Offered a council house but partner doesn't want to accept as it's 40 mins commute from work

[Zeta123]

I applied for council housing in the middle of November. I was offered a horrid house first and refused and was yesterday offered the most beautiful council house I have ever seen. It's 2 bedroom but in a lovely area and it's huge with a big garden. It's perfect, it even meets my partners very high standards. But he wants to refuse it as it's 45 mins from his work place and also isn't in the exact area that he wants. I'm trying to explain to him that it's not like buying a house. Although we have been offered two houses in the space of a few weeks this isn't the norm and it's actually hard to get a council house. I have wrote this thread in the hope that the replies will make him realise some people wait a long time for a house and are in much worse situation than us. We should be grateful to not only be offered a house but a beautiful one at that. So do you think he is being unreasonable and unrealistic to refuse a lovely house because of a 45 minute commute? How long did u wait for a house/ is there a long waiting list In your area? Also explain to him that in many areas we wouldn't even be housed at all as we only have one child and he works on quite a good job. We've accepted the house but he's not happy about it.

SOME are but the idea they are sitting in clover is ridiculous. In 7 years my mortgage will be paid, not so if I was in a rented home. So even if I have to sell my house for care costs I have probably 30+ years of rent free accommodation.

Oh & I have a newer bigger house with a garage for about the same money in mortgage payments that the council tenants round here pay in rent.

BoffinMum Most BTL are in it for capital appreciation - i.e., "their retirement". Bleating about covering their mortgage is neither here nor there. That is the sign of a pure amateur landlord!

I think you will find most HA properties have been re-mortgaged to fund further development of housing.

the housing regulator the HCA called this 'sweating your assets'

so actually any rent paid, is probably paying off a big loan to a bank or large investment organisation.

I went on the council house waiting list when I was 18. I'm now 34, and I've still not been offered a house. 16 years is a long time to wait if you get pushed back to the bottom of the list for any reason!

Custardo, the rates HA pay are much lower than deal you or I would have access to.

And with regard to capital appreciation, again, you need to offset expenses (i.e. what your investment might have earned in equities during the same period) and evaluate risk. Different arrangements make people different amounts of money in the end.

Seeing as this was quite a pressing matter last night op

Why haven't you returned?

I'd hate to think posters have wasted their time.

She did post she'd accepted the place but I too would love to know what area she's in that has such good properties at the drop of a hat. It might help some other posters who need accommodation.

Exactly. I'm a bit confused on her 'bidding' system.

Oh, well. I hope to be proved wrong! :)

A 45 minute commute is fairly standard. It takes me about that to get to work on public transport. If it was over an hour I would reconsider. Your partner has to weigh the time he will spend commuting against the time he will spend at home. He will spend more time at home than commuting so surely a perfect home is worth a longer commute? He isn't going to get everything he wants from a council house and this seems like it ticks all the other boxes.

Can someone explain about bidding on a house?
I'm in Ireland and you apply for a house if your income is under a certain amount and basically if a house comes up that is suitable it is offered to you if you are the next suitable tenant on the list. Two refusals is all you're allowed or you're bumped to the bottom.

Rent is calculated by a certain percentage of income. When I was on my own with dd I paid €30 per week. Now that dh is working I pay €140 per week.

Apologies for thread derail,but bidding always perplexed me.

The test as to whether a rent is being subsidised is very simple. Does the the price maximise the landlords income? For council housing, the answer is no, therefore it is subsidised. The amount of subsidy is the difference between the actual rent and what the landlord could get if they chose whoever was willing to pay the most.

I believe social housing should be rented to whoever is willing to pay the most. It's purpose should not to be provide subsidy, but to provide a type of tenancy that private landlords can't. Eliminating the implicit subsidy will make it more expensive, however we have a benefits/tax credit system designed to help people afford their cost of living, and the higher rents should be paid out of that system, to the extent that's considered appropriate. The problem with the current system is that that vast majority of people don't realise any subsidy is going on, and therefore no questions are asked as to whether that money is going to the right people. To the extent that higher rents were funded by workers rather than taxpayers, any extra money could be used to increase the availability of secure tenancies, by buying extra properties from private landlords.

Bidding system :)

The only English councils offering first-come-first-served properties today are Sheffield and parts of Greater Manchester. I've not checked whether there are conditions attached, though (must have a relative in the area or be classed as vulnerable, etc.)

It's possible that OP meets high priority conditions. If not, she's been incredibly lucky! Glad she took the nice house.

If all properties were only given to those who could pay the most then significant numbers of hard working people will be priced out of their homes. The rate of homelessness would go up.

Council houses are non-profit making that is not the same as subsidised.

If all properties were only given to those who could pay the most then significant numbers of hard working people will be priced out of their homes. The rate of homelessness would go up

The number of people in the country and the number of bedrooms would be unchanged, so I'm not sure why homelessness would increase. (I suppose it could, if the highest-bidders under-occupied.) I do assume housing benefit/other benefits/tax credits bill would go up to meet the extra cost, so people (hard working or not) would not necessarily be worse off. The people who would be worse off are those who the benefits system thinks are high-earning enough to be paying their own way. If you disagree with them being worse off, then make benefits system more generous, don't re-introduce hidden subsidies.

My thoughts are:

A) Why do you need a council house if he works in a good job?

B) I work in the west end (central London) and have 50 minute commute - many of my colleagues have longer - none of us could afford to live much nearer to work.

So I think he is being pathetic...

Housing benefit is being reigned in. Thousands of people are paying their own way. Designing the system in such a way that these people now have to claim housing benefit in order to avoid being homeless is false economy. The administration alone would cost a fortune, it would just be jobs for the boys and money moved inefficiently and unnecessarily around different pots within councils. That's before you come to the cost if the actual benefit itself. All hypothetical of course as hell would freeze over before they increase the criteria that would allow people to claim HB. Being in HB isn't something to aim for either. especially the number of times it gets mucked up.

A young professional couple both earning say 30k could probably bid £1500 pm on where we live now. That's hundreds more than my monthly salary we'd have to move, but to where if everywhere is as expensive?

I will repeat as well not for profit is not the same as subsidised.

Woowoo.

You've been banging on about council housing, housing association and benefits in the most unpleasant way for what seams like months.

And you only just googled to find out some info about them?

Perhaps the op hasn't been back because like me she's spent the last day without any power, my village has only just come back on after having none since last night

45 minutes in rush hour or at any time? Would cost £8-£9 a day in my cheap car, so will eat into income.

chuck we have been looking into swapping. Unfortunately most people want to move to other parts of Essex or to houses, not to London. We will keep looking though!!

Oooh, Sock, I bet you're dying for a hot meal! Brrr! Just seen on the news that a lot of households will be without power tomorrow :(

I can't believe how many people think that council housing is free and/or only available to those on benefits.

Me and my OH lived in one prior to buying, we've never been unemployed in our lives.

OP of course he's unreasonable. You were bloody lucky to be offered so quickly, here in London you'd be in temporary housing (ie b&b) for months or years before you got housed, even with kids. And a 40 commute is nothing. Life ain't like Albert Square with everyone working on their doorstep.

God this thread has been an eye-opener. My grandparents and parents lived in council housing all their lives (until my parents bought under rtb). If I'd stayed in my home town I probably would have applied for a council house too. In many parts of the country (ie not cities) there are very few private landlords. It's buy or council rent. And its how working people get housed) I kind of thought everyone knew that...

It took Dh over 2 hours to get home yesterday. He'd love a 45 min commute.