High joint income and in social housing with no plans to buy. Celebrate or selfish?

[SocialHousedNHappy]

I’ve been wondering about for some time and completely understand the dire and desperate situation that many people and families find themselves in. But… I hate the way that social housing is seen as only for the most desperate, when it was introduced as a housing option for all.

My household brings in a healthy income and we pay less than 10% to our monthly rent. This means we get enjoy a modest lifestyle and put some money aside for adult DC for when they’re older - they can then choose to buy whatever they fancy, car, house deposit, uni, whatever as will be their choice.

I hate that people seem to think that I should give up my secure tenancy and move into private rent. Looking on rightmove, a comparable house would be around 3x what I’m currently paying in rent, and to be honest, I wouldn’t move to private rented ever again. But why do people react as thought I’m doing something wrong, in the same way as they think of benefit cheats? I think the govt should be put under pressure to build more social housing - proper social housing, rather than the current situation where people are pit against each other and blaming each other for what is clearly a government failing.

I don’t want to sound like I’m gloating, because I’m not, but I don’t see why I should feel bad and not celebrate the life and comfort that my social housing has allowed me to enjoy.

I’m genuinely interested to hear if anyone agrees and feels the same.

Erm...well, the housing is rented out to tenants, who pay a monthly amount to the landlord. Obviously.

Actually the council rents are set at a level to make a profit, which used to go to the council, but nowadays goes to central government instead, so council tenants effectively pay extra tax compared to the rest of us.

Namechanged as I’m in a similar situation.

I was homeless and under employed when I got a lifetime tenancy on a new build in a gorgeous village with great schools. My rent is half market rent currently.

Since moving in, I’ve had significant pay rises and met my fiancé. I work part time because we can afford it. We have nice holidays and savings as a result of the very affordable rent. I’m staying put at least until kids leave home, then I’ll look for a house swap to something new.

Our lifestyle would be miserable if we had to pay market rent or a mortgage here.

Erm, you're getting people to pay your enormous debt for you.

So if I buy a house to rent it out, and charge rent at council level, will I make a profit?

Erm, the people get to live in a flat they can’t afford to buy.

Exactly. There are so many people here who are either disturbingly either misinformed or wilfully ignorant about very basics of the country they live in.

And so so desperate to insist everyone lives to their individualist ideal, rather than live cooperatively with publicly owned housing so that a basic human right is available to all.

The point is, you're taking advantage of their need for shelter by charging them extremely high amounts, in order to cover your debts.

I do not blame the tenants at all. Who does not want to live cheaply? Who wants to pay full market value? Noone. Market value is simply too high for many. But it is what it is. I do not want to punish anyone. I just do not think it is ok for people to be sitting pretty with cheap rent in houses the taxpayer owns while we pay through the nose to accommodate people who need it more in shit holes. It makes no sense.

@Butterytwigusedforjam

Second home owners and private landlords I would put in the same basket as the OP. However, the thread is not about that.

There seems to be confusion here and tbf there are clearly lots of different types of housing and tenancies available.

OP has said she used to earn way less and she’s since moved her boyfriend in. Presumably when she was either a single mum or very low paid she was put as high priority and given a lifetime tenancy.

As others have said lifetime tenancies are designed so that low income families aren’t being forced to move around continuously and can have security. They are able to end the tenancy at any time if they wish to.

Who paid for the house to be built? OP hasn’t said how old the house is but likely this was funded by taxpayer money. Who owns the land? The local council.
Who pays for the local council? The taxpayer.

OP’s rent probably does cover the basic costs of the house if it’s old and was built when the land was cheap. So potentially it’s not directly subsidised. As long as the rent uplifts cover the maintenance cost then ‘technically’ it’s not subsidised.

However, OP’s local council will have a waiting list of hundreds or even thousands of people who have urgent housing needs. We’ve heard lots of stories on here - couples and single mums having to live in hostels. There is a huge homeless issue worse than ever before. Who is paying the £8m I mentioned before as the DAILY government hotel bill? It’s the tax payer again! Who pays for the local authority to have to do the admin of all this? It’s the tax payer.

Our government is broke as a result of foolish policies such a right to buy and being inept. It can no longer afford to build enough houses and it’s harder to do so with spiralling costs and land shortages. Instead it has to pay for short term private sector accommodation which costs the government a fortune and doesn’t solve the problem, meaning it now has less money. The circle continues with council taxes having to be hiked year after year.

If all the people moved out of LA homes they didn’t need it would free up the space for all the people who desperately do need it. The bill for the housing in hotels/private rentals would reduce. The housing crisis would ease, people would get their lives back and be relieved from years on a wait list. We could all pay less tax.

