To think if all your children have grown up and left you should give up your 5 bed council house?

[dilemma456]

The housing list are so long and especially for bigger properties.

I met someone who lives by herself in a 5 bed council house last night. Her children have all moved out. There are people who really need that house crammed into much smaller properties.

AIBU to think that if you're massively under occupying social housing you should be under an obligation to move out into something smaller and that the council should offer you support and encouragement to do so?

I am currently struggling to get my parents to downsize, as they live in a massive house (owned) they are not able to keep, and rely on a lot of outside help. I can see what ShadesofViolet is saying, it makes no difference if the council or you own the home, it is equally hard to uproot and move. Especially if you are old. It would seem cruel and uncaring to evict an old person. Most old people realize themselves they need to downsize, and will do so willingly. Another neighbour was given a £5k incentive to move himself (divorced, wife and child moved out) into a one bed flat. The council dont do this anymore, they cant afford it. The onus is on the owner/tenant to realize they want a smaller place and take steps to make it happen.

YANBU. In a few years DH and I shall sell our much loved home because we can't afford the upkeep and council tax on our pensions. I don't see how people in state owned properties can have the right to a home for life regardless of their need for it.

No, they will not get rid of social housing
This England, it wouldn't be allowed
We need social housing, no matter how much some on here seem to resent it

SGM- I am in a similar position to you and intend to buy a soon as we are in a position to. But in the meantime, this is our home. Just because we do not own it doesn't mean we don't have an emotional attachment

Removing the automatic right to inherit property does make some sense. Although I wouldn't want to see an 18yo (for example) out on their ear when their mother died while they were still living at home.

Just to clarify a few points...

If a parent and grown-up child are 'in the know' the parent will put the child on the household details (if not already) after a year of being on the household details they are then legally entitled to make them a joint tenant so that when the parent does pass away that child CAN then inherit the tenancy.

There ARE cash incentives to downsize your council property.

I live in a 2 bed council property and have for over nine years now. I have made it a home, looked after it (such as it is- it's subsiding, the whole street is). I'm damn grateful to be here and I can be a SAHM because the rent is low and this is the only reason we can live on one wage.
When things are better for us, touch wood, in years to come, then we'll look at other housing options and somebody can have this house! The only thing I'd miss is the garden.
WRT the privately owned houses in council estates, you can tell them apart round here because when the council do improvements (new doors etc) the private properties are not done.

Well, I live in east London and there aren't any here

"While we're at it, shall we force homeowners to sell their houses if they under-occupy them? BTLs and holiday home owners who have priced locals out of the market?"

I believe interest rates tend to achieve that aim, did last time around the mid 1990's.

That maybe true of where you live, but they do exist.

I have never in all my life met or even heard of a council house that has five bedrooms. 4 bedrooms is still unheard of and most families would have to fight very hard or wait a very long time to be granted a 3 bed. OP is sh*t stirring.

Council tennants can inherit/change the details of the tennancy once. E.g. If mum dies and dad inherits, their children will be evicted when he dies.

I don't think anyone resents social housing as such but the criteria you have to meet in order to be given a council property should apply the whole time you occupy the property if you ask me.
I have known single mums be rightly allocated a house or flat whilst on benefits. The new boyfriend moves in and suddenly it's like a lottery winners house, BMW on the drive, sky channels galore, holidays, designer clothes because he is earning good money and they are paying next to nothing in rent. And that's assuming she's gone legit with the tax credits office, am trying to see the best in people.

In what form Veyron?

if you own a house, there is already major incentive to downsize (ie the potentil to cash in on the difference in value)

if you rent, generally there is an incentive to downsize - cheaper rent.

the government does not need to provide incentives to these people to downsize.

If you are in a council house, then i agree stability is important - and therefore the propsed 5-10 year letting terms sound lie a good idea. it keeps the accomodation secure whilst allowing people to be downsized.

ultimately no-one actually hs a right to remain in the same home forever. in all cases (owning, renting or council renting) it is conditional (upon having paid the mortgage, rent, or upon the housing criteria of the council).

I agree that there are problems with moving older people (especially the visually impaired) but this could be remitted by providing more appropriate accomms (eg warden-assisted)

I think moving forward there should be an end to life tennancies, people should enter into a council tennancy with the expectation that they will have to give up their property once their housing requirements have changed.

I do not support forcing people already in existing council properties to downsize. It was a different world 20 years ago and people were told they could have their property for as long as they wanted and people have invested a lot of money and emotions into their home.

My sister has grown up children and lives in a very nice 3 bedroomed property. Shew feels guilty that she lives in a property that she no longer requires but is reluctant to move as all the 1 bedroom council flats are in no go areas and inhabited by people that you would not want as neighbours. The council are offering £200 as an incentive for people in her situation to move into smaller properties, £200 isn't even enough to cover moving costs and obviously there would be decorating costs on top.

