to think its a disgrace that Cameron is going to stop lifetime council tenancies

[sparklesandglitterxx]

and think that that is NOT the solution to the housing crisis?

the solution as far as i can see it is, lots and lots more council houses need to be built, regulation in private renting needs to be improved, and GENUINELY affordable houses to buy for those on low wages that wish to or are able to buy

fed up of seeing the great things about Britain being chipped away. Why punish renters? The whole Tory attitude towards council housing being a last resort for the destitute disgusts me. council housing needs to be brought back to what it was originally meant for...which is a decent secure home for anyone who wants one. i live on a council estate which is a mix of council, HA and bought. People stay here, they build lives here, generally it is a lovely community. i have never been happier or more settled anywhere i have lived, I have done well in my life and been able to have a big family. my children are happy and thriving at school and have lots of friends. My point is if these changes go through, they will end up DESTROYING communities like ours and so many others. The Tories just seem to want everyone either paying their landlord mates every penny they earn or pushing up house prices by buying. But not everyone wants to buy, and more importantly not everyone CAN buy, (I have friends on good money who are still priced out the market) and hardly anyone would actually CHOOSE to be in insecure, expensive private rented !! I also think that if more people are in secure housing, it will help peoples mental health (hence cutting costs in mental health services), it will improve childrens chances in life, as they wont have to keep moving schools and away from friends etc, it will encourage people to better themselves, it will cut the HB bill, and also with people spending less on their rent they will have more to spend in the economy, thus boosting it!

I also suspect it wont end here....while it will be for new tenants only to start with, i would imagine it will end up being everyone in council / HA

I totally agree red

The problem is that a majority of homeowners (and I am one) don't see it as that, we have built our economy on ever rising house prices, personal 'profit' far outweighs the reactionary call for governments to step in and solve the issue, even though as you say it would actually make the leap between moving up the ladder smaller.

The btl/accidental landlord is in for a rude awakening as they are now legitimately seen as a potential tax revenue, the current government has silently tackeled this on two fronts, reduction in HB (a floor in income)and removal of tax breaks etc will far outweigh the usual cry of 'I will just increase rents'

Social housing should provide a service, putting in a process that addresses the entitlement to this service at specific intervals is, IMO a good thing.

I'd built loads of prefabs like they had after the war - so many that anyone who wants affordable housing can have it. Sod 'market value' - that just benefits landlords. Just flood the market with cheap housing - that will drive private rents down and make property reasonable again.

Lots of work for builders, and people who provide services to homes. More £ in the economy. And all those grasping people who have profited from the stupid property prices will just have to deal with it. Seems to me the tories are so terrified of scaring their pals that they will never have the will to deal with it. It's crazy wanting to make council homes like hens' teeth and driving up the rents to 'market alue' - when we could house everyone and drive the rents for everyone, private and public, down.

Have o right to buy allowed on any new HA or coucil house built. Of coruse the tories want right to buy as it diminishes the housing stock and you end up with a situation like we have in this village - only deeply antisocial problem families are now getting enough housing points and getting to the top of the list.

As for this crap about social housing not being a home for life but a get-on-your-feet thing... pure tory propaganda. Ie: bollocks.

ah, the bile...

so who is going to build these cheap houses to flood the market? The developers won't, no profit.

Sod 'market value' - that just benefits landlords

I think your being very niave with this statement, as for trying to score political points shows it up even more so.

Im in a housing trust place and have a secure tenancy signed again last year. If the government did this to me then they would have to pay far more to a private landlord Stupid rules trying to be reinforced by stupid people that are so far removed from real life its pathetically comical.

But puff your hasn't really proved that they are so far removed from real life as you have recently had to re sign a secure tenancy?

You obviously warranted the outcome, so what is 'out of touch' in re-addressing your suitability on a periodic timescale?

The agreement was tweaked but still stayed the same. They cannot get a secure tenant out. They can however "start" to let properties differently. So you're saying the likes of Cameron et al know about real working class life? really

You haven't really answered the question, is a periodical evaluation of your tenancy a bad thing?

You obviously warranted the 'tweak' but if you somehow landed a job a la Bob crow do you still think your justified in staying in your accommodation because of your secured tenancy, do you think it's not a case of pass it on, or are you more of thinking 'I've got mine so screw you'

As for your obvious political point scoring, the housing situation is not a recent phenoman that can just be traced back to thatcher and only resurfaced in 2010, the majority of economists that are currently lauded under the opposition where largely ignored during their decade in power, so the is redundant, the current situation goes far beyond a Tory evil/someone else good scenario.

Op are you seriously saying that if someone rents a three bed council house they should be allowed to stay in it when all the children no longer live there , when there are homeless famalies.? That they can't live in say a two bed and for larger groups live in the larger one ? It's social housing ffs and we are part of society not just mine mine .

Im not on "question time" neither am I on "debate mate" therefore I don't need to answer a question.

But, if for instance I married very well or somehow landed a job that was 100k plus then I'd of course buy and pass the property back.

