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.

OP - I think your use of "celebrate" may have set the tone badly. I would think "thankful " would be a better term.

Your prob too old to get a mortgage now anyway. How much is the rent ?

I was under the impression that what was supposed to happen in these kinds of properties is not taxpayers subsidizing rent.

But rather, the state (or other organization like a housing association) builds and owns the properties, and then acts as a landlord, but on a non-profit basis.

So really you are just cutting out the middleman, the rentier who is making an additional profit off of housing, and relieves the pressures of the market to some extent. This keeps rents lowish.

But where costs of building are high, only so much.

Then there is the question of where the funding comes from for additional homes, and if market pressures are not a factor, you will be charging people in homes built at high expense times more. Or maybe you could spread out those costs among all, but that brings in other issues.

It's hard to see that rents could be static in this kind of system.

I don't profess to be in any way an expert in social housing and its beginnings, I do know that it was never available to all. DGP's (long since passed away) were locked out of social housing because they couldn't have the two children required to qualify (only one which nearly killed DGM) so there always have been limiters over who qualified and who didn't. On that basis it is about need and shouldn't be a hurdle to be met once and then you're in for life (and potentially the next generation too passing on a tenancy).

Kudos to you really, so many of us have done the 'right thing' gone to university, gained a decent wage and role, yet still can't afford to buy and struggle with the competitive rental markets. Why should we be punished and forced to live with family and friends etc. when we are the ones paying more in taxes and not impacting state and local costs by having multiple children with no proportional income. More young people who have gone about family and career the right way should be rewarded with access to social housing, it is only fair after all - the more you put into society, the more you should get back!

Well I’m sofa surfing. Can’t be housed through the council as emergency as they seem to think I have a place to lay my head so I’m fine. I work but I earn buttons. Private landlords won’t accept me as I’m too much of a risk due to my LOW income for their extortionate rent prices.

Lower rent prices would be amazing, I could move into my own place. Have private space with a door I could close. I could finally have my life back and space to recover from the depression my situation has caused. Cook actual food instead of living off convenience food from having too be as quick as I can and not in the way to bother people I’m staying with.

People will and have told you to stay where you are. But as you said you are paying less than 10% of your income on your rent.
Yes you are being selfish. But you won’t do anything about that. You just wanted to brag. But the reality is you are keeping people like me from accessing affordable housing, to be able to have a home in a world where we are already stuck in a loop of poverty we aren’t even able to get out of, we are just trying to survive through it.

The point of social housing is to give those who can least afford homes a better chance of having one. We as tax payers put in money into social housing for those in society who are least well off and in higher need.

It is so that we have a fairer society.

Are you fucking kidding? After what i posted you can bloody well see who is doing the gentrifying. And it aint the tenants FFS

Who do you think pays for the builds? The tax payers.
Who do you think enforces that new developments must have some social housing? The government so that those who can least afford it have some options for housing.

But we’re not arguing about gentrifying or who caused the housing crisis. We’re discussing whether it’s morally justifiable for a person with plenty of cash to stay in housing which is scarce and intended for those in need. You’re conflating the two scenarios.

Well OP probably forgot that social housing tenants are supposed to put other peoples kids before their own. Only the middle classes and the rich can put their own kids first amirite

Somewhat selfish, but what just about anyone in your position would do. I don't think social housing was every really intended to be a real option for all, surely was always about helping the poorest in society to keep a roof over their heads and bring them out of poverty. It was never ever going to be widespread enough to offer homes for all, even if it was ever marketed as that.

Now I see a lot of people in social housing who have made the most of it and built a good lifestyle for themselves, partly off the back of decades of subsidised rents. And lots of people who are in a far worse place these days with arguably a much higher need yet no availability - families living in hotel rooms etc, on friends sofas etc. I've also seen quite a lot of people game the system to get social housing priority, which seems morally a bit wrong.

Social housing should be about helping the poorest out of a hole and not about giving people an advantageous lifestyle for ever more. It's hardly fair that an otherwise equal household, but renting privately instead has so much less disposable income. Not to mention zero housing security - they can be evicted with a couple of months notice whilst a social housing tenant has a home for life. I think social housing tenancies should be reassessed every 5 years - the current tenant has to reapply and be assessed on their current circumstances.

OP was told she had the mind of a gentrifyer MY post was in reply to that

Gentrification HAS caused the housing crisis. Its not conflation so stop bloody gaslighting.

Social housing is such a scarcity that it should be for posters like SybilBranston people who both need it and would be able to vastly improve their lives from it. You have already done that now OP.

I don’t know much about your circumstances at the time of being given the tenancy but where I am from thousands are on out housing list and the majority of them don’t ever get housed. Did you wait for long OP, because I waited 14 years and barely gained any points. Even the single mothers didn’t get housing. And I’m talking about the 90’s not even the extremes that we are living in now.

