To wonder what would happen if every council tenant had their tenancy reviewed

[BumpowderSneezeonAndSnot]

Life time tenant or not. Everyone was reviewed and income taken into account when calculating rents. Would this free up housing stock for those in need?

Ofcourse there are smaller properties. PEople just don't want to live in them. So someone doesn't want to give up their 3 bed with garden to live in a one bed tower block, that's fair enough but it's pointless lying and sayin there are "no smaller places" in my area there are more one beds than any other size properties. I will go and count how many are for bidding this week compared to other sizes.

Dairy because funnily enough, I've always lived in London, as have both my parents and grandparents (on dad's side). I grew up here, it's my home. My family are here, as are DH's. I work in the NHS as admin staff, I could not afford to live far away and commute, the costs are astronomical! So if I don't do my job, who can? They'll be paid the same as me. Same with TA's and cleaning staff at the local schools/ hospitals. The cost of commuting will make reaching our jobs from the nearest place we could afford just not worth it. I'd find a job closer to home. So who could afford to do mine?

www.theguardian.com/society/2018/mar/24/london-social-housing-sell-off-protest-luxury-hotel?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Tweet

"Savills is auctioning £7.2m worth of former social housing. Photograph: Stefan Wermuth/Reuters

Tenants opposed to the social cleansing of city centres will protest outside an auction at a luxury hotel where property developers and private landlords will bid for £7.2m worth of former social flats and houses.

Nearly one in 10 of the lots, which are being auctioned by leading estate agent Savills at the Marriott hotel in London’s Grosvenor Square on Monday, are former social housing, with 14 lots being sold by housing associations and six by councils.

They include three housing association flats in Croydon, two housing association flats in Camberwell and a housing association house in Harlesden. These three areas have more than 7,000 families in temporary housing and 104 people sleeping on the streets, according to the most recent government figures.
Guardian Today: the headlines, the analysis, the debate - sent direct to you
Read more

In the last Savills auction in February, more than 15% of the lots were sold by social landlords, including a two-bed housing association flat in Bayswater sold for £603,000 and a housing association flat in Paddington belonging to a woman who was forced to move after her housing benefit was cut by the so-called bedroom tax.

These sales are part of a wider trend that has seen some housing associations sell off social housing in high-value inner city areas in order to fund new developments, which tenants claim are frequently let at close to market rents, or even sold on the open market to private buyers.

One, one of the country’s biggest housing associations, Genesis, is at the forefront of this commercial drive. The 32,000-home landlord, which operates across London, has four lots listed for sale. In February, Genesis listed 22 lots of social housing, including a two-bedroom flat in Maida Vale sold for £417,000, a one-bedroom flat in Notting Hill sold for £401,000 and a flat in Kilburn sold for £450,000"

Genesis chief executive Neil Hadden told Inside Housing magazine in 2015 that housing people on the lowest income was not his “problem” any more as his focus was supplying homes at different price points. The company’s last annual report reveals it completed 159 homes in 2016. Of these, only three were rented at social levels, which are typically less than half the cost of market rents. In the same period, it sold 58 social homes to the private sector.

Genesis and Notting Hill tenants report that flats that were once rented to their friends and neighbours on a social housing basis in central London are now being used as profitable Airbnb rentals, rented out for at least twice the rate by buy-to-let landlords, or put on the market for £1m-plus

I think this, in tandem with landlords who have more than two properties, needs looking at.

I think more smaller bungalows etc should be built for older people who are less mobile to live in.

I think more smaller houses should be built for those whose children have left home.

I'm not so sure about making people leave - I'm a bit on the fence with that one.

I think the main problem though, is much more well off people buying houses to let, pushing prices up.

My position: privately renting in a middling - expensive town with no hope of being able to buy, despite in theory having a good wage as a teacher.