There are lots of memories etc. that go with living in a "home" where the children have left, its not just about "space" its about community also. There is also the want to still accommodate a child if things go wrong whether they are 19 or 40. The council or whoever should offer a smaller property in either the same area or somewhere beneficial to the tenant.

When I moved into my ha house 15 years ago it was unfit to live in.

It was filthy, the walls were crumbling and it didn't even have doors on the inside!

Now it's a beautiful house thanks to my hard work.

I work full time and I have 3 children. I pay full rent and council tax as do all of my neighbours in my street. I resent being accused of getting a house for free.

It's not bloody free.

Ive just seen a review on a fb page where a bloke is waiting in for a FIFTH time for a heating engineer.

Living in an HA property can be a full time job in itself!

I didn't ask for a "debate mate" nor was I thinking this was "question time"

You jumped in blindly with your political affiliations and saying they are out of touch whilst actually admitting that you personally have recently gone through a re-evaluation.

So, I'm not sure wether you agree that this policy is a good thing or bad thing?

The "community" argument is being somewhat derogatory to those in private rentals

I said it as a real life tenant are you Just? or are you just damn jealous that I am?

I think that if you earn a high income then of course you had it back, if not you dont unless there is something that helps you do that.

I didn't jump in "blindly Just I spoke as a tenant actually knowing what Im saying. Do you?

People saying "answer my question" doesnt do it for me. Same as "Did you mean to be so rude" they are passive aggressive statements and ones I dont entertain.

I think it's wrong to take a house off a tenant. The tories were the ones who gave everyone the right to buy. There's now a shortage of houses. The ones who've been in them for years shouldn't be kicked out just because there aren't enough homes. It's a typical nasty Tory thing.

Trying to assume that I am jealous is juvinile, the whole point of the thread is that it is apparently a massive injustice that the current government is wanting to implement a ~5yr revaluation of if you qualify for social housing.

You jumped in with the that you have recently been awarded an extension of your secure tenancy whilst stating that those in power 'don't understand the working class'

Apart from you not understanding the irony on your comment you seem to try and pin it on those 'evil tories'.

It's a simple question I am asking, regardless of who is implementing this, is denying a life time tenancy and or re evaluating circumstances at specific a time point wrong in principal.

Ginorwine would you expect home owners to be forced to sell and downsize once their dc have grown up.
Of course you wouldn't but why not? Because they worked hard and own their own home?
Council house were intended as a home for life. Many tenants have worked just as hard as home owners and paid their own rent.
It is Tory propaganda that social housing should just be temporary and for " poor" people.

The single childless working people in the council flats opposite me got their flats by applying for them laughing like everyone else and by not living in the south and as AndNowItsSeven points out some of the homes advertised on the website[ in my town all council and housing assosciation homes are advertised on the same website ] people can only apply for them if they are working.

purplehazed you do realise that the vast majority were sold under Blair/brown's "ruling"? A little disingenuous to blame "evil Tories" when labour had 13 years to change the law. It's almost as if the elite left don't give a flying fuck either but are happy to let the right take the blame - I suppose that's why it's called politics.

Much like during the 80's when the labour led council of Liverpool locked down their funds (they had gazillions) and let the locals suffer so they could point the finger at Westminster.

It's not so black and white my dear, one can hardly move for agendas around here.

^Ginorwine would you expect home owners to be forced to sell and downsize once their dc have grown up.
Of course you wouldn't but why not? Because they worked hard and own their own home?
Council house were intended as a home for life. Many tenants have worked just as hard as home owners and paid their own rent.
It is Tory propaganda that social housing should just be temporary and for " poor" people.^

Home owners have property rights.

Why would anyone be jealous of social housing? Baffling.

Many would see them as a last resort in areas they wouldn't choose.

^Why would anyone be jealous of social housing? Baffling.

Many would see them as a last resort in areas they wouldn't choose.^

That would be people who can comfortably afford the right house in the right area and still have a life after paying the rent/mortgage. A tiny minority in many areas.

Meanwhile, everyone else places enormous value in a secure tenancy and affordable rent. This can make a massive difference to their quality of life.

And many social housing is in perfectly pleasant areas with decent schools/shops/facilities etc.

I live on an estate where it is about 50/50 owned/HA tenanted. It is on the edge of a village and borders open countryside. All houses are solidly built, spacious, on large plots and there is very little in the way of antisocial behaviour/crime etc. Certainly no worse than people I know that pay 2 or 3 times more for their housing because they live in the naice areas.

Yes my estate is ok too its not in a village or in open countryside but it backs on to a huge adventure playground and park, its flats and houses the flats are in several two storey blocks at the front of the estate and the houses are mainly two bed but there big enough to convert into three bed if needed the rooms are spacious and i have a small but not too small garden i have been here nearly a year and not seen any trouble or antisocial behaviour.

God, some people are harsh. I've lived in a 2 bed social housing flat for nearly 10 years and I absolutely dread the day DS moves out and they force me to relocate.

I don't care about the size of the place. I don't want to leave this place because it's my home, I love the area and the neighbours and I've got a life here. I'm not just something to be packed up and shipped off.