Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

To say there is a stigma attached to social housing?

147 replies

longwayoff · 19/09/2018 10:23

Yes there is and its come about through the pretty much wholesale flogging off of social housing stock. Can Mrs May fix it as ago she says she will? Or is this simply early electioneering?

OP posts:
HelenaDove · 19/09/2018 22:56

I have been in my SH flat for 24 years. The first 4 years we had a pensioner in the flat below She moved into a nursing home when she became unable to cope on her own.

For the next 19 years there was a single man living underneath us. Lovely bloke Passed away last year.

2018 we have a weed smoker underneath us. Christ the SMELL You would not believe it, I can smell it in our flat without opening the windows or the door. Im SICK of it.

But thinking critically why have the HA suddenly done this NOW Why is there the sudden keenness to turn housing estates into ghettos. With the selling off of social housing going on its very easy to see why. When it comes to knocking places down to build luxury flats or the so called "affordable" housing and SH tenants are "decanted" (wonderful terminology from the sector there) never to return there will be no public or media support or sympathy for those who live on these estates. " Its just a druggie ghetto innit "

Its quite clever Youve got to hand it to them really.

IfNotNowThenWhen1 · 19/09/2018 23:19

When did it become "social housing by the way? When I was a kid it was just council houses. Or, yanno, just houses..
Anyway. I don't see why there would be a stigma particularly. I especially don't know why someone interviewing you would ask for your address and then act horrified?! Why would they even ask you that?
Some council/HA housing is great, some awful, it's very variable.
I agree with this though:
You need to mix in social housing with mortgaged houses
You do. The best estates are the ones where the tenants are long term and there are also owner occupiers.
Right to buy is a good thing for communities and social mobility.What's bad is when more houses are not built.

IfNotNowThenWhen1 · 19/09/2018 23:21

*what's bad is when there are not more houses built

KlutzyDraconequus · 19/09/2018 23:26

When did it become "social housing by the way?

That happened a few years after Maggie decided Right to buy was a good idea.
Millions of council homes got bought, councils had no money to replace them, new companies were set up away from the council, some as charities.
Social Housing Associations were born.
Unlike councils they are often run like businesses and have massive maintenance and other branches.

My landlord, Ongo Homes, run cafes, community centres, maintenance crews, locksmiths, removals and furniture recycling shops.
They build homes and rent to this who need them. Any money they make is put back into their areas.
Some areas are still rough, but that's more to do with the people's attitudes that.live there.

HelenaDove · 19/09/2018 23:30

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cornwall-45573021

sanssherif · 19/09/2018 23:36

There is a stigma to social housing.
Only on MN is 'living in a council house' enviable.
Council houses are seen as the bottom of the barrel, as hovels, and as value judgements of the people who live in them.
Private renting may be less secure but usually you live in a better area, and nobody can tell if you are on benefits or low income or whatever.
Council housing estates, even with bought properties, are pools for poverty. This results in antisocial behaviour, less care and pride in one's home and so on.
If anyone had the choice, they wouldn't live on one.
Having to tell people your address when you live on an estate is humiliating, they instantly see you differently. Private renting escapes that. Private renting lets your kids have pride in the area in which they live. That being said, most council tenants are terrified to make the jump in case they are less secure.
Right to buy is positive because it gives people a leg up and the possibility of eventually selling up and escaping the estates they would never get the chance to do, if they were council tenants. However, our city offers RTB after 3 years. They have just built loads of new homes, and the tenants can buy them at a discount after 3 years. What is the point, therefore, in building them as social housing?

starzig · 19/09/2018 23:42

Yes they are. Just because they are in such short supply you have to be really bad off or a single parent to get one.

IfNotNowThenWhen1 · 19/09/2018 23:56

Ahem. Single parents have no more eligibility to council homes than anyone else. Children have a right to be housed, that's all. It's a myth that you just need to have a baby and a home magically appears.

