Page 29 | Keeping a UK Council property for life even though you no longer live in the UK

Vintlet · 2026-06-12T13:42:02+00:00

This story has just been released [[https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/clyxkeny8x6o 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.

ChardonnaysBeastlyCat · 15/06/2026 08:44

Vintlet · 15/06/2026 08:40

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

It needs to be done for all cases where discretion applies.

Original poster

Vintlet · 15/06/2026 08:46

@JournalistEmily.This is what the 2025 Report noted
‘The system is deeply vulnerable to tenancy fraud. In areas of high demand like London, allocation has become a difficult rationing process rather than a transparent system'.
**
I would love you to deny this because it seems so utterly wrong. If you are a journalist perhaps you should be campaigning for more transparency?

OP posts:

Original poster

Vintlet · 15/06/2026 08:47

Sorry I couldn’t get my phone to drop the Bold on the paragraph to you

OP posts:

BooneyBeautiful · 15/06/2026 10:54

Vintlet · 15/06/2026 07:37

@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.

That reminds of a situation regarding a woman I have met in recent months. She lived in a Council house with her husband and their son. It was a joint tenancy. I gather she subsequently had an affair and moved out. She signed the tenancy over to her husband, so then it had been passed down once. The affair ended and her husband became ill, so she moved back to care for him. He then died. The Council wouldn't let her stay in the house, so gave her a one bed flat the other side of town. By then, her son was an adult, so he was given his own one bed flat also the other side of town.

It's quite a complicated scenario, but at least neither herself nor her son found themselves homeless. From what I can gather they are both quite happy with their respective homes.

MikeRafone · 15/06/2026 12:50

BooneyBeautiful · 15/06/2026 10:54

That reminds of a situation regarding a woman I have met in recent months. She lived in a Council house with her husband and their son. It was a joint tenancy. I gather she subsequently had an affair and moved out. She signed the tenancy over to her husband, so then it had been passed down once. The affair ended and her husband became ill, so she moved back to care for him. He then died. The Council wouldn't let her stay in the house, so gave her a one bed flat the other side of town. By then, her son was an adult, so he was given his own one bed flat also the other side of town.

It's quite a complicated scenario, but at least neither herself nor her son found themselves homeless. From what I can gather they are both quite happy with their respective homes.

Show quote history

Rules on tenancy and legacy tenancy will vary between council & the council area I live in doesn't do discretionary. The rules are set and not moved on tenancies to avoid discrimination cases etc. So ive know a live in boyfriend have to move out when his dp died as the tenancy was in her sole name - not his or her late teenage age children, so they were rehoused in adequate bedroom properties

FlyingCatGirl · Yesterday 07:17

flowerfam · 14/06/2026 13:02

You could say that about any house you are likely to inherit.

Show quote history

Not really, it's not a given because I could lose my inheritance if my mum ever needs to go into a care facility and the government make us sell her house to pay for it!

FlyingCatGirl · Yesterday 07:25

Vintlet · 15/06/2026 07:37

@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.

For me, council housing should be means tested, it shouldn't be used so someone on a good wage can have the luxury saving lots of money! They are supposed to be for people that would struggle to put a roof over their heads otherwise!

Crikeyalmighty · Yesterday 09:08

Persephonia1966 · 14/06/2026 19:57

@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.

ive always said this is the problem in the UK - compared to the couple of years we had in Copenhagen - Britain suffers from ‘can’t be arsed ‘ syndrome and that’s what’s lead to the rise of the right wing ( ironically plenty who cheat the system themselves too) - it was never about the EU, Denmark was red hot on constant checks on people who had no right to be there, fraud, etc - that’s why so much was digital , be it access to healthcare, renting housing etc - jobs , paying for goods and services- I’m convinced ‘some ‘have a big issue because they are doing dodgy stuff - hiding cash, cash in hand , subletting etc - UK just won’t pay out to police what needs policing and some of the public who are very keen on cuts aren’t so keen when it means they might get looked at

WiddlinDiddlin · Yesterday 09:18

FlyingCatGirl · Yesterday 07:25

For me, council housing should be means tested, it shouldn't be used so someone on a good wage can have the luxury saving lots of money! They are supposed to be for people that would struggle to put a roof over their heads otherwise!

