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.

My understanding is that the breach of contract was that the council house was no longer Fatima’s primary place of residence (and indeed, hadn’t been for sometime).

And these people will no doubt be the ones complaining about ‘the system’ and its failures whilst milking it for themselves and being a huge part of the problem 🙄 it’s bloody laughable

I only moved into my property at the start of last year and was told it is mine as long as I want it. I won't be moving now unless I'm turfed out in the future but my tenancy is a secure one so they don't seem to be offering limited ones in my area yet.

The whole point, post war, of the council houses is that they were intended to be dignified affordable housing for ordinary people to make their homes and lives in. They weren't meant to be emergency housing for the poorest
So I can understand where the mindset of not wanting to move out comes from. I don't think it's older people being selfish. I have had difficult.conversations with a parent who lives in their own (massive and unsuitable) house they own and they don't want to downsize either. Even though it would bring them closer to family. It's hard because I think older people can feel hassled/having choices removed from them just for being old.
But it's a problem when there just aren't the properties available for younger families wanting the same future the generations before had.

I completely agree.

The only reason I have mine is because my son is disabled and it became an emergency as whilst I could afford my private rental, it just wasn't at all suitable for him.

Yeah, it's that attitude that will stop us fixing our issues. I understand why you're doing it but everyone thinking like that is why we can't reverse the damage. Well, without something serious, like a civil war. No, I am not advocating for that, just explaining that I know there is 'a' way. Also, someone might need it more urgently than your family so it's quite selfish. But we have been forced to be selfish, haven't we.

I agree with the original poster, we need inspections or a registration system like in Germany, when you move in to a property. Councils shouldn't be allowing this and that's on them, not you.

🤞🏼🤞🏼

Yep, DM was told she could look into swaps if she wanted to downsize, but there is a shortage of smaller properties. My cousin waited 8 years to get a tiny one bed flat in a high rise.
DM has lived in her house for 40 years, has a big dog and loves her garden. Her family and support network are there. She is not going to want to move into a rabbit hutch 12 floors up.

How did she get a council property in the first place? I imagine there are more deserving cases than her@

She got the property in 2007, when she was 26/27, working and living in London and bringing up two children.

She met her second husband in 2012, do not know if she was a single parent in 2007 but presumably was at some point during her tenancy, if not before.

Why do you “imagine there were more deserving people” at the time? NB - Southwark’s housing stock at that time was 35% council housing vs 9% as the National average.

Oh....

For all the posters who are shocked at the various stories about social housing fraud, the 2025 Report makes concerning reading.
It only refers to London which has 300 plus Housing Associations. They all operate differently and do not share data. In the past 10 years detecting housing fraud has fallen by 40%. It is much harder to detect and recover social properties than it used to be.
A key finding is that properties recovered from tenancy fraudsters to homeless families in temporary accommodation is both faster and more cost effective than building new homes.
All of the posters confidently asserting that tenancies are changing and no one will be able to get away with fraud could not be more wrong. Central government needs to get involved and create a body that could monitor Housing Associations allocation and tenancy fraud. Until that happens the situation will just get worse. All of the families in emergency BnBs could be housed overnight if HAs could recover the properties being fraudulently lived in. The situation has got much much worse. There is no transparency about Housing Association allocation. Often, it is up to the discretion of individual HA staff.
Thanks to @SheilaFentimanfor providing the original link. Do read the report, It is frightening how mismanaged social housing is.

Link to the 2025 Report into Housing Fraud in London
https://barnet.moderngov.co.uk/documents/s89562/Appendix%20C%20-%20Tenancy%20Fraud%20London%202025.pdf

I'm not shocked - but I also think that tenants have a role to play in preventing mismanagement - i.e. not hogging it for all of their progeny, that's an issue too.

There's also been cuts in the budgets and therefore staff levels of the departments that would have responsibility for overseeing this sort of thing and detecting fraud. I also suspect the shift to presumably more disparate agencies hasn't helped. It's that mindset of "these people can't all be doing important things, we'll .save money by trimming the fat" "oh no, the things those people were meant to prevent have increased. Clearly everyone involved is lazy/incompetent and a waste of resources".... "Cuts department"

I think the hogging tenant on this thread is not going to get what they want anyway.

