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

for £400/month in my town yes you would get a nice two bed with a fitted kitchen , luxury carpets or flooring and fitted bathroom my council house has none of these and i pay £87/week.

There will always be some people who will need social housing and I have no issue with that (why should I, I lived in a council house until I was 12). I don't however always agree with lifelong tenancy. Peoples financial situations change and in my view (rightly or wrongly), there are occasions when really they don't warrant a council house.

My sister for example, 25 years ago, two small kids, no partner, no job, no income of her own at all. She was provided with a council house, safe and secure lovely home to raise her kids. Move forward 25 years, she is now married, both her and husband work full time - 48K a year between them. Kids moved out. Three bedroom house, low rent.
New kitchen and bathroom due this year. Does she still "need" social housing when she could rent privately (like many of us who never qualified for social housing and rarely will). She often brags about her home for life, will never move and when she retires will be able to claim benefits to pay her rent until she dies.

The irony is, she lives in the town where David Cameron is MP.

My brother lived in a council house with my Mum and Dad and when the right to buy came up they bought so that when they died he wouldn't have to move out. He owned two large houses which he rented out but he didn't want to live in them. My sister on the other hand had to buy her council house in her late 60's so that her son with learning difficulties does not become homeless because he doesn't have right of tenancy. Luckily my DH and I moved 200 miles from where we was born so that we could buy a house as we have a son with learning difficulties who cannot live on his own.

Yanbu.

Everybody who has a right to live in the uk qualifys for
social housing [according to shelter] wether you would get one or not due to waiting lists is a different matter but anybody can apply.

I'd leave existing tenants on the whole, as they are but I have thought for some time, council tenancies should now only be given to key workers on low wages, or people on minimum wage, or pensioners, or the disabled and/or carers.

I would rescind 'for life' tenancies granetd in the past say 10 years, from anyone who has got form for ASB, or who got their home under false pretences, coming from another area and covering up ASB. Our council gave away next door's tenancy, only doing one landlord reference - and as ASB tenants they had been thrown out of social housing then ended up renting privately, in a detached house where, with no neighbours, they caused no problems. So they got a 'good; landlord reference. A tiny bit more digging would have uncovered why they were renting privately.

Be more rigorous in offering tenancies in the first place, in other words: ask for a few years' worth of references and let HAs and councils share data about known ASB tenants. Also make it easier to remove tenancies from people who break the rules, as in this area, there are about 5 criteria for losing your secure tenancy and tenants can break 4 of them and remain firmly put. Change the law around eviction, rather than take secure tenancies from good tenants.

Why have we lost the idea that 'social housing' (vile term) are people's homes, FFS?

I lie in private rented, I don't have luxury carpet, fitted kitchen or bathroom though. Have ceramic flooring that's a death trap as so slippy, ancient cracked corner bath and a fitted kitchen admittedly, but don't open some of the cupboards unless you have a a free hand to catch it as it falls off the hinge as the door has rotted away from the hinge so a new hinge isn't going to fix it. And don't dare pester the landlord for the repairs and promised new kitchen as if she puts the rent up to market rent to cover the costs, we won't be able to afford it and will have to move to a different area miles away from jobs and schools.

All the, give them a set tenancy and then see if they can then afford to be moved out people...

You do know that income isn't part of what determines whether you qualify for social housing?

I was comparing what you getr fior your money here in my town for private rented compasred to council not a lot of difference in price so not much subsidy if any considering the extras they get in private rented but agasin i dont live in the south i could say it untill i,m lue in the face and still no one will take any notice?

get for comparedagain blue

I disagree with almost everything the current Government does, but I actually agree with this step. I know a number of people who live in council properties who earn considerable wages. How is that necessary or fair?

Of course, the devil will be in how it is implemented and what is done with the money and properties saved.

Council houses are a state owned asset and as such should be reserved for the most needy. Which is certainly not the case at the moment. I totally agree with this new initiative. Such a typical socialist viewpoint. I only wish there was enough to go round. There isn't but you're not having mine. Which isn't yours anyway.

I agree with what you have said Joffrey about how low waged workers - ie people who need to be in a particular area for work should receive priority for housing association properties and it should be considered a priviledge - ie you should be a good tenant/neighbour and treat your property well. If you abuse that privelidge, you should be evicted.

However, there will always be people who cannot/will not be decent tenants but they have to live somewhere? What if they cannot afford to buy or rent privately? It is all very difficult.

tabulahrasa
You do know that income isn't part of what determines whether you qualify for social housing?

That isn't entirely true anymore. I know of at least one London Borough (Westminster) that takes income into account when allocating housing.

"1.6. Exclusions
1.6.1. Applicants whose circumstances are as follows will be excluded from the housing register subject to the discretion of the Director of Housing (these exclusions may not apply to homeless applicants as they do not over-ride the Council’s duties under the Housing Act 1996 Part VII);
...
Whose household’s total gross income from all sources exceeds the threshold for the higher rate for taxable income tax (currently
calculated as taxable income of £32,011) or whose household’s total savings and capital assets exceeds £59,349.
Applicants whose household has capital assets of up to £59,349 will be assumed to accrue a pro-rata income of £5 per annum for each £100 of asset. This assumed sum will be added to other income (Supply and Allocation of Social Housing and Low Cost Home Ownership 13th March 2006). Any compensation awarded to members of the Armed Services for injuries sustained while serving will be discounted. Supply & Allocation Report 12th June 2013."

Thing is if you are offered a council property where is the incentive to spend any money on it if in five years you will be turfed out?

This house has graffiti on the inside walls, holes etc and I spent a lot of money making it liveable.mi wild be highly hacked off if I was told "sorry love...your just over the threshold for this place now so out you go" .

