of time. Something tells me OP wouldn’t like that either

In classic mumsnet fashion. I think you need to educate yourself - if you think the current system works just look around. You've also pulled the jealous card - go you.

Eh? Where have I said that?

Its you that's closed like a hardback book

Given you don't think anyone should have any opinions on anyone else - why post at all?

😂 I'm splitting my sides here. As @K0OLA1D said, the private financial affairs of people in social housing are NOTHING to do with you. I bet you think it's FREE too. You do know the majority of people in social housing pay rent right? What am I saying, of course you don't know that! Your posts are full of horrific innaccuracies.

I'm cringing for you. 😬 OMG. 😆 As a pp said, should everyone know all about everyone else's GP appointments, dental appointments, and hospital specialist appointments too, and what they are all for, to make sure they are 'allowed' by the Uber-Judgemental? What about children, shall we all judge anyone who has more than 2, because all that taxpayers money is supporting them through school. Oh NO!

Loads of people move house when they get pay increases. It is pretty common for people to move house. Some people just live in a different world of being nannied by the state their whole lives.

LOL, no they don't. Most people who have a pay increase just stay in the same property. If every time people got a pay increase, they moved house, no-one would ever stay in the same place for more than a year! 😆 And millions of people live in affordable, secure, social housing, (In fact social housing has been around for nearly 140 years.) People are not being 'nannied' because they have secure affordable housing, THAT THEY PAY RENT FOR. 😂

Tell me you are bitter and angry, and jealous of people in social housing, without telling me you are bitter and angry, and jealous of people in social housing.

The bile is dripping from your posts @Lioncub2020 . 😬

.

I would like to see housing allocated based on need. If your a single person you have a small house, if your family you'd have the right number of bedrooms. If don't need social support you can rent/buy privately. At the moment families end up in hotel accommodation whilst weathly empty nesters live in large council houses. It is ridiculous. No one needs a 4 bedroom house for longer than say 25 years until their children have moved on. but it could be allocated to someone in their 30s for life. Social housing should be allocated based on current need rather than past need.

😂

No one I'm feeling.

Everyone should just cut some branches off their magic money trees and buy their own

So do you want working people living in SH or just those on benefits? It's difficult to tell.

The personal circumstances of those housed in HA are fuck all to do with anyone else. They need a home they have a home. That's all that anyone needs to know.

What a ridiculous attitude to have. The HA house across from me have no means to pay for their own home. They have a HA house. Does it bother me? Not remotely. Id have stayed in mine if I hadn't got the money for my own home. And it would be no one else business as to why I was there.

Loads of people move house when they get pay increases. It is pretty common for people to move house. Some people just live in a different world of being nannied by the state their whole lives.

But that would depend on the hypothetical income threshold. It’s the middle and high earners who should be kicked out, although that would depend on other factors such as if they have dependents.

Why is paying their own rent not considered supporting themselves?

I do know this.

That's why I said secure housing.

Which brings me back to the question I asked earlier...what incentive would there be for anyone in SH to get a better job/ work more hours, if there is a chance that they may lose the house they live in...would you take that risk?

Those who are wealthy enough to support themself?

This thread is about lifetime tenancies, didn't you know this?