Starmer refuses to promise that domestic abusers will not be released early under emergency measures to combat prison overcrowding

I think I've said the wrong thing"

I've not heard of people being made to forfeit social housing if it's deemed under occupied?

You wouldn't forfeit but you would be "encouraged" to leave.

I got so hung up on the prisoner getting housing with his daughter that I may have misunderstood the situation posted here ie assuming there were children.

But if in fact it is only a one bedroom flat then that wouldn't be "under occupancy".

But does lead to the possibility that if the wife who has left because of domestic violence has signed a joint tenancy. She has to consent to any change to the tenancy.

I think!

https://england.shelter.org.uk/housing_advice/council_housing_association/joint_tenancy_relationship_breakdown

(unrealistic advice in here when domestic violence is invovled )

I've not heard of people being made to forfeit social housing if it's deemed under occupied?

You wouldn't forfeit but you would be "encouraged" to leave.

I know of domestic violence cases where the woman has had to flee but the abusive ex has kept the social housing property. Particularly awful given that the victims are left homeless and often put in substandard temporary accommodation.

I know its grotesque.

But is the situation for most women with violent partners.

They have to leave.

Have never heard of a violent man voluntarily moving out.

Its all part of the pattern of control.

Most women fleeing domestic violence end up in sub standard housing, or some shared accommodation where a woman with 3 children will be allocated one room.

It really shows the values a society had when there is a shortage, as we massively have in this country of affordable housing. How the allocations are made.

Sorry dont want to clog up this thread with the other thread about housing, but on re-reading it is likely he got the housing because (hard to imagine why) his daughter was to live with him. (Seems totally mad)

But once his daughter was taken into care or removed from him, technically he would forfit the flat as it would then be "under occupied".

But sounds a total mess. But I am afraid not uncommon.

re: Housing association landlord refusing to deal with dangerous neighbour

I'll take that statement at face value, but as someone who has been both as a tenant and tenant represetative, extremely rare because Councils nominate prospective HA tenants, and I find it hard to believe any Council would put forward someone straight from prison.(*)

Unless its an area with hardly any waiting list.

But yes, do totally unsuitable people end up being your next door neighbour? Unfortunately yes.

And do any of the authorities do anything about it. Very, very rarely.

At a recent meeting with local police, it was raised that a HA tenant had been "cuckooed" and there was blatant drug dealing that the police knew about and did nothing. It was only because a local reporter was present that they next day the police did act and it got turned into a major local news story, with no mention of course of the years of hell before, nor the tenant victim.

(*) I've now read the thread, and unfortunately it sounds like any number of housing situations - not always social housing. And the problem is (which I suppose does relate to this thread) is that no one person is responsible. Neither social or private landlords are support workers. So long as they are getting the rent each week they dont care. I know of so many people whose lives are in fact a daily misery because of neighbours. And isn't helped by cuts in funding to police, courts, social work. It is really depressing. Maybe it was like this in the past and just not recorded. But it seems to be happening more and more. Even if we had the prison space, would it be possible to lock up someone who is an unpleasant thug, makes people's lives a misery, if in the end it is just seen as a neighbour dispute.

Prisoners should jump housing queue to cut crime, says Sadiq Khan
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/09/13/sadiq-khan-prisoners-jump-housing-queue/
Can be read at https://archive.is/RhMtn

The reaction to this has been universaly hostile, because (as far as I am aware) no local authority would do this.

However, what is noticeable is the number of men who say this is fair. The prisoners (ie mostly men) should be given a chance. If only people helped them they would be nice useful members of society. I even heard some male say during a discussion even if it meant stopping a woman with children being housed. ie doing the right thing, continuing to care for your children, and staying within the law, should not be rewarded.

But as others pointed out, if this was to become policy, why bother putting yourself on a waiting list.

Just go out. Do a crime. Spend some time in prison, and then your reward will be council housing.

But as with everything else, the fact that women's needs are discounted, is of course not surprising.

Hotels seem to be the first point of access but do you mean they will continue to use that accommodation? What happens when they need to move out?

I think this was an off the cuff remark by a Minister because so many people were astonished that Labour would do something as irresponsible as they did.

I doubt they will do it as they wont want it to look like they didn't really plan for their headline lets get tough on rioters and put them in prison, and then thinking oh dear there's no room we will just have to have an emergency even earlier release, than we already had.

Wouldn't surprise me. It is now in the papers that Labour have admitted that they didn't do an assessment of the consequences of cutting the winter fuel allowances on pensioners.

They are acting more like the postue politics of SUs they people in charge of running the country as a whole.

I am amazed if any council with a waiting list of local people would allow a newly released prisoners to queue jump.

Public opinion and local newspapers would make their lives unbearable.

Are you seriously saying that a newly released prisoner is given a flat over and above someone local who has been waiting to be rehoused for years.

If anyone has any links to reports of this being done can you post them?

ie getting a self contained flat as opposed to being put in a hostel or the type of unregulated accommodation I tried to describe last night.

Thanks

I dont think anyone newly released from prison will get social or council housing.

The waiting lists are far too long and they would be a low priority in terms of need.

The will if lucky get some sort of accommodation in a hostel / homeless support service. (At one time, and verified prisoners being released were advised to get a tent!)

This is why as mentioned up thread the talk of the Government having to book hotel rooms - all because they wanted to flex their political muscle and send a message leaving probation services, housing departments and the prisoners themselves without anythin in place to deal with the crisis caused by Labour wanting to virtue signal.

And as a poster upthread said, many councils now, because of lack of central government funding, no longer have staffed hostels.

Instead they use what are called unregulated housing. Basically this could be house owned by and individual who converts the rooms in to bedrooms and then lets the to the council. So you could have someon who is a drug addict or dealer, and young person with no family support, a woman escaping sexual exploitation and women escaping sexual abuse being together.

And although the law has now been changed to say councils cant use them for young people, it still means vulnerable young adults and others are alone in an unsupervised mixed housing situation.

They had a name like rotating door or something, where police would regularly drop of vulnerable young women to her "accommodation" only for a few minutes later a pimp or pusher turn up to take her out for reasons none of us would like to happen to any woman.

There's a very authoritarian streak to Changed Labour, isn't there?

I think part of it is their desperate need to be acceptable to main stream media and big finance.

This seems to be translated into having domineering central control.

Whereas for year the Tories got away with being any number of warring groups running rings round their PM and the Speaker and leaking to the papers.

Of course the other part of it is that many parts of the Labour Party really hate each other, and use any dispute as an opportunity to get rid of their "enemies" to their particular set of politics.

So as Labour has spent the years in opposition not being the opposition but cleansing the party of those thought not to toe the line of the dominant group.

Really, really depressing.

In the end the party system works against MPs being primarily in the HoC to represent and support their constituents. Now Party loyalty takes precedence.

On a slightly different angle statement from Women in Prison about the impact on women prisoners being released early
https://womeninprison.org.uk/news/women-in-prison-statement-on-early-release-sds40-emergency-measures-september-2024

As quite a few of the men released early who were interviewed said it was inevitable with nothing being in place to support newly released prisoners they expected to be back in prison as lack of support meant they would re-offend within days.

So I imagine support services for women leaving prison are even more sparse.

But why worry about inconvenient details when Starmer can appear on tv and in papers flexing his iron control macho political muscle.

Voters should know their role is to be duly subservient and grateful.

Not being a Tory isn't a good enough reason to not be questioned.