Or is this a fair way to let homes?

[bridge83]

Me my dh and our two children are currently in a three bed private rented house that is really expensive ie rent, council tax, utilities etc. We've had our name down on the council list for six years but as there are only two areas that we would consider living and these are very popular areas we haven't had any luck.

So a few months ago I got a letter though from the council telling us that they now have additional service and another way of getting homes. Usually you bid for any properties you like on a weekly basis but now they've introduced a section of their website were there are homes available now as in you can have one straight away. The only catch is that it's a first come first served basis. I know this probably does sound very fair but as there is no telling when these properties come up you have to check their website every day or more like multiple times a day.

So I've expressed my interest on a few properties in our area recently that would have been perfect but obviously we weren't the first to register our interest as we would have heard something by now. Today for instance there are three properties that have come up close to were we live and I've registered for them all. I checked their web page this morning and there were no properties listed. I took my dd to school and checked again when I got back and there were properties that had just been put up. I know I haven't won any of them as the council email you straight away if you're the first bidder. But how the heck can I secure a property if they are put on so randomly throughout the week. Aibu to think that this is an odd way of allocating properties? Unless I check their site every five bloody minutes I don't have a chance do I?

It makes a mockery of the banding system though doesn't it? Surely that is based on something solid - eg. actual need. I am wholly confused by this.

I am organised lol. I work, study, look after two kids and run a busy home. I only have one day in the week off work and I can't constantly be on my phone whilst at work so it does limit me a bit.

To be honest were I live for example is very sought after. Even though they are essentially council estates they are actually quite nice and have a mixture of homes owners too and some of the neighbours are lovely. So were we are most of the hoises go to bad A-B so that is people who are in the greatest need.

There's no hundreds available on the homes now site. Around 12-15 every week or two. So there are plenty left over for the main bidding site. Plus not everyone will be as fussy as me and will bid on multiple areas. I can only be in one of two areas because of my kids schools as I'm not willing to uproot them.

You need a software programme then - my son is retakingh is driving test and we have paid a company which checks by computer every 5 minutes when cancellations come in in our area.

Whilst this is good for you personally OP, I don't think this is policy is right at all.

What is the point of having priority banding to establish those inthe greatest need (and it seems obviously those in priority need would be most in need of a house right away), if some houses will be allocated to those who don't need it so much (at all) just becasue they were able to bid at the right moment.

First come, first served, is very likely to be hard on with disabilities/ disabled family members/ caring duites or those with lack of access to technology. I can see that this policy could and should be challenged on all manner of 'fairness' and discrimination grounds. It is why the bdding system is structured in the way it is in the first place so how exceptions can be justified, I have no idea.

We are on lists and despite high priority banding have not been lucky yet (highest bid was 6th) so I'd be all kinds of furious if I found out that a suitable property went to someone else just because I'd slept in after caring for my husband in the night.

I also think the tension and jeopardy created by bidding in this frantic, almost obsessive way is very damaging, particularly to those in real need. We are still trying for private rented as well as social housing and some agents use first come first served. I find it unbearably stressful to be so desperately looking for a home (under notice as LL sold property) and with trying to be available to ring and view houses on the spot (even having to take cash to viewings as a deposit) as well as manage illness & disability, the unpredictability and edge-of-your-seat tension on top of other stress and illness, it is too much. If this was happening with our social housing bids too, it would send me over the edge

If you can currently manage to afford to live in the private sector don't you think you don't really need a council property and that they should be given to those you actually can't afford to rent privately?

Also, if your that picky, your need can't be that great.

I personally don't agree with this at all. There are so many people who due to circumstances are absolutely desperate for ANY council house or flat in ANY area not just two particular areas. The system is there for a reason and there are obviously people higher up on the list who are deemed to have a greater need.

I agree with a previous poster about managing to live in private sector. There are people that can't manage this at all and I feel that these should be for them. So many people with disabilities etc are waiting desperately for a property so this just doesn't seem fair whatsoever to me.

Also, the fact that it is only two areas shows that you aren't particularly in desperate need. I can understand about schooling however, if someone was desperately needing council accommodation they wouldn't limit like that or use schooling as an excuse. There are exceptions such as certain areas for personal and safety reasons but this reason is not right at all.

I hope someone who has the most need manages to be allocated some
of these properties.

That's a bit of an assumption isn't it? Both me and my dh work on minimum wage. We are not well off and I'm studying a degree so that we can try and better ourselves. But in the meantime our rent and council tax is extortionate. We are struggling to afford the basics some months and can't see us ever getting onto the property ladder. I'm in the lowest band which I think is fair so I'm not jumping the queue over disabled or less foruante people. I'm happy to wait my turn but if the council have designed this way of allocating properties wouldn't I be mad not to take them up on a property I like if I'm lucky enough to win one? Plus my Ds takes his GCSEs next year so I'm not uprooting him from school and we're about to apply for secondary school for our dd in Septmeber so yes, we need to stay local.

If I didn't live in the private sector where would I live then? I'm certainly not moving back in with my parents the age that I am and I'm already trying to make a better life for us by studying and holding down a job? What exactly do you want me to do?

