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.

So you are suggesting she gives up her tenancy for life, and her cheap as chips rent, where she has a nice lifestyle and no money worries, and no repairs to fork out for ... to pay £1000 a month more for private let, (with no security of tenure!) in a place that is probably a shithole (like many private lets.) OR she takes on a mortgage possibly costing £1000 a month more, with 1000s of £££ of repairs and no way of paying the mortgage if she is unable to work! (Risking her losing her home!)

ALL so someone else can be in the fortunate position she is in now?

STOP!!!!!! STOP STOP STOP!!!!!!!😆 My sides are splitting!!! 😂

Yes you are selfish. Surely you know perfectly well that the whole point of council housing, at taxpayers' expense, WAS to provide housing for those who could not afford to buy or rent privately. However it seems that there are many like you who abuse it. Should be means tested every few years at least, the idea of tenancy for as long as you like is wrong.

MN......... Social housing should only be for those in desperate need.

Also MN..........Im not buying a house near the social housing estate That place is a right ghetto.

The cognitive dissonance is off the charts!

I think the system should have some incentive to push those that have high incomes out, so maybe with household incomes of say £60k it should become market rent and at say £100k it should be above market rent. However, as long as the system is as it is, and it will probably never change, you may as well look after your family.

I don’t find children being homeless in the least bit amusing.

I’m not suggesting that. But to “celebrate” that she’s blocking access to social housing for poorer families waiting to use a system OP herself has used to “better” herself is pretty crass and poor taste.

I agree that I wouldn’t qualify with my current circumstances, but that doesn’t mean I’ve played the system. If I’d not improved my lot, people would seemingly be fine with that. Strange.

Imagine someone who received benefits when they were ill or jobless, but now is healthy or has a well paid job, still receiving those benefits because they were awarded “for life”.

All other forms of benefits stop if you improve your lot - because benefits are for people who need them, not those who used to need them a while back. Same should apply for subsidised council rents IMO.

I appreciate there needs to be stability so you can’t just kick people out because they are no longer top of the list, but an assessment every 5 years or so with a generous notice period would be entirely fair. Alternatively as a PP suggested you could stay put but be expected to pay market rates, then the extra income could go to help house others elsewhere.

For me, social housing is there as a safety net for those who need it to survive . Imo there are needier people than you who need it, even if you did once need it. Time to move on.

John Boughton (author of Municipal Dreams The Rise and Fall of Council Housing) on the welfarisation of council housing.

//www.insidehousing.co.uk/insight/the-rise-and-fall-of-council-housing-56139

Inthe 1980s, residualisation may have been a partly unintended consequence of housing policies pursued with varying ideological intent

Since 2010, and more so since the return of single-party Conservative government in 2015, we’ve seen something further: welfarisation – ‘a conception of social housing as a very small, highly residualised sector catering only for the very poorest, and those with additional social “vulnerabilities”, on a short-term “ambulance” basis

You can laugh at vulnerable people on a waiting list for a home that OP is blocking all you like. It makes you crass too. And no worse than the Tories using loop holes to protect their hoarded cash.

Whatever helps them sleep at night

There is nothing wrong with living a good and happy life. Obviously housing in this country is horrifically expensive and so many people will find your situation in comparison to their own really painful. Very few people qualify for social housing now.

We need more social housing.

Erm okay - so who subsides social housing if it isn't the tax payer?

👏👏👏

Secure housing should be a right not a privilege. That there are so many people without secure, safe, pleasant, affording housing is a national scandal. But it’s not the OP’s scandal. You’d be better off looking to the current government, heir to Margaret Thatcher who sold off much of our social housing if you are looking for someone to blame.

We do need more and we certainly won’t get it while rich family’s who don’t need social housing hold on to what little housing stock is left.

If that's what communism actually is pass me the manifesto and sign me up! 😅

@FreshWinterMorning who do you think pays for the OP's housing subsidy? do you think it's the super rich or corporations? or do you think it's the squeezed middle class and those paying tax who are barely above minimum wage.

From an old post of mine.

The Elephant and Castle neighbourhood is being physically, socially and ethnically transformed. This started with the demolition of the Heygate estate, a classic for stigmatised perceptions of council housing and the people who live in it. As the local 35% Campaign has meticulously documented, a succession of promises to Heygate residents were broken to arrive at a situation where 1,214 council homes were demolished, to be replaced with 2,704 new homes, of which only 82 (3%) are for social rent. The HA partner was London and Quadrant. To be eligible for the cheapest one-bedroom home built by them on the Heygate site, people needed a minimum household income of £57,500. The average household income in that part of Southwark is £24,324

1,214 social homes were demolished and replaced with 82.

ITS NOT TENANTS CAUSING THE FUCKING PROBLEM

I dont agree with this. I was a care leaver and was given a council flat at 20 after living in supported accommodation and hostels for 2 years. I lived in social housing for 10 years while I got my shit together, studied and eventually got into the career I wanted. Then at 30 I bought my own place with my partner, because that was always the goal and the next stage of my life. I dont feel like lifetime tenancies should be a thing, yes there are some people with enduring mental health issues or disabilities that will need it for ever but not everyone? I had plenty of friends with young kids living in b&bs so no I don't think it's right. For the majority there should be a fixed term of tenancy or a review of circumstances.

I really don't get how/why posters are saying that "they are subsidising your rent". You do know that housing associations charge enough rent to cover the costs of the repairs, regeneration and new developments? So where are your taxes coming into this?

Also, it's not really as easy to just buy a house or even rent one on the private market. At the age of 45 you'd have to have a huge deposit to lower the term of your mortgage enough to be able to afford the monthly repayments and have it over a term that finished before retirement.

See I don’t understand comments like this. I’m not blaming Op for the housing crisis but I suppose I am blaming her for not affording others the chance she was given herself. Can’t you see the difference?

Definitely, rough council estates would soon improve if more families like yours lived on them. Higher earners would spend more to make their homes look nice and their children would statistically be better behaved.

I'm not against the idea of social housing for a high proportion of people, but I think it needs to be based on a proportion of income, and also people need to be prepared to move to nearby properties when their household complement changes. Otherwise you will have a need to build huge numbers of 3 bedroom homes.

Otherwise it's not likely to be sustainable.

That's the downside, or one downside, of this kind of state funded benefit. It will give people some stability and a level of dignity in their circumstances, and you will avoid gouging from landlords - but you will have less control over your home. Because it's not yours, it's an asset of the community, not just you personally.

Yes you’re doing the poor such a great job of showing them how to checks notes rob from the poor to feed the rich.

The estate will look ever so much better now.