Council's paying thousands per month in rent for substandard accommodation in London - is this fair to the tax payer and the fmaily?

[mids2019]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cly21w7qewvo

Noticed this story in the news but what struck me as well as the ghastly toilet was the fact the council was paying 2,500 Linda in rent for the property. I love outside of London and a 1K mortgage seems on the high end of things in my local town. It seems bizarre that councils are paying such money to private landlords given their already squeezed finances but I guess there is no other option in London.

Could it be that is a fairer solution to offer accommodation outside the capital of rents are so high or should local councils try and minimise local emergency housing costs but be at the mercy of slum landlords?

They need council housing. Right to buy has done this, as well as lack of restriction on rental costs. The bill for housing benefit is an absolute joke.

Isn't it the tax payer that is being fleeced? There must be something wrong in a system where a landlord seeks up presumably making a large profit and then the tenant has to find somewhere unsuitable with again the landlord being the benefactor to the tune of 2.5K per month?

I suppose one other question is whether the poor can afford to live in our capital?

This is the outcome of rtb,it should have never happened in the first place.

These cases are always difficult. Yes, London is expensive and families could be housed more affordably in better accommodation outside the capital. I believe some councils already offer this. But housing is only one part of the equation for people - the other part is being near family and support networks, transport links (especially if you don't drive or can't afford a car), community facilities, not having your kids uprooted from their schools (which if you're on a low income or in challenging circumstances, is about more than just your kids' education, it's also a source of support). And of course certain ethnic minorities will have understandable fears about racism and social isolation if they move away from locations with established communities from which they can draw support.

I suppose you could argue that other people have to suck it up and move so why shouldn't they, but if you have very little and life is always a challenge, your resilience is likely to be low just from having so much on your plate to deal with the whole time. It's not good for kids to have depressed and overwhelmed caregivers who are isolated from the communities they live in, so if you are going to move people away from established support networks, there should be some sort of relocation support in place rather than "off you go, here's the keys".

Another characteristic opener from you, mids.

People on lower incomes often earn those incomes in London/major cities. If you clean offices or work on the transport network (driving, signalling, checking tickets) or serve in a city central coffee shop, then you need to get to that job before it starts/home after it finishes, and you can’t do that if transport from outside the city can’t get you into work in time.

London needs to be building absolutely tons of housing, seriously. Taller and denser.

So many areas near Tube stations that are full of small two-storey buildings.

'The poor'
'Our capital'
Is the you Marie Antoinette? Or a reporter from a scum medium?
How bloody tone-deaf, patronising and victim blaming

Can you beat economics though? Will there always be a demand from the taxpayer in these situations to find appropriate accomodation and land lords will charge for the penguin of the house. Unless we completely redraw our economy especially for the low paid and somehow not allow house price inflation will it not be the case that some cities especially London do become more unaffordable? If rent is 2.5K per month i.e. £30K per year then a cleaner may find it difficult to realistically live near their employment and we have a situation of housing benefit supporting land lords and subsidising cleaning employers for low pay. There must be a limit to house inflation somewhere.

Poor as in not rich and our capital as the capital of the UK. Unless someone wishes to redefine poverty or admit it doesn't exist?

How do you make denser i.e. taller bindings in London without the developers wanting huge amounts for the build? Developers want the maximum from their house or flat sales and they certainly can charge top dollar for luxury apartments. I agree more housing is needed but we would need a state/council solution? Also an end to right to buy as this would be easy profiteering .

Councils should work together such that they can support each other on housing issues, my friend works for a housing company and they are always begging families to take properties, very nice places and they say no! Many houses remain empty.

@mids2019 . Once you throw childcare into the equation, the reality is that you have a trade-off between distance from work, rent costs and the cost of childcare. There is zero use telling a parent trying to hold down a low-paid job, "well you'll have to leave at 6am and get back at 8pm then, because we can't afford to house you closer to your work" if actually their kids' school/nursery doesn't open until 8am and shuts at 6pm. What you're really doing if you house lower income families miles from infrastructure and transport links is severely limiting the ability of at least one parent to work.

So are you saying that it doesn't matter if none of the low paid jobs in expensive areas get done? No cleaners, no hairdressers, no delivery drivers, none of it? Because of you're suggesting that the people who do those jobs shouldn't live close enough to do those jobs because it's too expensive for them, then how do you think the jobs will get done?

I think rent caps should be introduced so that there is some sort of control.

I’m saying that people should move areas and that includes finding a job in the said area, what is the point living in London in poor quality areas just to do a low paid job? The low paid jobs are everywhere too. Yes I understand family but they can travel to see each other.

How?

The amount of housing benefit can be (and is) capped. But if I have someone willing to pay £1k pcm for my flat and someone who has HB of £800pcm, I will let it to the former. Especially if I had to remortgage post trussonomics and my payments went up from £750 to £900.

I thinks it's a system which make the land lords quite wealthy that needs looking at. Of course any city needs employees on below average wage and thisbwillnalways be the case in a capitalist society. I guess the argument presented against rent control is that but is state interference in the market; if I buy a house what should I be limited in the amount of rent I receive?

Another problem is that ultimately it is the taxpayer paying the housing benefit so isn't this a tax payer subsidy in ensuring we have system where people of all incomes can realistically live in the city? I don't think the council is at fault here but rather an economic system that is failing.

By the way I hope the landlord does repair the toilet but doesn't that in self show the problems of a rental system where land lords are remote and possibly actively engage to minimise their repair bills!

Ok - but then, who does the cleaning and road sweeping and nursery work and hospital portering in London? Of course, any given person/family can move out, but the jobs tied to location still need doing.

So you're saying that expensive areas (like, I don't know, the whole of London) don't need any of the low paid jobs to be done, then?

The post is about housing and one’s choices on what quality of life they choose. The business owner will always find a staff replacement, But your health will never be replaced if one starts suffering due to poor living conditions.

Nurses, cleaners, carers, refuse workers, shop workers etc...... nah London doesn't need any of those...... 🤦‍♀️

Of course these people should all move out of London, and just leave it to the rich and elite. I'm sure the rich and elite will soon move out though when their bins aren't emptied, there is no one to stock their supermarket shelves and then that do you do? They all move to Surrey and then the poor people have to move out of Surrey and the same thing happens again over and over and over again.

New York has managed rent control for decades. England haven't managed it at all and it's shocking.

I watched the BBC report on this. They were - quite rightly - rehoused, but that shouldn't have to be as the result of a council being shown up on national television. This was a working family, placed hours from the man's work and the children's school. That poor woman. Imagine cooking next to that bathroom?

I also feel for the councils. There is nowhere to house people. I do think the government must now fund them to build more social homes where homes are needed. If people are decently housed many will be working, doing jobs that need to be done, paying rent and contributing to the economy.

Hear hear!

Health and wellbeing should come first surely, how can one live in a horrid situation just to hold down a low paid job? The council should also have an expectation on houses they can pay rent on if a landlord isn’t meeting the safety and maintenance requirements then they should withhold rent. Apart from that paying 2500 on rent is too high they aught to have a cap.

Well they won't if nobody living in the area can afford to take those jobs!