I think there needs to be a massive overhaul of housing in this country. Revamp the council flats, stop the tower blocks from becoming ghettos, give proper incentives to encourage downsizing and introduce short term tennancies for new tennants.

Ok here is an example of cash to downsize a council property.

Edna is 70yrs 0ld, previously widowed, 3 kids grown up with children of their own etc.

Lived in a 4 bed parlor house (separate lounge/dining room) for the past 40 or so years. Once she has registered an interest in downsizing she will then pretty much pick and choose available properties - this obviously can be a very long process BUT she will get to choose.

Once Edna has ended her tenancy on her 4 bed house and has signed her new tenancy agreement she will then be given a cheque from the council for up to £800.

If Edna needs help to move as children can't help etc then Neighbourhood wardens will be used to help.

This i can guarantee you is the policy used where i work.

I think that's fair veyron.
She may need mew furniture, and it costs thoudsads a week to keep a family in b and b

5-bedroom council houses are rare but do exist. There is one here and I know it only has 3 people there, a couple and the last of a large family.

It does give the impression of being a crowded home as there are several overflow mattresses in the garden.

I think incentives forr those in council houses to downsize is a good idea, but not for those who own their own home. My parents bought their house 34 years ago and they bought as their home, not just a house to live in. My bother was 2 at the time, so they have brought up both their children in that house, worked hard to pay for it ect. I think it would be very unfair to make them sell their 3 bed house (which allows them to have my brother and his wife to say, as well as giving them room to have their grandsons to stay), or penalise them because they wish to keep it.

" The council are offering £200 as an incentive for people in her situation to move into smaller properties, £200 isn't even enough to cover moving costs and obviously there would be decorating costs on top."

And yet my SIL is expected to do that every 12 months with two children in tow, whilst on benefits and never seeing her deposit again. In addition to all the stress of trying to remain within a reasonable distance of the school and finding a property that will accept HB.

Yanbu, it sounds heartless to make an elderly person move out of a family home but social housing should be available for everyone who needs it, which it sadly isn't. A friend of mine lives in a one bedroom flat with her dh and two dcs and they have been told they can't be rehoused for 10 years! This seems so unfair when you consider all the single people in 3 bed houses who would be very comfortable in her cramped flat

btw I don't think that if you own home, you should be forced to sell/downsize it.

I do think that if you are a tenant you do should and do have limited rights over where you live.

I have been a council tenant, a private tenant and a homeowner. I am also a housing officer for a local council. I am in no way against council tenants in any shape or form. But am fed up of this namby pamby state that we currently live in. it's really quite pathetic sometimes, when are people going to take responsibility for themselves?

Sorry rant over!

Who are we actually talking about then, who actually qualifies for being in "need" of social housing?

Its a genuine question - I have no idea of the benefits system or the housing system.

This a regular thread on MN. An opportunity to bash both the elderly and those in council housing on the one thread

My Mum has lived in council housing for about 50 years - 40 in her current house. She has paid rent for all this time and the only benefits she has ever received are Child Benefit and State Pension (universal benefits). She has paid more in rent in this time than she would have paid if my parents had been able to get a mortgage in the 60s and 70s. In those days mortgages were only available to people in receipt of salaries not weekly paid wages (kept the riff raff in their place). Her sister and her husband were able to get a mortgage - long since paid off - and overall considerably cheaper than my Mum has paid and is still paying. I do think this gives her a right to remain in her 3 bedroom home. Mum is now 84 and when the time comes her house will be available again to another family who will continue to pay rent on it. My Mum could have bought her council house (at a greatly reduced price because of the length of her tenancy) but she believes in social housing and would have felt that she was then depriving the next generation.

Regarding the market value of private rents. This has come to mean covering the cost of the buy to rent mortgage on a property. In many cases people in privately rented accommodation are costing the state more in terms of Housing Benefit. This Housing Benefit then lines the pockets of the private landlords. I am glad the current government has taken steps to cap Housing benefit. If they continue to squeeze it, then the cost of renting will come down to more realistic levels.

The only real answer in my opinion is to build more social housing. I doubt that will happen under this government, although Nick Clegg did say during the election campaign that he was in favour of building new council housing. Selling off council houses in the 80s while simultaneously, changing the laws of renting property, in favour of the landlords, is what has led to today's situation.

There is a great deal of smuggery on this thread. Paying a mortgage does not make you in any way better than others who rent, whether it is housing association, council or 'private'.

i agree with the majority on this thread. Social Housing should not be for life. I actually think there should be frequent reviews of a persons needs, this could benefit in 2 directions, both to downsize and upsize.

The only way to secure a house for life is to buy one and pay the mortgage, why should the government be doing this for people.

People who rent privately don't have this, why because the landlord is the state should it be any different.

In answer to Hullygully who said but what happens when the grown-up children come back to visit - why is this even relevant last time i looked council houses weren't hotels and no-one in social should have the right of a 'spare room' for potential guests!!!