I really hope that you are right. Tough times are tough enough without people being unremittingly selfish and amoral.

@Vintlet I agree, there should be some sore of intervention to better monitor fraud. The problem is, that costs money even if it saves it in the long run, and some are primed to see any additional public spending as inherently wasteful. It's like not fixing a broken roof tile to save money and then a year later the rotten attic floor collapses costing multiples more to fix.

I didn’t have time to read the whole report, just the summary at the front, but I think one of the key requests was for specialist investigators. This is probably an area where the facts on the ground of individual boroughs/LAs being responsible for the housing is counterproductive as an investigation team working across a few neighbouring areas might well be more effective/value for money.

The crazy thing is the report clearly says it is much cheaper and easier to recover fraudulent housing tenancies than build new homes. However as @Persephonia1966says there just isn’t the will to spend money on recovery. As @SheilaFentimansays the right thing is to appoint a group of specialists to work across a group of Housing Associations. No one in government is suggesting this they just bang on about building new homes many of which will fairly quickly disappear from housing stock.It’s all wrong and so many people will suffer as a result.

You're lucky if you can do that. In my area a tenancy can only be passed on once.

@HiEarthlingsThe fact is though, it is discretionary. I know a girl I used to teach, her mother and father both lived in their very nice three bedroom council ( now HA) semi with a large garden. When they died, some years after each other, she inherited the tenancy. She had moved back with her small daughter to care for them. She and her now husband have professional jobs. By staying on in their house, they can afford to help their three kids buy. Their family have been in the house over fifty years ( she has much older brothers). They are good tenants. You might claim that tenancies can only be passed on once but in the end it is down to the discretion of the Housing Officer. I know a few people who have had the tenancy passed on more than once. To be fair they are all worthy tenants in their own right and I think a Housing Officer will see the tenancy in safe hands. Housing Association officials have more discretionary powers than the old council officers. If an HA housing officer sees a family that will be made homeless if they are evicted from an established tenancy, even if it has already been passed down once, they generally allow the family to stay. Another acquaintances moved back home when her mother developed dementia. She fought hard to get her mother into care and succeeded. Because her mother was a council tenant , care was paid for. The HA then tried to evict the daughter and reclaim the tenancy. The daughter was able to show that she would be homeless if evicted so she was allowed to takeover the tenancy. The notion that a tenancy can only be passed on once is discretionary but if it is clear that someone inheriting a tenancy, even though it has been passed down once, is in need, eg has a family is elderly etc they will generally be allowed to stay on. I agree that the woman boasting her family will pass it round amongst themselves will be unlikely to inherit the tenancy. However, a family member returning to support an elderly parent or a family member who has returned to live with a parent because of DA or because they are homeless will almost certainly be allowed to take on the tenancy. Most of us can accept that as reasonable. It is why hard and fast rules don’t apply and it often up to the discretion of the HA housing officer. In case of this kind of need, few people would object.
illegal subletting and passing a property around within a family is very different and should be treated harshly.

Just to reiterate the finding of a major report into tenancy fraud from 2025. If all the illegal HA/Council tenancies could be recovered in London there would be no need for families to be in emergency BNBs. It would be much cheaper and quicker to increase the housing stock by doing this than by building new properties. However, because the huge number of HAs in London (300+) which operate independently and do not share data, it is very hard to crack down on tenancy fraud which is why there are so many sub lets

It has a be a panel in exceptional cases, not on a whim of a single housing officer.

Please tell me where this is - I'm a journalist, would love to investigate! [email protected]

In cases of need like the ones I highlighted most people ( including me) have no objection to tenancies being passed on more than once. Just out of interest, when you talk about a panel does that apply to all HAs? From reading the 2025 report it seems that the emergence of HAs has been a disaster in keeping track of illegal sublets.
Do all HAs apply the same rules? I will find the quote from the report that says there is no longer transparency in housing allocation because the HAs all operate differently