... to not understand the "Right to Buy" thing???

[MillieV]

OK. Up and down the country, and here on MN, there is talk about councils not having enough council stock, that there should be more, and we all blame it on Margaret Thatcher. But why is it that now, politicians want to follow in Thatcher's footsteps yet again?!?

One article here

Do these properties come with covenants, i.e. they can only be sold on by the original buyer to those who are also in council/social housing, and continue to be at a discount? This would be fair. However, I fear the housing stock may just be sold on at market value 5 years down the line...

if you were to buy your house, will the council replace the actual property in the same area?
Not only that but older social housing was generally a decent size for a family with a garden etc. New houses are tiny with as many crammed into as small a space as possible, so replacement houses will not give the same standard of living.

London is important to any discussion of housing as it has about a third of the UK population (counting the adjacent areas) and the fastest growing population. Oh and generates the wealth that pays for housing benefit etc. A policy that ignored London would be perverse.

That's just what she Told me... I don't know the ins and outs of the scheme but regardless of the actual figures my point still stands she would have got it for a huge discount and by her own admission would never ever have been able to own a house any other way. I guess I'm just ridiculously envious of the fact I've worked my arse off to become a nurse and get a career and will be looking at private renting for the forsee able future and she works in a low skilled job, popped out some kids and now owns her own home.

Jackieharris - your GPS got a massively subsidised lifetime secure rental home.

They did not pay what they would have had to pay if they would have had to pay in private rental or in mortgage interest. That is why no one shoudl be entitled to buy at a subsidised price on the basis they 'paid rent'. I paid rent for 25 years in private rental before buying. Should private landlords be forced to sell rented houses below market price to tenants after 5 years. No of course not.

Your GPs (as did my GPs) had a benefit throughout their lives of living in a massively subsidised home that young people will never have access to.

People just don't seem to understand how economically nonsensical council housing is. It is subsidised housing pure and simple - and that is why council house waiting lists are so long. Its free money. If council houses were at market rents with no right to buy there would be no waiting lists.

Not sure about the rest of the UK, but RTB seems broken in London.

Last year my borough sold 150 council flats for an average of £90k. The average sale price for flats (not houses) in the borough is £540k. There are 18,000 people on the council housing waiting list. Given the discrepancy between the average council flat sale & private flat sale price, there is something very awry when very significant capital gains are being transferred from the public purse into individual ownership.

I bought an ex-Council flat last year as my first property, paying around the average borough price. Both other flats in my terrace are council & being a lovely terraced street, residents typically have long tenures, having been given their flats as young families. My neighbour does not live here & collects mail once every four weeks or so. They do not sublet so they're doing nothing illegal as far as I can see - I can only presume she is waiting for maximum right to buy discount. However, their family sized flat lies empty the vast majority of the time.

Giving people the right to buy their home builds strong communities and benefits future generations of that family, but we also need a strong pipeline of new housing as otherwise it is borrowing from those who can least afford it: Gen Y and Z who cannot hope to get a council flat in London unless their personal circumstances are really dire. Something needs to change and until supply is fixed, I just cannot see why RTB is supported in areas that lack secure, affordable housing.

There have been 20 council bungalows been built in 2014 literally over the road. It's a condition of selling the land to developers to give so many properties back to the council. 3 other areas off the top of my head are having council houses built at the minute.

I'm thinking it's great because those houses are being built with solar panels installed. Another HA built a load of eco houses for rent as a pilot which seems to have been successful as there are plans for more.

I think there's a rot set in down south and stagnated making people suffer when it's not the case for other areas in the UK.

Of course there still would be waiting list. It isn't just for the rent cost but for the actual security.

Ooooo the subsidised housing brigade have lifted their heads. Took your time man

I cba to labour a point.
A quick Social housing is not subsidised it still makes a profit it's the depletion of stock that creates inflated prices.

If they spent the money on new stock it would be equal, instead the profit from sales and rent gets chucked back into the pot.

Being envious of people getting tge discount is understandable but as Tu-Pac would say.
Don't hate the player, hate the game

Well you can check.that put frik put your council into Google with right to buy and the discounts are on there.