IfNotNowThenWhen1 · 19/09/2018 23:58

The point, I would imagine sansserif is that the tenants buying after 3 years would never have been able to afford a mortgage otherwise?

starzig · 20/09/2018 00:04

Still way more likely than a married couple without a child though.

HelenaDove · 20/09/2018 00:10

DH and i are a couple with no children Ive never wanted them We got this flat in 1994

HelenaDove · 20/09/2018 01:58

"Theresa May says people should be proud of their council houses and council housing should not be stigmatised is the prime political (non Brexit) news story of the day. It also includes £2bn of new social housing funding.

What a crock of sh*t!!

I was thinking of a more professional phrase but hey let’s call a spade a spade which was the phrase used by the Tories Housing Minister Grant Shapps in 2012 when he said let’s call social housing what it is and rename it as “taxpayer funded housing” in an opinion piece in the Daily Torygraph!

shapps stigma

Now where could social housing have got such stigma from reader?

It couldn’t be that Thatcher’s 1980 Right to Buy of council houses made merely renting a second-class and non-aspirational cultural phenomenon could it and has led UK housing policy for the last 38 years? Ahem!

Oh Joe stop being negative what about the new £2 billion funding!? Oh okay then let’s do that.

£2 billion of funding for … the six-year period 2022 to 2028 is £0.33 billion per year.

A bit of a (further) cut to the £8.4bn over 5 years the Tories inherited in 2010 and which they cut to £4.5bn over 4 years and £1.125bn per year under the very same Grant Shapps mentioned above and now this new funding is one quarter of that amount and at £333 million per year is just 20% of the £1.68bn housing funding the Tories inherited from Labour in 2010!

I use the word “inherited” here very deliberately as this announcement is a political trick from the Tories. The funding runs from 2022/23 to 2028/29 which is … the NEXT parliament and is a huge political trick from the Tories as if Labour gets in and wants to run its much higher percentage of social housing policy the Tories will say but the spending review only has £2bn so where is the money coming from for your social housing policy!

Now let’s look at the spin the BBC (and others) put on this Theresa May announcement and we are told the Prime Minister will say:

“Some residents feel marginalised and overlooked, and are ashamed to share the fact that their home belongs to a housing association or local authority. On the outside, many people in society – including too many politicians – continue to look down on social housing and, by extension, the people who call it their home. “We should never see social housing as something that need simply be ‘good enough’, nor think that the people who live in it should be grateful for their safety net and expect no better,” 

Theresa May thinks and more importantly wants you to believe that social housing IS a safety net yet it is not. The term ‘social housing’ means council and housing associations yet HAs are not part of any safety net at all and never have been as they have no obligation to house or re-house anyone including those who are homeless because HAs are not part of the public sector and therefore cannot have any mandated public duties.

Housing associations are correctly termed private registered providers (my emphasis) and they account for around two in every three social housing properties. Put simply, the safety net only applies to one third of all social housing and a small minority of it.

I leave you with some questions

Since when has any government announcement of how much will be spent four years ahead of it being spent become newsworthy?
When did the national media stop considering the content of such announcements which sees the government of the day announce a funding level that is just 20% of what they inherited 8 years ago and which is not in the hugely biased BBC article?
How the hell can the Tories aim to double the new housing output they have achieved to date of 150,000 per year up to 300,000 per year by drastically slashing the funding to make that happen?

Ah you see why this story is being spun on stigma don’t you reader?

_

PS The number of #ukhousing people who have welcomed this risible funding level with its massive cut tells you all you need to know about the innumerate sycophants that run housing associations and their lobbies. From the same BBC article:

David Orr, chief executive of the National Housing Federation, said the prime minister’s announcement was “extremely welcome”.

“This represents a total step change. For years, the way that money was allocated meant housing associations couldn’t be sure of long-term funding to build much-needed affordable housing,” he said.

He said that by changing the way the funding was allocated, ministers had given “long-term confidence and confirmed that we are trusted partners in solving the housing crisis, building new homes and communities”.

If this is how the housing association sector reacts to this massive cut in funding … FFS!!!"