Housing in this country is ridiculous, you might not consider yourself selfish but your post smacks of “I’m alright Jack”.

It's literally the definition of gentrifying. Please go look it up.

Its the developers who are gentrifying.

There is a hell of a lot of cognitive dissonance going on around this narrative. e,g ive seen posters on here saying that the minute a tenant earns above minimum wage they should buy or go into private rental and let someone who really needs it have the chance to rent their social home. Then the SAME posters moan that they wouldnt buy a property anywhere near a housing eatate because its too much like a ghetto When its what they were bloody insisting it should be

I posted that in 2019 Nothing changes on here

How much is your income?

In my area social rents start from about £400 to about £500.

If you are earning 10* that then you have 4-5K a month income?

In some areas you can't keep your social tenancy if you earn more than £50 000 and it sounds like you are probably above that.

All those who are saying OP should stay where she is and not feel guilty - how rich would someone have to be before you think they should give up their social housing? Is it OK for a multimillionaire to keep their council property?

Yes OP you asked the question because you know the answer!

You are spending less than 10% of your income on rent. By this point you’ve clearly got a massive deposit and a high income and you could afford to buy somewhere.

Instead of doing that you plan to hog the social house for the next 10/20/30 years?

Meanwhile round the corner from you will be a 6 person family sharing a two bed flat. A family with a dad sharing a bed with his son. A family housed in a hotel. A woman being abused and having no where else to go to get away. No it’s not your problem…. but are you part of the cause of the problem? For every day you stay in that house you are causing another family to stay in dire circumstances for another day. So whilst you sit there counting your gold and moving money between high interest accounts & ISAs maybe spare a thought for someone else.

Yes it would be lovely if we could all take advantage of the system. If only we could all have been Matt Hancock’s neighbour and got a multi million pound government contract to deliver fuck all in the pandemic. Small problem though… if we all take advantage and act like CF’s there’s nothing left for anyone else. There’s a word for this it’s called…. GREED! You are feeling guilty because you know you should. You’ve had a lovely ride, time to give the house back to someone who actually needs it!

Don't be silly. If they give up their social housing, they'll have to have responsibilities then.

To cut their own grass, to pay for their own boiler to be serviced, for a new cooker, if anything breaks, new carpets, new electrics, new pipes, if there's a leak they'll have to pay for a plumber.

But if they're in social housing it'll all be taken care of.

Go look at Kwajo Tweneboas Twitter feed.

Yes it's true that social housing is reserved for the vulnerable now because there isn't enough social housing but OP obviously got her name on the list when it was more plentiful.

She shouldn't be made to give it back or feel guilty because of a failing of the state to supply housing. If you had a council flat and started earning good money would you give it back and say 'oh sorry yes I'll be moving back into the shoddy, volatile, private rental market so I can pay five times the amount of rent.'

I don't think you would.

Tax payers do not fund commercial builds of new housing which is done entirely by property developers and / or housing associations themselves. There is no new building or property acquisitions being done by local authorities whatsoever. Very little new build homes go to social housing any longer (I live in an area that's been / still being 'gentrified' and live in a new build social housing flat. In the past a small percentage had to go to social housing, now none of it does. There are some units handed over as 'affordable housing' (it's not affordable) or 'shared ownership for key workers' which is very strictly regulated and also not cheap.

Social Housing is not 'tax payer funded' or 'subsidised' in any way at all, that is one of the biggest lies spread about social housing.

Personally, I believe social housing should be checked as to the income of the tenant and that if they become a high earner, wealthy, inherit, etc they should be asked to move onto shared ownership or another type of scheme. I do think it's morally and ethically wrong of wealthy people (such as certain MPs) to take up social homes, however, I commend the OP in being honest and don't blame them for their stance. Until there is legislation about upper income of tenants then the OP is completely entitled to live at ease.

By that logic everyone should give up their houses to give them to people more needy. Why don't you channel your energy at the state who have failed to supply housing rather than not picking at individuals who have done exactly the thing that the government designed social housing for. Or look at the private landlord's charging exorbitant amounts of money and taking government money from renters who are on benefits.

Social housing is not just for people on benefits
Most council housing (what is left of them) is not subsidised.
Government pay out far more money to private landlords than they do for social tenants.
Most social tenants pay their full rent as it’s affordable, where as many in private rent need HB so our taxes are still being spent on people’s rent regardless.
Secure housing is surely one of the most essential things we all need.
The housing crisis is caused by lack of affordable housing ,ridiculous house prices and insecure tenancies eg landlords evicting tenants etc.
Most peoples circumstances improve in time, but if your at risk of losing your security for doing that, then why would anyone bother?
And if they did, they would only end up being one of the needy, homeless ones again once (and that’s if their lucky enough to find one)landlord decides to sell.
Like it or not , the majority of people when faced with it , would choose security over uncertainty and that’s a fact.Your halo only shines when your not in that situation .