AIBU to be annoyed by this

[Mugofteaforme]

www.kentonline.co.uk/kent_messenger/news/2013/march/2/tenants_given_sweetener.aspx

In all fairness it's nice they're getting new homes, but isn't the extra £4700 a little too generous? This comes at a time when most of us are fighting to keep our heads above water. A bit of a kick in the teeth some might say.

Meh. It's a statutory payment, can't get that worked up over it myself.

The tenants shouldn't have to pay moving costs themselves. It is probably more cost efficient to provide them with a sum of money as a sweetener than to implement any other kind of system to help with moving costs.

It is inconvenient for tenants having to move out. Items may not fit in other residence, they may need storage etc.

Bit of a non issue really.

So they should just lose their flooring, wallpaper, or anything else they've put in without being compensated for it?

What if they're fighting to keep their heads above water too?

If you add up their moving expenses and what they have spent on flooring, diy, decorating their homes and garden then it probably would add up to that much. Why does it annoy you so much? Wouldn't you accept compensation if you were forced to move and you had a long term tenancy?

YANBU.

This is why it's a good thing that social tenants will no longer be able to expect to keep the same property they have been allocated for their entire lives.

The government won't be given private tenants a free five grand and moving costs every time they have to move, so it's simply unfair. Do it for one or do it for none. I wouldn't mind either way, as long as the same applied to all of us.

Do you mean ' do it for all or do it for none'?

Oh! Yeah, I do!

Let me get this straight.

Developers are trying to renovate/rebuild this property for financial gain, and are choosing to persuade existing tenants to move out to enable them to cash in on this prime land, and you are annoyed...?

Why?

I agree Clouds and I'd love to know how anything like £5000 would be spent on decoration in a council property especially when so much is done pro bono or with heavily subsidised grants. Surely a brand new house/flat for £350 a month would be compensation enough.

Why do you find it hard to believe that "anything like £5000 would be spent on decoration in a council property"?

I am genuinely interested in what makes you think that.

My friend lives in a council property. Her and her husband both work full time. They have put a new kitchen in their house, a new bathroom, carpets, painted, decking and lights in the garden, blinds and curtains to fit the windows. If they were asked to move for redevelopment i would have no objection to them receiving £4,700.

Don't forget that the redevelopment of the site will no doubt be more intensive and provide more homes than are currently there. They will also be cheaper to maintain and many will probably be sold off as shared ownership. This isn't cash being given away, its being redistributed.

Council or HA tenants pay for all flooring and all decoration, curtains quite often aren't transferable as windows are different sizes - the council only repairs or installs doors, windows, kitchens and bathrooms, everything else is done by the tenant.

How is a new house you didn't ask for compensation for actual money that you've spent?

Council houses cost the same as other houses to do up.

More so in fact, as you are not allowed to keep the flooring, even if new.

Has it escaped you that the developers are paying for this to make more money? What beef is it of yours?

'especially when so much is done pro bono or with heavily subsidised grants'

have you any evidence for this?

Councils don't leave carpets down between tenants (well, mine doesn't), they gut the house. My mum moved into a new build HA house (left marriage with my disabled Dsis) and they installed for free a shed, a compost bin, even a bloody bug box- but left bare poured concrete floors and no help to cover cost of carpets.

Thanks for the feedback..

It's actually one-bedroom flats that are being redeveloped so I stand by my view that £4700 is an over compensation. Try telling those who have spend a future decorating their rentals then asked to move within six months notice without the security of an onward address that it's fair- it simply isn't.

Perhaps the money would be better spend providing more social housing. thats my idea of redistribution. Who knows it might catch on and make the world that bit fairer.

Sorry outraged my ownly source is from those I know on the estate.

you don't have to decorate privately rented homes.

But surely it's irelevant if you don't think council tenants spend that much on redecorating?
I'm sure there are many people who have spent that much.

And to be honest, it isn't a council tenants fault that you have to leave your private rental is it?

Ok, maybe there are a lot of improvements necessary to the system itself but to be angry that a council tenant receives fair compensation to cover their costs, and you do not is a bit odd.

My Mum was in Council Sheltered Accommodation. Thought it would be her last place of residence. They decided to pull it down so all of them had to move. They paid the allowance so she could: pay removals, pay rent up front, redecorate, get carpets.

But it's not just compensation for money already spent or the hassle of moving - they have a new house to buy flooring and what have you for as well.

Newly built council H/A houses are given to tenants with chipboard floors, if they're lucky enough to get a garden they get bare dirt and if they don't make them presentable they start getting threatening letters about the state of their garden.

Even if you wanted to live with chipboard floors, you have to at least do kitchen and bathroom flooring before they get water damaged.

In a short term private let it's not the tenant's responsibility to provide flooring or decorate, it is in a council or HA tenancy.

If the developers were paying, it wouldn't be a problem. But they aren't, the government is paying.

Fair point that you don't have to pay for decoration etc in a private rent, but you do have to pay moving costs. Why aren't those covered by the government too like they are with this development?

You are trying to compare moving when a tenancy runs out to being forced to move with a current tenancy. If a private landlord forced you to move 3 months into a year contract they would more than likely be liable for your costs.

It's a statutory amount - called Statutory Homeloss Payment. YANBU to think its a lot of money - it is - but the amount is set by the government and is statutory, s individual landlords are not permitted to offer less. It's to cover all the costs of Homeloss and relocation - removals, redecorating, flooring, reconnecting phone, mail redirection etc

Having worked in social housing for many years, I've met many tenants who have spent a small fortune on their homes and put my own home well to shame. It's only right they should be compensated if they lose their home through no fault of their own.

And as a couple of people have said, council homes are usually let with bare chipboard floors and bare walls (or the previous tenants decor - so anything from bare plaster to psychedelic rag rolling!)

And these are (at least for now) lifetime tenancies so people could have lived in the home the are going to lose for 20+ years. Very different to private rented.