to think that elderly people living alone in 3/4 bed council houses should not have a choice about whether they want to stay there?

[BlessYouToo]

In fact, they should be moved into one bedroom accommodation as soon as the kids leave home (this should have happened years ago of course). Having a 'spare' bedroom in case the grandchildren come to stay should not be an option when they are in state owned properties.

I have today been to view a council property with a friend of mine who has been homeless for 3 years (in temp accommodation) after finally getting to the top of the bidding queue! She was called to see a 4 bedroom house and it was absolutely rank, the smell made me want to heave. Plaster was hanging off the wall and the whole place was damp as the previous tenant either, did not or could not, heat and ventilate it properly Apparently the house was in a much worse than the state we saw it in today but the council had done some remedial work on it to make it safe so it was a bit better. The garden was also just a sea of brambles.

We were told that an elderly person had been living there and had just been moved into a nursing home. T

I was shocked that the council could rent out a property in this state. I would have expected that they would have made sure the property was up to a decent, clean standard before renting it out as any other landlord would have to do (all my friend will get is a paint allowance if she is eligible) but I am even more shocked that this elderly tenant was allowed to let the property get into this condition. Why do councils not carry out inspections to ensure their properties don't get into this state? Obviously the house was too much for the previous tenant to cope with and surely they would have been better off with a smaller property that they could keep clean?

We were told that many of the properties coming available after elderly tenants have either died, or gone into alternative accommodation, are left in a similar state. How many families with young children are left crammed into tiny flats while elderly people are living in houses much too large for their needs, letting them decay around them? I find it unbelievable that this has been happening.

I feel gutted for my friend as she has been desperate to get a stable home for her DCs and will now be going into a total shithole without even carpets on the floor, just cement. It's a bloody disgrace! AIBU?

[AwfulMaureen]

Max in my opinion they need to put money into using abandoned buildings....making them livable again...and into buying up empty houses which have not been occupied for a number of years. There are hundreds and hundreds of properties in the UK which lie empty. It's a disgrace.

[MaxsMummy2012]

AwfulM I completely agree with you, it's awful that there are do many disused buildings are just left sitting about and falling into disrepair.

[Flipdefloo]

Agree here too. That and a complete overhaul of the housing industry.

I think when it comes to bun-fighting over which of our most vulnerable we throw out of the lifeboat first, it's time to re-look at how we got in this mess in the first place and whether those who need to have really taken responsibility. Wasn't it something along the lines of loads of people taking out stupid mortgages they couldn't afford, and the banks taking stupid risks in not just allowing, but positively encouraging this? (So what’s has changed? Apart from the government now joining the party with taxpayers absorbing the risk?)

Why are the most vulnerable in society copping the flack and hardship in real terms? And increasingly now the middle earners too?

I'm personally glad to see more support for community-led, low impact solutions to the housing crisis, such as Community Right To Build projects:

www.lilac.coop/
www.gov.uk/government/news/funding-boost-for-aspiring-self-builders

I'd much rather see these appearing on the edges of all towns and villages, than these ugly mass money grabbing, habitat destroying, soulless developments, that are currently being shoved up all over the place (well, down here anyway) before any infrastructure is there to support them.

Sorry if I am ranting, personal circumstances make this issue a tough pill to swallow.

Between the state and DP and I, we have just paid the best part of £40K off someone else’s mortgage in the last 3 years (where they have done literally NOTHING apart from pay for an electrician once) who is now selling up to cash this in as part of an enormous profit on an ex-council place.

Entirely legal and in their best interests of course, but we have to ask, is this right for society? Having had to move in similar circumstances 3 times in the last 4.5 years, with our business suffering from the first crash, we are skint out of savings and now facing the state more expense in housing us, though where, I have no idea!

Sour grapes you may say, well yeah, I guess I could be forgiven?

[Flipdefloo]

And if I were to have any choice in the matter at all, I do not want a home as a result of kicking out some poor bereaved and grieving elderly widow/er out for our benefit. Thank you.

[mymatemax]

I understand the frustration but honestly it would kill my 87 year old f inlaw if he had to move out of his 3 bed family home that he and his late wife raised their family in. He has lived there for 57 years.

[AwfulMaureen]

Mymatemax exactly...and as someone who is in social housing...in a flat with my children...I would NEVER want him to move. He should be allowed to stay in his home.x I am happy to wait until a larger property becomes available or save up for my own. Hopefully I can do the latter. We'll see.

[mymatemax]

Maureen, we have all discussed with him moving to a smaller property, he even acknowledges himself that he would manage a smaller property easier but, he cant bring himself to do it. He feels as if he will be leaving his late wife behind, the move would just be too much for him.
Yes I agree that where possible people should be in a property size to suit their needs BUT it should be their choice, not forced eviction.

Oh and he has been on the receiving end of poor housing, before they got their council house they were living in two rooms with shared bathroom with 3 small children. They were promised their house for life & really should be allowed to keep it if they want to.

[MelonadeAgain]

Loads of people are forced to downsize due to circumstances. I don't see why council house tenants should be any different. I have quite an attachment to my family home as a child but my parents had to sell it to fund nursing home care for DF and my mum was quite glad to move into a small modern studio apartment in town.

[MelonadeAgain]

And absolutely yes, 100% to more self build FlipdeFloo. Its the norm in other countries, I don't think in the UK we fully consider the social implications of housing increasing numbers of people in overpriced concrete blocks in housing estates and encouraging them to think they can do nothing themselves.

