To think: if you can fly first class, you shouldn't have a council house?

[Mexxo]

Facebook friends of mine (friends of RL friends really) making lots of comments this week about their impending holiday to Mauritius on which they'll be flying first class and staying in a 5 star hotel.

This couple have lived in a council house for many years (no kids yet), though this year so far she has got a new (not brand new, a year or two old but still v nice) BMW and he has a new Ducati.

One of their friends has commented on FB "Wow, did you win the lottery?!" and the wife replied "no we just saved a long time for our dream holiday".

First class flights to Mauritius are £4k each. A week in a 5 star hotel must be at least £2k and probably more. That's £10k for a week's holiday. AIBU to think that if people can squirrel away that much money for a holiday, they shouldn't be living in a bloody council house subsidised by taxes from the rest of us?

I too was under the impression council housing was predominantly for those in need and who couldn't afford to rent privately.

And those saying they aren't subsidised, they are massively cheaper than private renting. About 50 percent in some cases.

I don't really think people should shack up for life in them.

BUt private renting isn't secure though a landlord can sell their house from under you with not much notice, if somebody has a secure tenancy why should they give that up if they are paying rent even though it might be lower than a private Let,

'It's a shame that what could be quite an informative exchange of views about an issue that is clearly of interest to lots of people has been dragged down to the level of playground bullying.

Reasoned debate is much more persuasive than cursing and abuse, whatever you think of someone's point of view. '

What is reasonable about spending time calculating how much a childfree, working couple spend on holidays and vehicles and then grousing about it on an internet forum?

As Freddo says, they're taking a lot less out of 'the system' as they don't have children and they work.

Many years ago I was a council tenant and my ex arse of a boss was totally dumbfounded when I informed him that I also paid council tax. When he inquired how much I paid including my rent he was scurrying back into the small damp hole from where he came from when he discovered I actually paid £175 more a month than he paid for his mortgage in the nice "posh" part of our town.

Not all council tenants grunt when spoken to and are on benefits.

Jesus who cares, so they can save a few bob and have nice things. That may well change should they decide to have kids, I'm actually a slight tinge of green with jealousy here :-D

Or maybe they saved Airmiles?

It is a shame we couldn't have a reasonable discussion. But if that was what you truly wanted I don't think you would have included so much information about what they are spending OP.

You could have just asked "should people who earn lots be able to stay in council houses?" or something similar.

Your OP was clearly begging for people to back you up in your disgust. Nothing more.

One of them inherited the tenancy. That's how it used to work and plenty of people, including on here, did the same, bought the place, then sold it on for a huge profit.

you started a similar thread

you have a nasty bee

My Mum is in a council house.

She pays £100 a month more than we do on our mortgage (although obviously we have been lucky with interest rates).

I found this interesting. It's from wiki but does suggest that this is an issue

'Another criticism is that the system favours those who have already secured tenancy, even after they are no longer in dire need. The combination of security of tenure and affordable rent gives little incentive to tenants to downsize from family accommodation after their children have moved out. Meanwhile, those who are on the waiting list are often in much greater need of this welfare, yet they cannot have it; once a council house has been granted to a tenant, they cannot be evicted except for anti-social behaviour, serious offences committed at the premises[13] or serious breach of the tenancy conditions, such as rent arrears.'

Currently living trough the hell that is private rental eviction, I can honestly say that if I get the council house at the end of this utter nightmare I will not be letting go of my secure tenancy. Not until I have enough for a mortgage at the very least.

But if you start down the "you earn too much" route what do you think will be next?

Healthcare? Education?

I dread to think what mess we will be in then.

Currently living trough the hell that is private rental eviction, I can honestly say that if I get the council house at the end of this utter nightmare I will not be letting go of my secure tenancy. Not until I have enough for a mortgage at the very least

I hope you get sorted soon the uncertainty must be awful for you and when you get your secure tenancy Hold tight

I can't understand how anyone can grudge someone a safe and secure home. Knowing your home is always going to be yours, the freedom to decorate, landscape the garden etc. The safe knowledge that you can have a family and not have to worry about a private landlord pulling your home from under you or upping the rent by a silly amount.