The only way to achieve this is to ensure every council/social housing property is let at a required standard. So neutral hard flooring, clean walls etc.

You can earn up to £50.000 locally and ask to go on the housing list. Of course you will be waaaay down the list and will wait forever but you can still go on the list.

A 3 bed in this area is around £800 a month privately rented, council 3 bed is £750, the council estates are dodgy areas with appalling schools. If I were renting I think I'd rather spend the extra, so to me that cheaper rent does not look like much of a 'subsidy'.

I've never lived in a council house, never even thought about it, I believe my Great grandparents did in London after WWI for a short period before buying a house in Dorset. My OH's Grandfather lived all his life in the same 2 up 2 down back to back council house in Lancashire, OH's father is one of 9 children, his GF was a miner. OH's father went to Grammar school and University and bought his own house, the only one in his family to do so, all 4 of his kids went to uni, all of them own their own homes. It does not follow that just because someone gets a council house that they and their families will all be council tenants for ever and ever amen.

Even if you ignore the anecdotal evidence above, when the Right to buy legislation was being re-written much research was done into peoples habits and the trends as regards buying and renting, pretty much bore out what I've said, people move on, some won't, but most will. What's changed is people can buy council houses, most people who do would probably have bought a house eventually anyway, those who don't buy their council house wouldn't have moved on anyway.

x2boys that's not true that everyone can apply for council housing - there are lots of exclusions.

Also, you say that your council rent is almost as much as private market value rent, but in the private sector the quality and facilities of a property are over and above what you rent. If the difference in rental cost is so small, then you surely have the choice of leaving council accommodation and renting privately for a comparable cost, therefore getting all those 'extras' like white goods and carpets etc... You seem to be saying that there is hardly any difference in the cost and you get more for your money in the private sector - in which case, you have the choice. It's up to you whether you stay in your council home or move over to private renting then if the two are so similar.

I dont disagree with this decision and i am a council tenant. If you dont buy your council house then why should you be renting for life when others need houses as well? council houses are a starting point for people not a lifetime house.
And i think they shouldn't be so reluctant to kick out problem tenants, if someone breaks the tenancy and there is proof they should just chuck them out. To many nasty neighbors in council houses and housing association who act like this because they know they wont be kicked out and the authority dont give a shit.

For my area there has to be a housing need, which relates in part to being able to afford local rents. The lowest level is bronze which is along with those that are difficult to place tenants/ those volutarily homeless.

I think income is/ought to be a main criteria in most areas surely.

citybush i agree with that.
Council/HA are not all great as they are made out to be. I have lived in 3 council/HA buildings and havent had good neighbors, specially with estates people trash the place and constantly break doors, pee in lifts, kids are hanging out inside, noise because of bad installation, cheap nasty kitchens and bathrooms that get replaced every 20years and council/HA dont care what your nasty neighbors do to you as long as they dont kill you its fine for them to make your life hell.

council/HA are really not all they are played up to be, moment i get out of university and into a stable full time job im out of here!

Does nobody care about the concept of community anymore?...If people have long-term tenancies and can stay beyond the point at which they are in desperate need, then it has the potential to build strong communities...If people can only stay in their homes if they're no more than 5 years out of crisis, what kind of communities will we be building? They will surely be no more than transient ghettos. And where's the incentive to improve your lot if the result is you lose your home?!

THIS ^^

Does nobody care about the concept of community anymore?...If people have long-term tenancies and can stay beyond the point at which they are in desperate need, then it has the potential to build strong communities...If people can only stay in their homes if they're no more than 5 years out of crisis, what kind of communities will we be building? They will surely be no more than transient ghettos. And where's the incentive to improve your lot if the result is you lose your home?!

So by that logic, no community can ever exist outside of a council estate?

Because in every street in every town, people come and go as their lives change. They get a payrise and move to a bigger house. They get a pay cut and move to a smaller house. Their children leave and they downsize.

And shock horror, there is still a sense of community. Because a community isn't built by the same people living in the same house for 40+ years.

Absolutely agree spare.

I live in a street of 17 privately owned houses - only 5 of us are the 'originals' from 12 years ago, for precisely the reasons given by spare. Communities and community spirit does not depend on the length of time a person has lived in the house (esp now with both parents working outside of the home as the norm) - it has to do with how involved you are locally, and that can be on a short, medium or long term basis.

Just my opinion here but I agree with this idea. In my area there a two people in my end who have council houses that I know for a fact could more than afford private rental, one is a neighbour who brags about all the more than £500 per week her DH brings home and she works as well, the house across the road is a 2 bed that an elderly lady lived in and now a Middle aged couple with no kids (flown the best anyway) have just moved in and apparently, according to the countless workmen that have been there, she's always on the phone moaning about things needing sorted yet they both work full time so could put their hands in their pockets and sort them themselves or downsizes so a family could have that house.

Then up the road is a granny bungalow meant for one person turns out a whole family (mum, 11year old son, mums boyfriend and granny) are all living there, they are all in there as the mum got kicked out of last house for not paying her rent so is over crowding a council house instead with her boyfriend who the police are constantly looking for.

Then there is us in a private rent, which by the way as a pp said is not all rosy, yes it had carpets and a kitchen but the kitchen is falling to bits, the carpet was bare with the sharp grippers showing (had to replace this myself as landlord wouldn't) and the enamel in the bottom of the bath is gone so all the ingrained dirt from over the years is all stuck in it. I'm in the same position that if I hassle him enough he would put the rent up to unaffordable levels or serve us notice and we have lived there 4 1/2 years and I love the area. The council houses here for a 3 bed are £75 p/w mine is well over £100 p/w. I'm on the list but will likely never see a council house which is fair enough as I wouldn't say we needed one as we make enough money to cover the essentials.