Keeping a UK Council property for life even though you no longer live in the UK

[Vintlet]

This story has just been released
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/clyxkeny8x6o
It seems so unfair given the lack of social housing in the uk that the First Lady of Sierra Leone expected to be allowed to keep her London social housing property as a pied a terre. Surely we cannot be expected to house the world. No one in authority would have realised given that she was still paying the rent if she hadn’t boasted about keeping it on a radio interview. I wonder how many people keep and sublet uk council properties when they no longer have a right to keep it.

You could argue that indirectly it costs taxpayers though. Because if the council house is being rented by someone who doesn't need it (need could be open to interpretation) then that means another family/person on a low income will need to receive housing benefit in order to afford a more expensive privately rented housem whereas if the council house was available they could pay the lower, fairer rent there and require less benefit.
Especially if the person with the council house tenancy owns another house which they rent at a higher rent to someone receiving housing benefit which of course goes straight to the council house tenant as the landlord.

Normally whistle blowers. Council tenants are always reporting their neighbours.

Most councils and HA don’t allow joint tenancies with anyone other than partners or spouses. I don’t think this is going to go the way you think it will.

I mean it’s brave of you to say that but that’s honestly not fair. Are you actually allowed to ´succeed’ a council home to a sibling ?

They wont. They will get a huge shock and be in the local rag with sad face about being evicted from a family home that was never theirs.

It’s absolutely crazy that it can be passed on at all unless it’s because the tenant has died and had a family member living with them and can proove it’s been a permanent abode . Surely you can’t just move out and let someone else have it??

My response was to a poster who was talking about keeping a council house in the family. A house that was given to them because they needed it. I suggested an assessment every 3-5 years, if they are able to afford privately or a mortgage then that council house should go to someone in need just as they were.

Nothing wrong with doing affordability checks for housing on the open market, this could be rented or mortgage.

Not really. I’m sure if there was a white, moderately well known British white pensioner bragging on a large public forum that they were living in Tenerife whilst still retaining their council house in the UK, then she/he too would be outed in the media. And rightly so. This isn’t about race, it’s about some self entitled arse thinking she can do what she likes with no consequences. And stupid enough to brag about it publicly.

That is my understanding of it all.
You can pass it on once, and that will usually cover a spouse.

But there is no sense in evicting someone who has just lost their spouse. Where would they go? The street?

Where is the profiteering in that?

Of course not if a spouse died . I actually covered that in my post.
I’m saying surely you can’t just move out and say I’m passing the flat to my sister who has never lived with me?

Yes, I agree. I don't think any council would allow that anyway, and rightfully so!

I’m sorry but that’s morally reprehensible. How do you feel about someone who is now in the position your daughter was in struggling in a B&B?

This is exactly why social housing need should be constantly reviewed and removed if means testing shows it’s no longer needed

Thevfurore is because
A/ she is very rich and doesn't need social housing and
B/ because she boasted about on a radio show.
It has zero to do with her being black- councils do not investigate this stuff unless their faces are pushed in it.
This woman is the leader of her country, and therefore rich and she boasted in public on the airwaves about fraudulently holding a social housing property- they had no choice but to investigate- she could have been as white as the driven snow, they would have had to investigate just the same.

That’s neither here nor there. People in private rents claim housing benefit (now UC housing element too) homeless families could be in their house as well

SAD TIMES 🥲 <wipes tear>

Ridiculous. Of course that should not be allowed.

And it shouldn’t be able to pass on either.

You live in it when in need or you don’t. Thats it.

No passing on, ever?

Of course not. Why you passing it on!

The only circumstances I can think where you can allow a temporary hold on disposal is that the children of tenants are orphaned and a caregiver moves in until they reach the age of adulthood or are means tested to be able to live independently

Passing on is exactly what has allowed generations of working class Brits prosper. I’m really sad that those same families have brought up their next generation to be so bitter, resentful and uniformed.

Interesting post upthread that Sweden tell their citizens what the state of finances is and how the social contract works. Unlike here where successive govt fall over themselves to appear generous.

Obviously there is increasing pressure on social housing when there are women (of whatever creed or colour) who never work, have no breadwinner or a low-earning one and have multiple children - who in turn will all be clamouring for social housing too!

So not from one spouse to another?

My dad died this year, and his tenancy was passed on to my mum. What would be the sense in evicting a pensioner who had just lost her DH of 40 years?

Or a widow/widower of any age.

I don’t understand what this means re Sweden.
In the uk we are also completely open and honest about state finances which are easily acceptable to anyone to read, analyse etc. anyone has the ability to become a local councillor etc and influence public spending.

what do you think Sweden tell people that we don’t?

Well, thanks, Zelda. Under your plan I'm getting evicted the year after next. I'll be 73 and even more disabled than I am now.

Or - how are you defining 'council tenancies'? Before my HA flat came up, I was in a privately rented place with the council paying my rent.

Are you evicting me in two years' time, or did you make me homeless three years ago already?

Why wouldn’t they be on the tenancy to begin with?

If they are married and they have lived their 10 years then go for it.

But you have to draw the line somewhere.

Many people cannot buy houses now full stop. We are in a state of serious problems with housing. You have young families who are moving after every year renting. That is not conducive to a child’s education.