Social housing does not make a profit.

There is a smoke and mirror con going on that is only possible in the public sector magic money tree economy.

Most housing associations lose money and only stay solvent by selling off stock and using that that income to cover losses on rental side.

In some areas housing associations are near bankruptcy. Its a scandal waiting to happen.

Thanks gamer... looks like she was telling porkies... still it's between a 50-70% discount, no big deposit and house she couldn't afford to own were it not a right to buy house... still jealous and still think it's unfair.

Well I won't be voting conservatives just based on this. It makes no sense deplete stocks and don't replace them. Even though most builds are forced to build a proportion of council/social housing it will never be enough.

I should add that falling borrowing costs have essentially allowed Housing Associations (HAs) breathing space since the financial crisis but if interest rates rise the rental stream from tenants will fall massively short of outgoings. Cuts in Govt grants will put further pressure on them.

The real scandal will erupt when banks seize HA assets when a HA defauts on its loans and the banks will either hike the rents or evict tenants and sell off the assets to recoup their capital. Then people will realise just how financially unviable Housing Associations really are and pressure will then grow for Govt to rescue the HA sector by pumping money in to stop tenants being evicted - yet more subsidy.

HAs only work as a concept as long as property values keep rising, grant subsidy remains and interest rates stay low. The wheels will fall off the minute those things change.

We were on the fence who to vote for. Now, don't know who to vote at all?!?

There is no political party that makes sense.

Tories - Trying to get election points through stupid policies like this one is a big, big mistake.

Labour - I'm afraid public spending will go up for farcical reasons, if they get back into power.

Lib Dems - Would have been a good choice, but they actually agreed to reinvigorate RTB with the Tories...

A definite "NO" for UKIP...

A couple of points

The discount increases with the length of tenancy but is capped - a maximum of just over £100k in London and about £77k in most of the rest off he country

There is a period during which, if you sell, you have to pay some or all of the discount back - this is tapered depending on how long ago since you purchased, BUT you could buy today and let the property out at 3 times the rent you were paying as a tenant tomorrow (or more, whatever the market will bear)

Thatcher and successive Governments refused to allow councils to build with the proceeds from RTB sales. The current Government committed to a 'one sold, one built' policy, but to say that building has lagged behind sales is putting it mildly.

Social housing is an asset which pays for itself and which benefits society as a whole. The RTB, like the sale of public utilities has been a case of selling the family silver. Some people benefited hugely, but at the expense of future generations. It is often those who purchased who complain that their children can't find affordable housing in the areas where they are born and brought up.

i agree that people in social housing should somehow be able to get a foot on the housing ladder,

why? it's one thing to prevent help for rent so that people don't go homeless, it's a completely different thing for people to be given major state assets.

Ooooo the subsidised housing brigade have lifted their heads. Took your time man

of course it's a subsidy. call it what it is.

still jealous and still think it's unfair.

it's crazily unfair. Few things boil my blood in this country like RTB. it's a massive scam.

I think anyone who can access it should do it (I would) but it's a failed policy and massively unfair. it's disgusting.

There is no political party that makes sense.

I am so against RTB that I would vote UKIP if they promised to scrap it. and I hate UKIP.

I pay 60 quid less than my neighbour who is private. council houses are not subsided. I have lived in a ha property for nearly 7 years and have the rtb and am doing.

So if you had a chance to do it simple would you refuse?

Not sure where you liveal amazegumball but they were four new builds a few months ago I bidded for only working people were allowed to bid.

LST... then your neighbour has a good landlord... round my way average for a 3 bed semi private is about £650. HA is about 350. It is heavily subsidised. Also will your neighbour be able to buy her house subsidised like you? Probably not.

Yes I would go for a right to buy if I was in that situation but I still feel it is ridiculously unfair!

So if you had a chance to do it simple would you refuse?

I think I said clearly that if I had the chance to do it, I would.

but it's utterly ridiculous.

It's not subsided. It isn't.

Yes working people do get priority in some houses. I believe it's a good way to encourage employment.