What happens to OP? She’s had a huge help from the government when she needed it which was great. Now it’s someone else’s turn. She buys a house with her family which she has been able to save to buy as a result of her very cheap rent. She is happy knowing she has a great place to live.

Obviously OP isn’t totally to blame for the crisis. However, she is being a drain on public resources and she is part of the reason all of our council tax and income tax is the highest it’s ever been.

I would love it if we had a totally different society. But we don't. I would live people to live cooperatively and for appropriate housing to be a basic right. But we cannot. This is simply not the society we have created. It cannot be achieved either. It really cannot. Who would fund it? We do not have the money to turn the tide. We cannot properly educate our children. We cannot look after our elderly. We cannot treat the people who need the NHS. So we do not have the ability to offer social housing to any but the most needy.

There are no quick fixes. Massive change would be needed to live in a different society. But in the meantime, we can put needy families in the social housing we have. Or we can raise the rents on social housing to that of market value, except for those who genuinely cannot afford it. We could use the profit to build more social housing.

But we should absolutely not be subsidising higher earners to block our shared real estate while also shelling out stupid sums on emergency housing.

Yet, despite a few posters stating that there’s no shortage of social housing where they live, and being housed in a matters of WEEKS, not one person enquired about where those areas are? Unless I missed it.

Empty housing, over-inflated private rentals, multiple house-owners, stupidly out of control market house prices are ignored. Instead people are happily bashing me and social housing tenants in similar situations like it’s a legitimate sport. Ok then.

Most of those people with "urgent housing needs" have only themselves to blame for their abysmal choices.

Why should OP's upstanding, tax paying family get the shaft so that we can accommodate irresponsible, imprudent non contributors???

This!

OP, you surely must have expected responses like you have been getting when you wrote your post

@LaurieStrode . What do you base your facts on ? Do you know these families and their problems to be so sure ?

@SocialHousedNHappy

You posted (I thought) because you couldn’t understand why people thought you were doing anything wrong. Some posters have given their opinion on why they think it is wrong. So now you know. You don’t have to agree, no one is coming round yours with a pitchfork. There are a myriad other more pressing issues. But you asked and people responded.

So many AIBU seem to be more ‘I am right and I want to argue with someone who thinks I am not’. Odd behaviour. Almost as odd as engaging with it and posting on the threads….

I think it is selfish. I also think the government should regularly review eligibility and need on a semi regular basis, and evict those who can afford private rents to make way for those who are more in need.

However, with the world the way it is and society having lost its way, I'd be doing the same thing in your shoes for my own family. So I don't blame you, even though I think it is wrong.

I wouldn't be bragging about it to friends, or on SM. I'd keep quiet.

I want to know why people think social tenants not giving up their properties are the biggest factor in the housing issue?

I can't afford a mortgage even though I am on a relatively healthy income for my area because I am a single parent. Less than a decade ago someone like me would have been able to get a mortgage on a modest home. Less than 2 decades ago someone on my wage (factoring in inflation) would have been able to get a very comfortable home.

A few years ago I could have comfortably afforded private rents. Now, I could afford it, if I needed to but it would be far from comfortable. Rent has increased from approx £380 pcm for a 3-bed terrace to £700-800 pcm in just a few years.

Now, that is possibly because of people blocking social housing but it is more likely to do with buy-to-let LL, mostly from the SE, buying up huge portfolios of "cheap housing" and artificially inflating house prices so that people like me cannot afford them.

Ditto the SE, prices are being massively inflated by overseas investors buying up property they intend to leave empty and holiday home owners.

Why not means test? You don't seem to have an answer for that. I think you don't want to know the very obvious answer.

I actually think most people have been very gentle; considering that you only started this thread as a "F U" look what I've lucked into through no work of my own. . Sucks to be you, I'm off to celebrate!
There was no other point. Nobody decided to start "bashing " social housing tenants. You seem to take some glee from starting a fight that wasn't there ( well where I live). Perhaps the guilt is getting to you?
We get it. You have cheap rent and a lifetime tenancy. YAY?
You got anything else to offer the world.

Move on people. Nothing to see here.

No that's not the whole idea. If you were offered cheap rent you would take it in a heartbeat

Thank you. I've felt the post was never anything but a lame attempt to rub people's noses in the fact that, due to nothing remarkable on the OP's part, they get to live a life much better than anyone else in their wage group. They are loving the fact that they have this; but I wonder if the government could change the rules, as they need to be changed; and not just for future "gives" but for past also. If people are going to "use" the rules for their benefit and the detriment of others, then the rules need to be changed.

Assuming council's books are balanced at the moment if the OP paid market rates simplistically the council taxes would come down - the council wouldn't need as much from tax payers.
But why don't you think its should be means tested OP- given thats how you got it in the first place?