I got on the property ladder when houses were cheaper and profit was there to help us up the ladder. This does not really exist anymore and if a young couple can inherit a tenancy for life then good luck to them. Karma is a bitch OP.

Thank you.

It is hell. Which is why I'm a bit snappy today since not sleeping right for about 2 months now.

People really underestimate how scary living in rented housing can be. I will never ever be comfortable again knowing it can all be dragged from me in a matter of months. I will never begrudge people hanging on tight to something more secure.

Especially now. People who can afford private rentals or mortgages don't have the job security they did.

Landlords are having to sell up too.

I would have to think long and hard about putting myself in a position like this again so I can see why people stay in council housing. Even though this means me and my children will have months of b&b type housing due to shortages. Even then.

Ohtheconfusion -

I can see how people begrudge. I was classed as homeless for a year but couldn't get a house. Would be easier if people who could easily private rent didn't stay in them.

I do understand why they want to though, but it's not great for other people.

When Thatcher brought in 'right to buy' all the family homes were snapped up - big beautiful houses in very desirable parts of London etc

This left councils with stock which was inadequate for families. But equally the housing market has this too - elderly ladies rattling about in 4-bed houses desperately needed by families in our area.

Gold ship - but it's not their fault there isn't enough housing.

Maybe they have been where you were and never want to risk it?

I don't think I ever will.

I will be one of those people the op is slagging in ten years time no doubt. But I will know my children have the security they need over their heads and it will take an awful lot for me to give that up if any of this raw fear or guilt I have now remains.

I think in a lot of L A the right to buy scheme has been scrapped

Golf - no it isn't their fault I agree. But if these people can afford a deposit for a house, if these people could get a mortgage, then they should do that.

Like I said I completely understand why people want to stay when their circumstances change, it's their homes after all. But it isn't their house, and when someone else's need is greater it needs to be time to move on to private housing. In my opinion anyway.

I totally understand why someone would stay in a secure council house - why on earth would they give it up unless they wanted and were able to buy an equivalent? Especially if they had faced homelessness before and in this job market.

On the other hand, I read so many stories of people here in dire need of somewhere to house their families, stuck in B&B, with no chance of private rental, who are faced with hideously long waiting lists and little chance of getting what they need.

The obvious answer is build more social housing, but thats unlikely to happen.

The problem is that once you start turfing people out, where does that line get drawn. Older people who have been in their council house for 40 years? Families who wont have the same security in a rented house?

But everyone should be entitled do a secure place to live without the fear of the landlord asking you to move after 6 months. And without the threat of eviction.

But that isn't the issue the issue is, if you can afford to rent privately then should you?

Council houses should be for those in need, my parents are now elderly and have no hope in hell of renting privately, they have a need for a council house.

A young childless couple who earn between them lets say 45k, they can afford to rent privately, should they? I think yes because council housing is at a premium there is not enough to go round, how many times do you see stories on here where a family is living in a b&b waiting to be housed. How is fair and right that the young couple (who lets not forget can afford a private rental) have a house and a family with two kids are stuck in a b&b.

The whole system sucks, and needs to be fixed. Housing a basic human right should not be for profit.

If everyone paid a fair market rent for their home then there would be more money available to build more housing.

Essentially, the 'profit' that private LLs eventually make when their mortgages are finally paid off is what they get in return for taking a risk and doing the work involved in being a LL. if councils/HAs worked to the same model, then their 'profit' would be more available housing.

'The problem is that once you start turfing people out, where does that line get drawn. Older people who have been in their council house for 40 years? Families who wont have the same security in a rented house? '

Exactly, Lamb! The largest proportion of under-occupiers are pensioners/elderly. Where do they go if you turf them out? There isn't enough housing to move them to, they can't get a mortgage due to their age/not working.

The rules have changed for many new tenants - no more tenancy for life or right to buy - but you still have many pensioners banging around in large houses.

Should they be moved on, too?