Show quote history

Its a nice idea but if you do that, then you give people a disincentive to earn more, save, generally do better.

So that's another reason to stay on benefits, stay on a low income, don't save etc.

Appreciate it might stop people on a decent wage already from getting a place, but plenty of people on a decent wage are still in need of housing that is beyond their financial means - housing is and should be provided according to need.

beingtakenforafool · Yesterday 10:05

council housing was meant to be a home for life to give security and wasn’t just for the poor years ago. lack of building more over many years and many goverments and a huge increase in population means not enough to go around. Also many are now housing associations as councils sold off and rent is not always as cheap as people think, many are affordable as opposed to social. the reality is more social housing would be better for all, the reason private rent so high is also due to demand, but its all probably a bit like shutting the gate after the horse as bolted now.

MikeRafone · Yesterday 10:24

WiddlinDiddlin · Yesterday 09:18

Its a nice idea but if you do that, then you give people a disincentive to earn more, save, generally do better.

So that's another reason to stay on benefits, stay on a low income, don't save etc.

Appreciate it might stop people on a decent wage already from getting a place, but plenty of people on a decent wage are still in need of housing that is beyond their financial means - housing is and should be provided according to need.

Show quote history

In some areas if you apply for council housing and you earn over £50k you will not be accepted on the housing list to bid for a council property

Fluffypuppy1 · Yesterday 10:38

Crikeyalmighty · Yesterday 09:08

ive always said this is the problem in the UK - compared to the couple of years we had in Copenhagen - Britain suffers from ‘can’t be arsed ‘ syndrome and that’s what’s lead to the rise of the right wing ( ironically plenty who cheat the system themselves too) - it was never about the EU, Denmark was red hot on constant checks on people who had no right to be there, fraud, etc - that’s why so much was digital , be it access to healthcare, renting housing etc - jobs , paying for goods and services- I’m convinced ‘some ‘have a big issue because they are doing dodgy stuff - hiding cash, cash in hand , subletting etc - UK just won’t pay out to police what needs policing and some of the public who are very keen on cuts aren’t so keen when it means they might get looked at

Show quote history

This.

Especially European health systems. If you don’t have a national healthcard, you’ll need to provide a credit card, so no health tourism. Over here, as long as you can give a UK address, you’ll get treatment. I took a relative visiting from overseas to our local A&E a couple of years ago. He had health insurance, but they weren’t interested. They insisted on registering him as at my address, even though he was only visiting. That definitely wouldn’t happen in most European countries.

XenoBitch · Yesterday 19:34

FlyingCatGirl · Yesterday 07:25

For me, council housing should be means tested, it shouldn't be used so someone on a good wage can have the luxury saving lots of money! They are supposed to be for people that would struggle to put a roof over their heads otherwise!

Show quote history

There are in some areas if there is a high demand. Where I live, you can't even get on the list if you earn £30k, yet private rents here are half the take home pay of someone on that salary.

RVectensian · Today 06:50

XenoBitch · Yesterday 19:34

There are in some areas if there is a high demand. Where I live, you can't even get on the list if you earn £30k, yet private rents here are half the take home pay of someone on that salary.

Show quote history

But if their income goes up to £60k the year after they move in no-one checks/it is irrelevant.

SheilaFentiman · Today 07:04

RVectensian · Today 06:50

But if their income goes up to £60k the year after they move in no-one checks/it is irrelevant.

Show quote history

Very few people’s income will jump by that in a year.

Ours has a capital and an income threshold for each size of housing, with the capital including assets such as property anywhere in the world. That’s to get on the list; as the list is in priority order, it’s certainly possible that someone could have promotions or a small inheritance whilst they were waiting which would move them down the priority order (possibly off the list)

RVectensian · Today 08:44

Of course not, it was hyperbole but the numbers are irrelevant to the point tbh.

Abhannmor · Today 08:54

In Ireland if you go away for more than 3 months without informing the council you are evicted. There's a housing crisis everywhere.

SheilaFentiman · Today 09:09

RVectensian · Today 08:44

Of course not, it was hyperbole but the numbers are irrelevant to the point tbh.

Are they?

It depends if you think council/social housing should be removed once a certain income threshold is reached, as well as an income/capital threshold ruling out accessing it.