Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Flip

1 2

Original poster

to think, i wouldnt be surprised if the next thing to happen in social housing might be....

31 replies

dirtyface · 02/09/2013 15:49

....that people who got their HA / council house/flat as a sole person (ie lone parent etc) are not going to be allowed to move a partner in.

so if they want to live with someone, they have to go and get a private rent / mortgage elsewhere

i was just thinking about it earlier as i met DH as a lone parent in a HA house and it made far more sense for him to move in with us rather than get a private rent together somewhere. in fact dh's (private) flat when i met him (a small 2 bed) cost more than my 3 bed house.

but it honestly would not surprise me a bit if they put a stop to that the way things are going. i know there are probably clauses in most tenancy agreements that say you are allowed to move someone in but am sure the powers that be could change that. yes i am cynical i know ;)

what do people think?

OP posts:

HeySoulSister · 02/09/2013 15:50

So they will only 'let' to individuals? Doubt it

HeySoulSister · 02/09/2013 15:51

Also, what would happen when older children turn into adults but are still at home?

mrsjay · 02/09/2013 15:55

no they would just add them to the tenancy if a partner moved in they can't discriminate against single people because they are in a long term relationship or got married, and what heysoulsister said what about adult children will they have to move out , Social housing is for all not just single parents

JakeBullet · 02/09/2013 16:04

I don't think they will do this. I am in social housing and might in the future have to add DS to the tenancy as he might always have to call this house "home".

What I am not allowed to do is sub-let or take in a lodger.....no room for one anyway.

SaucyJack · 02/09/2013 16:06

I can't see it happening, not least because meeting a new partner must be one of the best ways for lone parents to be able to come off of benefits.

BrokenSunglasses · 02/09/2013 16:11

I don't think they'll do that. It's benefits they're messing around with, not social housing tenancies. What would be the point?

I do think that long term partners should have to be included on the tenancy agreement, and subject to all the usual conditions though.

ChazsBrilliantAttitude · 02/09/2013 16:12

I think they might be on difficult grounds. It might breach someones right to a family life so potentially could be challenged on human rights grounds. I don't think it would happen.

OddBoots · 02/09/2013 16:17

They wouldn't do that - another adult moving in saves them money as it will either up the household income so reduce benefits or if the new person isn't earning it will mean they don't have to fund their housing elsewhere. More people under each roof is a good thing from a financial view.

meditrina · 02/09/2013 16:23

No-one is talking about this.

So who is your "they"? Councils? HAs in general? Or your particular HA?

Original poster

dirtyface · 02/09/2013 16:28

i know no one is talking about it meditrina - i never said they were.

i am just musing :)

OP posts:

Feminine · 02/09/2013 16:32

They will never do that.

any way you look at it, it makes no sense

I think you have been over thinking things TBH. :)

malovitt · 02/09/2013 16:34

Can i just ask...My neighbour has lived in her HA flat for fifteen years - bid on a larger flat as kids sharing (opposite sexes, large age gap) and got a three bedroom a few doors down from her original flat with the same HA. HA would not let her sign for it unless she showed them her payslips and P60s. She has never been in arrears and has always paid on time.
Is this a new thing - having to disclose your income?

Feminine · 02/09/2013 16:35

mal maybe for confirming ID?

JakeBullet · 02/09/2013 17:03

I would say that this is an ID thing too. My friend has just moved from one HA property to another.....same HA and still needed to show ID.

Theas18 · 02/09/2013 17:17

Surely it's cheaper and a " best use of space" to move the partner in... maybe it'll be compulsory LOL.

Also when partner moves in benefits payments go down so it's a win/win...

meditrina · 02/09/2013 17:19

dirtyface that's exactly why I asked you who you thought might be considering it. If there were a body that was, then I wouldn't need to wonder about your musings, and whether it was councils or HAs that sprang this concern.

malovitt · 02/09/2013 17:19

No, it wasn't for ID. She had already shown her passport and driving licence. They said they wanted to see evidence of her income. When she said it was confidential, they would not let her sign until she did.

LondonMan · 02/09/2013 17:38

....that people who got their HA / council house/flat as a sole person (ie lone parent etc) are not going to be allowed to move a partner in

As a general benefits reform, I think it is more likely/makes more sense that the system will change to incentivise people to live in households with at least two adults. Since "two can live as cheaply as one" this will lower total living costs and means lower overall payouts on benefits, in addition to the obvious savings on housing costs.

To a certain extent, where people are taking in in lodgers as a way of coping with the bedroom tax, this is already happening.

sisterofmercy · 02/09/2013 17:43

Dunno - it's under occupancy they're more concerned about at the moment. There aren't that many people who manage to get Social Housing as a single person now anyway.

Original poster

dirtyface · 02/09/2013 19:02

ok fair enough, was daft thought

my excuse is i am preg and not thinking straight atm

feel a bit embarassed now

OP posts:

NotYoMomma · 02/09/2013 19:24

I think itmore likely they will means test council properties so if you earn over a certain amount orhave a certain amount of savings etc you should move on

CocacolaMum · 02/09/2013 19:53

or they will make it so that singles have to house share....

OddBoots · 02/09/2013 19:59

Possibly means test or start putting the rent up lots once you earn over a certain amount to try and move people on into the private market.

ChazsBrilliantAttitude · 03/09/2013 12:12

Don't feel embarassed - you are allowed to speculate on what random shite poticians will come up with next. They never fail to surprise and disappoint.

Original poster

dirtyface · 03/09/2013 13:25

LOL so true chaz. and common sense is not their strong point and clearly not mine either

but i thought if they did do that, they would say its to free up housing for the "genuine needy", ie if a single mum gets a working boyfriend let HIM pay for her and her kids housing and chuck them into private renting and let them fend for themselves. so its a double bonus - someone comes off benefits AND there's a spare house. that was my theory anyway :o

OP posts:

Flip

1 2