I don't believe we need more social housing, we need more affordable housing.
Sadly, developers don't want to build small houses (although they are now legally obliged to) and homeowners want to see the value of property increase. This is creating a market where it's very difficult for modest earners to get on the property ladder, and those that do usually have a bigger financial burden placed on them that previous generations did.

We need to completely slow down the housing market prices, and make more affordable homes.
Social housing shouldn't really mean renting from the council, it should mean providing real homes for low income families. A home they have a vested interest in. A home that belongs to them.

"Judi Wilson, who lives in a Genesis flat in Brent, said the flat below her was sold at auction a few years back and was now used as an Airbnb rental. “There is a constant turnover of guests, some of whom have held wild parties,” she said.

Peter Robinson, who lives in a Genesis flat in west London, said the two flats above him were sold after the tenants moved out: “At least 50 potential buyers so far have been shown round the flat immediately above me. Maybe the £1m-plus price tag is putting them off.”

Westminster MP Karen Buck, whose constituency includes thousands of Genesis and Notting Hill properties, said both associations were becoming developers rather than social housing providers: “Genesis and Notting Hill began life in my constituency as a response to private sector squalor and Rachman-type landlords. Both of them have lost sight of their mission to provide decent social housing in areas like Paddington.”

The auctioning of social homes was depriving her constituents of vital social housing, she added. “It sticks in my throat to see social housing sold off in a swanky hotel.”

Genesis said it was still committed to helping those who find it difficult to meet their housing needs in the marketplace. “Over time, our approach to delivering this in the most effective way has had to evolve in step with changing government policies and a difficult operating environment,” said a spokesperson. Scarce government funding had forced it to become more commercial but it was replacing social homes: “We have built far more social rent homes than we have sold"

"The auctioning of social homes was depriving her constituents of vital social housing, she added. “It sticks in my throat to see social housing sold off in a swanky hotel.”

Genesis said it was still committed to helping those who find it difficult to meet their housing needs in the marketplace. “Over time, our approach to delivering this in the most effective way has had to evolve in step with changing government policies and a difficult operating environment,” said a spokesperson. Scarce government funding had forced it to become more commercial but it was replacing social homes: “We have built far more social rent homes than we have sold.”

Notting Hill Housing said it still provided Londoners with good quality homes, and any profits from sales were invested in affordable housing. “Times have changed and the lack of government grants brings pressures, but any commercial work and property sales we undertake is done to create greater surpluses to invest in more affordable housing,” it said, adding that it sold properties in high-value areas to fund development of family homes elsewhere in London.

Sales of housing association social homes to the private sector have more than tripled since 2001, with 3,891 social homes sold in 2016. Overall, more than 150,000 homes for social rent have been lost since 2012 – mainly through the government’s policy of converting social rents into affordable rents and right-to-buy purchases"

More adaptable housing should be built.

Did the op just post and ....go?

Also regarding the elderly- DH's grandparents were in a 3 bedroom property. They needed 2 anyway to sleep separately for medical reasons/ adaptions. The extra bedroom meant a family member could always be with them, and they did so until it became untenable. So when one was admitted to hospital they could come home sooner because they had someone there to stay, only needed 1x carer per day instead of 3x, someone to cook, clean, shop, assist with washing etc. I'm not saying it's right for all but in their circumstances it saved the council a lot of money and it's far better for the people to be cared for by family rather than strangers.

Oh' what would I give for this to happen!!
Virtually everyone I know living in council property is taking the piss....EVERYONE!! Make me livid

Friend lived in Council Flat in an extremely wealthy area, basically Istanbul like Beverly Hills. Anyway mom dies leaving large house. Council house comes up with massive garden, you know probably build 2 more big detached houses on. He and his G/F apply for the council house, get it. Then sells his moms house, buys a fucking Range Rover and has been told due to being s previous council tenant he can apply right to buy.....intends to buy!!!
Another one, single parent, 2 kids (seperate dads) nice council house new BF, BF buys the house at virtually fuck all price. Both move out within a month and are currently renting it out!! She's never worked in her life, child support of both kids, plus rent from new tenant. Drives around in posh 4x4

And on and on and on.
They're all at it. Fucking sends me crazy sponging sacks of shit!!!

