To think that a decent home is a basic human right, not a privilege

[0pheliaBalls]

I rented absolute hovels in London for years, paying vastly over the odds for flats which variously had slugs in the shower/condmned gas appliances the landlord refused to fix in the depths of winter/2ft wide holes in the ceiling through which I could see the upstairs flat caused by water damage which again the landlord refused to fix and so on. The last straw came when I went into DD's room when she was a few days old and found a rat in her carrycot with her.

I now live in another part of the country in social housing and have lived here for 10 years. DH works (for a housing charity, actually) but there was a scary bit a few years ago when he was made redundant - thankfully we qualified for housing benefit so we didn't lose our lovely home.

We feel so fortunate to have a safe, secure, pleasant home for which we pay a very reasonable rent. We're all too aware that not everyone is as fortunate, both from my previous experience (I've also been briefly homeless, slept rough and in a hostel) and DH's work. But shouldn't everyone have the right to a decent roof over their heads, at an affordable cost?

Wanted to put this to you because when I mentioned it elsewhere I was flamed and told that people have too great a sense of entitlement these days. Sorry, but I believe everyone IS entitled to a secure, decent home.

No of course housing isn't a human right!

Why on earth is than an AIBU?
I don't think there is a person alive who would say that some people aren't entitled to a secure, decent home.

Why not?

Sorry Bamboo, that wasn't aimed at you. Clearly however there are some people who don't agree

Not sure really. In an ideal world yes. But where is the money going to come from for all those that can't/won't buy their own home?

Well there's being entitled to a secure, decent home and then there's human rights.
There's also the issue of somebody else paying for it (for those who can't pay for themselves) and the government subsidising the income of the wealthy who let these homes to those for whom they have to pay.

Many people will have opposing views on many aspects of this.

YANBU

In a wealthy western country like the UK it shouldn't even be up for debate, but sadly it often is.

Hopefully we'll get some decent housing legislation soon.

Well, yes, OP, and I agree with you but landlords DO have standards they have to adhere to. Sometimes homes are wrecked by the tenants in them.

I agree housing in this country is ridiculous though.

Absolutely right op and it is a disgrace that firstly it isn't and secondly some people are prepared to think that is okay.

If you know anything about the impact of poor housing on health, employment, life choices and chances, you would (I hope) hang your head in shame. It's ugly disgusting that anyone thinks its acceptable for anyone else to live in poor conditions.

People are not entitled to it, but they should be, it is a basic human need if not a right.

Human rights by their nature should be cost-free because they should apply to all humans all over the world.

I'm afraid I don't think housing fits that description. In an ideal world yes, but sadly not in the world we live in.

Agree with never there are no human rights, artifical, made-up bullshit.
You should talk about human responsibilities, those that have to share and those that don't to make an effort to get.

It's a disgrace that some landlords get away with providing over-priced substandard rentals in the first place.

ophelia I really feel for you.

Landlords can ride roughshod over lodgers and tenants in this country.

Landlords do not have any standard to unless they have licensed PREMISES and even then its woefully embarrassing how they cna do the bare minimum and pull wool over inspectors eyes.

Its shameful, all we need is minimim standards and robust policing of them....yet again...we are failed by the system of policing.

Rhonda totally agree.

people have a right to a habitable home. it may not be a room for every child, it may not be up-to date- modern but in decent repair and with heating.

news.bbc.co.uk/panorama/hi/front_page/newsid_9122000/9122529.stm

Mr Dansky, who has 140 properties in Newcastle alone, has become wealthy by exploiting Britain's critical shortage of affordable housing.

Perhaps more significant is that he is just one of a number of bad or neglectful landlords who are receiving perhaps as much as £3.5bn a year of public money through housing benefits paid to private landlords who accept poorer tenants.

Black mould

William Spires in Newcastle
William Spires Newcastle home has black mould and broken windows

The poor cannot sue and councils say they do not have the money or resources to devote to taking slum landlords out of the system

Human rights are never cost-free

It costs a lot of money for police to keep us safe, healthcare to keep us alive, a justice system and all the other checks on political power to make sure we have free speech and free thought, etc and so on.

The countries in the world that are most free and safe are also the wealthiest, that's not a coincidence

How strange that we will pay for all these other things but ensuring adequate housing, well that's every person for themselves

Other European countries have well regulated rental sectors, I don't understand why in Britain this is so complicated

I suppose in this context a "human right" is something other people are expected to pay for if the recipient can't. Having just googled to get a definition of what a "human right" actually is, the first page that comes up says that one aspect of human rights is that they are universal. I would say that means no-one in the world is entitled to housing as a human right until everyone in the world had adequate food, which is a higher priority. Which would mean that housing would not currently be important enough to be a human right.

Having said that, in theory at least, people in the UK do seem to have a right to housing.

Of course adequate shelter is a human right. It may be aspirational at the moment but it should be considered a right.

Surely, housing is something you work for so is not a right but something you have achieved? Even if you have rented a property, you have achieved it and will be paying for it. All right, some of the expenses will be from the taxpayer but you yourself will have found somewhere to live.

It's an achievement not a 'right'.

It's a disgrace that some landlords get away with providing over-priced substandard rentals in the first place.

Rents can be expensive but it's by definition impossible for them to be overpriced if there's a free market. If a rational person is renting substandard accommodation the problem is not the accommodation, or the landlord, it's that their income is insufficient to pay for something better. (I think there is enough property in the country for everyone to live adequately, it's just not distributed so that every one does.)

Didn't think it'd be too long before the landlord badgers came out to play

I prefer to provide a decent house a tenant can call home. I guess that's why my tenants have all been in for 3+ years. I also, along with many other LL's do our best help on threads with specific tenants issues.

...oh and we aren't rich but hope to be a lot better off in years to come when we sell, never going to make anything significant on a monthly basis.

As far as social housing goes, that all fell to bits when Margaret Thatcher wanted the working class man to aspire to owning their own home and sold off the local authority housing stock thought right to buy, but then never reinvested the money to replace the housing they sold do stock dwindled. I can see why she did it, but nobody can excuse the lack of reinvestment.

Yes, but the right to basic shelter is provided to those who can't work with HB, social housing and charities. Or, at least it should be. We also pay for water, healthcare, legal representation. Those who can't pay should be supplied them.

YANBU, adequate housing should certainly be a human right, but it's a very tricky one to administer.

It makes me pretty cross when people say things like Landlords can ride roughshod over lodgers and tenants in this country. - what about the thousands of landlords whose HB tenants are paid rent directly and then choose to spend it on other things than their rent and then fall into arrears? They have to spend literally thousands taking them to court to evict them and then never get their money back. They often then have to spend thousands more repairing a property that's been trashed by the tenants who won't pay for it because they're HB claimants with very little/no income and so don't fear being chased by the court for debt that they obviously won't be able to repay.

I know there are tons of wonderful tenants who pay their rent and leave the property the way they found it, but there are also lots of shockingly awful ones who are protected by law from being evicted. It's a double-edged sword, and it's always the law-abiding people (landlords and tenants) who end up getting cut.