And I should add, the reason we NEED social housing is because of not being able to work due to disability and caring duties, and the vast majority of private LLs not allowing housing benefit and so we are facing constant rejection despite our best efforts. It isn't a lifestyle choice for us.

I'm not using school as an excuse. To some people their children's education is very important and they'll do anything they can to ensure they can stay settled and happy in the school they're at.

I never assumed it was a lifestyle choice. We had no other option to private rent as we have no medical need to can't move up the council list but I'm not even moaning about that. I've already said I'm happy to stay in the band I've been put in.

I would say to any decent and proper parent that their child's education should be extremely important to them. I was making the point that others in desperate need of suitable accommodation have to take wherever available. Does that then mean that they don't class their child or childrens' education as important going by your logic?

What about transport to school? I know several people who through certain circumstances which are incredibly common had to take properties when they were finally offered them away from their child's school. They either contributed their child's education at their previous
school or they started at the local one. The thing is, if you are so worried about schooling then why not wait until after the GCSE then if changing school is what would have to be done if you moved.

The vast majority of people struggle with the cost of bills etc. Think about others that are less well off than yourself - they would be struggling a lot more with bills etc. It does work both ways.

As I said Bridge, it is good for you and your family, so take advantage if you will, but no, it is not a fair way to let homes.

Exactly the vast majority of private do not accept housing benefit whatsoever.

Crikey yes there are people less fortunate than myself but there are also people who I'm less fortunate than. I realise that some people are in dire straights and have no choice but to take any property in any area they're offered but not everyone is in the same boat and that's not my fault. I've no doubt I could get a property within a couple of weeks if I was willing to go to another area, one area springs to mind but it's really rough, has a bad reputation and is crime central. I'm not willing to move my kids to a place like this so I'm sorry if you think that somehow doesn't make me worthy of a council house.

My landlord doesn't know that we get a small amount of HB but we both work so I don't think he'd be bothered either way. You get HB directly now not your landlord so why does the landlord even need to know?

???

because the first thing LLs/ agents ask is if you are full time employed. And it woudl be futile and stupid (and wrong) to lie because it will be shown up in credit checks and references. And you wouldn't get the property.

Also all the tenancy agreements I have seen have a clause saying that you must informthe agent/ Ll of you start to receive housing benefit. I you don't, and get found out, you would be in breach of your agreement and libale to eviction and losign a good reference. I have known and heard of this actually happening to people.

Here in the South/ South East (and many other places I'm sure) there is terrible prejudice against benefits even for genuine disability and illness, and even with a guarantor and/ or rent up front.

Our previous LLs (before property was sold) were willing to give us a chance but it took 2 years to find a suitable property with willing LLs. Then, the property was sold and we are out becaseu the owner wants to redeveop the site

Sorry, for bad typing... am not well and tired and simulataneously searching for houses!?!

Well I didn't realise that. But to be fair a lot of people who want council houses do indeed work full time they're just on a low wage like me. So there must be a lot people in private rent who just about manage but are a low priority with the council. I'm aware that there are also a lot of people who can't work because of disability or other needs and I feel for them but really it's not my fault they're in that unfortunate position. Plus I've already said the way the council are allocating properties isn't right, hence my post but if a property comes up and I'm the first person to bid (via the first come first served service) are you really suggesting i should feel guilty or even turn it down so that someone else more deserving can have it?

I was simply answering your AIBU as to whether the method was fair: It isn't.

If this were available to me, in our situation I would use it, but I would also campaign to get the council to change it. And I would feel guilty that someone else more in need might have lost out. Desperate as we are, I do not enjoy benefitting from unfairness or enjoy thoughts of throwing others under the bus in order to further myself and have a conscience I have to live with and conscience/ guilt stops us from all being complete arseholes to each other.

I'm not saying you are an arsehole..! You have asked for opinions on whether this method is fair, so have given my answer and my reasoning. If it pricks your conscience a little to benefit, as it sounds like it does, then I personally think that is OK. Be glad you have empathy!

Emm no, I didn't say nor think that you not wanting to move your
children to a certain area which is in "rough" in your opinion, makes you unworthy of a council property. That is the first time you mentioned a certain area. However, now that you have brought it up, if there was such a desperate need for a council property then it wouldn't matter what area it is in. I'm guessing that is the real reason, and not the schooling. Not every single area that has a reputation is full of the dreaded bad people. At the end of the day, you have a roof over your
head and in secured accommodation so your level of needs would be low based. That is simply why I personally think YABU that is all. I'm not arguing, simply stating what I think regarding the subject.

I do think council properties should be for the people in the most need. If you can pick and choose what area quite happily and claim it is for school reasons then because you don't want your children in a "rough" area it is not a desperate need. Where I live has a mixture of bought and council properties and also has a reputation for being rough and crime etc however safest place I have lived.

Anyways, my views won't change regarding this especially due to knowing a lot of people desperately waiting for council properties stuck in temporary accommodation or families in refuge for example. They should be housed first, in my opinion.