Sorry for the rant, I need to breathe!!

I’m at the idea of life tenancies.
People situation will vary a lot during their life. As some posters pointed out, some people will have struggled at some point and then will start earning money again/married etc.. and won’t NEED a Council house.
At the other end, you have people who desperately NEED a Council house becaus ethey have no money but there is noth8ng available....
How is that fair?

Of course, this will mean that some people will stay all their life in their Council house.
And some will come and go.
Pensioners are a different issue imo, esp because they would have been told all their life that they had a house for life.

As for building more houses... yes we need more of them because unfortunately, there are more and more people who are living in poverty in the U.K.
but it’s not possible to expect the governemnet to give a house to half of the population just because.

Istanbul!! WTF

".....Basically like Beverly Hills"

Stupid phone

Life time tenancies aren’t common now, but there are plenty of people who have them
From many years ago.

The thing is, housing isn’t a dynamic industry. You don’t just make a decision and BAM next month 2 million people need evicting. You do things like stopping life time tenancies today so in 30 years time no one will have one. It’s a very long term thing. The Bedroom tax- rubbish now, great in 20 years when people have stopped under occupying.

Selling council houses is another one.
First selling those means that there is less Council houses available to those who need it.
Second, how can people who are said the never want to let go of a life tenancy because of the safety it gives them suddenly find the money to buy the house and maintain it despite the fact knowing they would always have a roof over their head being a reason good enough for them to not try and get a better paid job.
Someth8ng doesn’t add up there.

Remember.... it's the TENANCY FOR LIFE...... not the HOUSE!!

Sorry for shouting..... but you can move from property to property with your lifetime tenancy...... from a 5 bed to a 3 bed then to a one bed bungalow as your life changes and progresses

But it just doesn't make sense as a policy as anyone who gets social/council housing because they're in need might be put off improving their situation beyond a certain point as it would mean losing their home and being thrown to the wolves in the private sector. Also the admin of reassessing everyone regularly would be really expensive.

The answer is to regulate the private rental market so that everyone who rents has security of tenure, not to penalise people in council/social housing who go on to improve their lives.

There seems to be a lot of envy and hostility on this thread, i do despair at times.

Bedroom TAX......

We converted our 4 bed detached to a 3 bed just after buying.....20yrs ago

Just paid mortgage off no need to sort lots of repairs, upgrades and decorate

Bedroom TAX?? Seriously I've spent 20yrs scraping by I fully intend to die here

If bedroom tax comes along I'll make the upstairs into one hug bedroom with no dividing walls, massive ensuite and jack and Jill walk in wardrobes

The next occupier can convert it back....after both our corpses have been removed!!

What are you talking about mrcharlie? As a homeowner bedroom tax has nothing to do with you

My HA don't offer secure tenencies anymore.

So I am constantly reviewed (every 2.5y)

The answer is to regulate the private rental market so that everyone who rents has security of tenure

I largely agree, but with caveats that tenants must keep their side of the bargain too and behave responsibly.
Landlords also need to make a profit, since their initial investment is very much needed in some areas.
It's tricky to regulate, but I do agree with you.

Also. You might be doing well and get turfed out, only to have an accident or illness and become unable to work...... or a relationship breakdown...... and then you are in need once again

That could happen within days and weeks of being forced out. Will the council magic up another immediate property for you? Doubt that

Mrcharlie I'd be very very surprised if that were the case in your second scenario, unless it was a long long time ago. The RTB rules are very strict, a bf of a tenant can't buy the house. If he gave the tenant the money it would have been in her name alone as a cash buyer as the mortgage lender would obviously want to know how the mortgage was being paid and 'my boyfriend's paying it' doesn't really cut it. And what is the relevance of her having 2 kids by 2 dads?