[MindOut]

They should be able to stay as long as they bloody like - my grand parents had to move from their council house of 60 years to make way for a large development and I believe it killed my grand dad. He really didn't want to move he had put his heart and soul into the garden. Within a year of moving he was very ill. The stress of the move was unbelievable for them - it was heartbreaking to see. I would hate to live in world where we start turning out old people from their homes just because their children have left. I get that families are waiting, but they forget my grandparents also had a long wait for their house when they were first married too - nothing has changed in that sense!

[mymatemax]

We should like after the most vulnerable in society & in many cases this is the elderly & that includes protecting their home, the place they feel safe, comfortable & familiar.
As I said earlier it would kill my f inlaw to move house after 57 years. To find a suitable property he would also be away from his support network of neighbours, family & friends who all provide care & support.
Moving him to the nearest suitable HA bungalow would leave him isolated and with less care, probably a false economy as the state would pick up the shortfall

[LongTimeLurking]

I think given the new Benefits cap that has come in that is forcing families out of their homes in expensive areas (London), it is not unreasonable to expect single people / couples rattling around in huge properties to move somewhere smaller.

We have a major affordable housing crisis and it cannot be fair or reasonable to have 3/4 bedroom family houses being used by 1 or 2 people when many families are desperate for a proper family home.

Of course this only spreads the misery around a bit more fairly though. Ideally the government should be building a whole load more council houses as well as building homes to sell at sensible prices to people on low/mid income wages - this could be profitable and cost effective long term.

[mymatemax]

we shouldn't fix one problem by creating another though!

[Mrsdavidcaruso]

LongTimeLurking

I think given the new Benefits cap that has come in that is forcing families out of their homes in expensive areas (London), it is not unreasonable to expect single people / couples rattling around in huge properties to move somewhere smaller.

But what if like my Dad a single person/couple are not on benefits why should someone who pays full rent have to move to give way to people who are getting most of their rent paid by the tax payer

As I said before my Grandad at 85 still works and pays tax he gets no benefits ( I refuse to call his contribution based pension entitlement a benefit) why should he be forced to move just because someone thinks his 3 bed housing association house is too big for him.

[Grennie]

Lots of elderly people die when they are forced by circumstance to move home. This policy would lead to a lot of deaths of elderly people.

[Grennie]

This would have killed my gran. In her old age she started to get incredibly anxious about any change. A change in house would simply have been too much for her to bear. She also had helpful neighbours which vastly increased her safety.

Although she only had a 2 bedroom council flat.

[MaxsMummy2012]

If it became a common practise that you move when circumstances change then older people (who dont like change) wouldnt be in a position whereby they have to move because they'd already be in the correct size property - most people are in their 50's / 60's when their kids move out having reached adulthood so people should have to move then. Social housing, and peoples thinking about it, needs to change in order to meet the demands for it.

[Tinkerball]

The warming has disappeared but this thread is from 2011.

[diddl]

It does seem sensible that they should move out to make way for families.

After all, if they have had the benefit of a family sized house that they couldn't have otherwise afforded, why should they prevent other families from the same by staying in a house bigger than they need?

[WooWooOwl]

I don't agree with moving people out of their homes when they get to 70+ years of age. Not for the sake of people who chose to have more children than their current home can cope with. I really can't understand the mindset of people who think it's ok to uproot older people who have very little left in life except their home and the place in the community that they have built up, it's just cruel.

But the young families who have social housing now can rightly expect to be moved into smaller accommodation when their children have left home, they will still be more than young enough to cope with a move.

[Flipdefloo]

WooWooOwl I agree to an extent, but would add they should only have to move out if and when a property is available in their existing community and it should be encouraged with incentives, rather than forced. Individual cases should be able to be assessed/made exempt too.

I don't agree with the "most people are in their 50s/60s when their kids move out" as its quite possible for an increasing number of parents (fathers in particular) to be in their 70s in these circumstances - think first time mother in late 30s/early 40s with an older partner, possibly even in their 50s.

More young people will be forced to stay at home until they are 25 due to not being eligible for ANY benefits. So actually, as we have more and more WOMEN putting off having children until late 30s/early 40s, the age of parents with lower socio-economic backgrounds (likely to be found in social housing, or claiming benefits in private rental) when their children move out will possibly be quite high.

[BackOnlyBriefly]

We have a major affordable housing crisis and it cannot be fair or reasonable to have 3/4 bedroom family houses being used by 1 or 2 people when many families are desperate for a proper family home.

If it's about doing it for the families desperate for a proper family home you will agree that people who own their houses should also be forced to downsize?

[Curlyweasel]

As long as the spare rooms are being paid for, then I don't think they should be forced to move. Oh, I forgot, pensioners are exempt from the bedroom tax aren't they? As are working couples who live in social housing. Or working single people. Isn't it just people on benefits who have to pay the spare room subsidy? That's right, I think. Those who can least afford it. All makes sense really.

[diddl]

"If it's about doing it for the families desperate for a proper family home you will agree that people who own their houses should also be forced to downsize?"

Hahahaha!

[Flipdefloo]

Of the 2.5 million accidental landlords (30% of 9 million) that have become so as a result of the economic crash and wreckless banking practice, it might be fairer to expect them/the banks take responsibility for their choices and release their property to desperate families at affordable rates. Seems fairer to me than forcing old people out of their homes.