Lifetime Social Housing Tenancies

No dear you don't get me that way. You're obviously here pulling out leg, get maximum froth with your bingo card. Bless you, you don't even know SH are rentals.

It's not those in SHs fault you didn't grow up in one.

This is disgusting! You know damn well that many people take out mortgages because they can't access social housing and need some housing security and to save a bit of money. You can't sit there in your lifetime assured social housing and talk about the risk associated with taking out a mortgage when you know full well that you are in the least risky position possible thanks to the tax payer. This two tier system is unfair! You are being subsidised by everyone else and then act as if other people should be glad to do this for you whilst also be totally delighted that their options are either taking their chances in the private rental market or taking on a mortgage.

They are rentals and this has always been the case.

There's was nothing stopping your parents from applying

If home ownership isn't for you then sell the bloody thing and rent for the rest of your life.

Always looking in the neighbours pot to check then don't have more than you, human nature. It's pathetic the way people go on.

I disagree OP I think it's the opposite. The fair way would be social housing with lifetime tenancies for everyone. Build far more of it, and/or the government buys up all the private rentals and ends the horror of private renting completely. Everyone either lives their lives in a secure, lifetime tenancy, or they have the choice to buy a different kind of house if they wish but social tenancies can be a norm for most people. When my grandparents married in the 1950's the first thing they did, like all sensible working class people at the time was put their name down for a council house in a beautiful new build council estate with playgrounds and libraries and communities. This should be what we aspire to have for everyone now. End the struggle for basic survival and we can all achieve far more with our lives.

Surely when people enter in to mortgages they are aware that interest rates can go up or down? Yes, I know Truss was a disaster and left many, many people in difficult circumstances, but I still think they probably should have been aware. Interest rates have been much higher than this in the past.

All we can do is laugh at the absurdity put a thread like this up and people tell you you should of "chose better" and should of got a council house or a rich husband yourself.

If you were to put up a thread saying you intended to marry a man for money you'd get denounced as a gold-digger. And God only knows the response if you put up a thread mentioning your plans to get a council house (would involve living in a bed and breakfast for over 5 years with your children so by the time it was over they'd definitely remember that shit)

You cannot win on mumsnet 😂

That's what i don't understand people choose to get a mortgage knowing there are risks then us social housing tenants get the blame. Or told its not fair.

No, I can vote for a political party that represents my views. I'm sure one will come along soon enough as I would bet the majority of the population don't support lifetime tenancies.

You can stamp your feet all you like but the tenancies are for life. That’s the rule. If you want to see it changed stand for your local council and try to get elected to parliament then you can implement change.

YANBU. I think if you need social housing, that's fine, but I don't believe in anyone having a lifetime tenancy on any property, I think tenants should move to more suitably sized homes as their families grow and then shrink again and when the tenant dies the property should revert to the council to house more people that need it. If social housing was built with many different property sizes/types in each development then people wouldn't have to move away from family, friends, jobs, schools, etc, if they needed to up or downsize.

It's all just nonsense and red herrings. The top 1% won't stay in a country that has a punitive tax regime. Not when the rest of the world is crying out for wealthy people to move to their country and will incentivise them to do so. Look at the mass exodus from the UK and Europe already of the wealthy. You are in real danger of shooting the golden goose. You can argue about the ethical rights and wrongs of wealth distribution all you like, but policy has to be rooted in reality. We cannot realistically tax the super wealthy enough to fund everything that the masses feel they are entitled to.

So again the question is asked, if social housing will continue to be a scarce resource then who should be entitled to it? Those who happen to have acquired a lifetime tenancy at some point in their lives but are now totally capable of supporting themselves in the private rental market or even purchasing a property OR the poorest in society? It really is an either-or question. You can't answer both and then pretend we can magic up enough social housing through taxing some mythical immobile billionaires.

Just to add, of course people that have have overstretched themselves to buy a house will be bitter when they see people earning more than them enjoying subsidised housing that they and other tax payers are contributing towards. It is intrinsically and inherently unfair. That's why lifetime tenancies need to be banned. Creating a two tier housing system where it is actually financially beneficial to manufacture a situation where you are poor for a few years to get a lifetime tenancy and then begin to build a career in the full knowledge that you can enjoy subsidised housing for the rest of your life is bonkers.

Sorry but your original comment was batshittery, implying everything was ops fault/bad life choices as if she could easily of just chosen to live a council house when in most areas that would involve 5+ years of living in assorted bed and breakfasts or hostels.
Or as if she should and could of easily snagged a wealthy man, rich men can tell when a woman just sees them as a walking ATM machine.

Op is not unreasonable to fall in love with her man who works a regular job and to want to have children together in a regular house without breaking the bank.

Idk why it was deleted because it wasn't offensive more just crazy

Yep

Some people are so out of touch.

Social housing rent shouldn’t be at the level of private rent. The private rental market needs to be regulated.

Landlords can charge £1000 for a property that would be £500. Because they can.

Yes some landlords their mortgage has gone up but what about the big landlords that own the properties outright? Market rent is what they can get away with.

What subsidy?

I think you've misunderstood - many do.

Housing may be subsidised by housing benefit. If someone is in receipt of housing benefit its possible they're actually costing the taxpayer less if they are in council housing rather than private rental.

But council tenants do not receive cheaper rent because its subsidised by the tax payer. They receive cheaper rent because the aim of social housing is to house people, not to make a profit.

They pay what its costs. A little more actually. Now, if the councils were allowed to spend the money made when someone buys their property, on building additional properties for social rent, then we wouldn't be in the mess we are now.

That was your choice

In response to your boring first paragraph yes, people should have the right to all the things you list. If the wealthy didn’t do all they could to avoid paying tax then maybe things would look very different and when I say wealthy I’m not talking about those that consider themselves high earners. I’m talking about the 1% that have 80% of the wealth. Just to add, I’ve found that most of those that pick over the rights and wrongs of social housing have usually overstretched themselves with a big mortgage that they’re now enslaved to. Most of it’s pure jealousy