Zoflorabore · 20/09/2018 02:19

I live in a HA property on an estate that is mixed but heavily HA.

There is no stigma here.

I've got a lovely 3 bedroom semi detached with a huge garden for £400 per month. Admittedly it's in the NW so am aware that property prices and rent are much cheaper than the south but it's still a fantastic price.

My ds's dad owns his home, smaller than mine for £700 per month ( he told me this ) and recently had to replace his alarm system which cost hundreds.
I've had problems in my home that are rectified by the HA and feel like I have a secure home.
Ds's dad could lose his quite easily if he lost his job etc and didn't have the insurance to cover it.

I am not ashamed of living in a HA house, far from it and if other people think it's something to look down on well that says more about them than me.

florenceheadache · 20/09/2018 02:42

there is a stigma. partially due to a change in demographics, history shows the early concept picked and chose who lived in them, keeping the area nice and clean in appearance. at the time people lived a simpler lifestyle with less "stuff".
now it is meant as housing for the most destitute and our society admires "stuff" lots of "stuff" that is often seen overflowing out the windows and doors.
the estates need to be made smaller much much smaller with a lower concentration of mentally ill and addicted individuals.

darkriver198868 · 20/09/2018 03:07

I live in a HA flat. Been here six weeks. It is by far the nicest flat I have ever been in but, that is mainly thanks to the person who lived her before me.

When I got offered the flat I was warned about the area, about it being to rough and lots of undesirables but, I seem to live in a quiet part of the area. There is a mix of people here. My neighbours above me work full time.

1981fishgut · 20/09/2018 06:48

Penisbeakerismyfavethread

I’d kill for a secure tenancy in a council house where I could paint, not be scared of losing my deposit, not worry about the black mound in my flat

sorry just had to laugh at this my first council flat the walls were so damp the wall paper would peel off my toilet wasn’t bolted to the floor and we had mice the damp took 4 years and I had to go to a law firm before hey would do anything and the toilet took 8 months and it wasn’t until I caught and took a mouse down to the council office and threatened to realise it they did anything that came a week before I was due to move out

It’s a prior dream some councils and HA are shit

1981fishgut · 20/09/2018 06:56

BMW6

There IS a stigma and unfortunately it only takes one or two anti-social families to give an entire area an awful reputation.

I wish the Councils who have these dreadful tenants had more powers to get them evicted much much sooner.i I am afraid I would mean half the estate being evicted on some areas they often have powers but don’t use them especially with people who have children the issue is when you live somone were eveyone is smoking weed rising peds and it sending their children to school often if your of that ilk you follow suit because you know you won’t be judged if you live on a road and their were mixed in with mortgaged houses you less likey to behave in a anti social fashion

Tumbleweed101 · 20/09/2018 07:00

I’ve lived in social housing most of my life - growing up in London I found there was a stigma attached but not so much where I am now in a rural location. I think there’s actually more of ‘you’re lucky’ feel now to having a council property.

SD1978 · 20/09/2018 07:01

Nope. I don't think so. There is a distinct lack of it, and many families going with it because downsizing families see it as their house, not a govt house. And many people who could afford a private rent not doing so.

Notacluewhatthisis · 20/09/2018 07:21

It's a complex issue.

My friend lives In social housing. It's on part of a fairly posh estate in a posh village. We are both involved in community events and there isn't any judgement on her for where she lives.

But in general there is some judgment. But I do think some of it stems from envy. Imagine you private rent. Paying a fortune with no stability. Can't afford to live in a decent area with decent schools. A new estate goes up, you can't afford to live there but people in similar positions to you get to move in there. Get rent at reduced rate, often subsidised on top of that. They get stability and access to the good schools. I can see why people get pissed off. But they should be pissed off at housing in general. Not the people who live in social housing.

I live on a council estate. A small one. In a mid terrace on a row of 4. 3 of these are now owed, including mine. I bought it off the couple who bought off the council.

Not many houses on here are owned no one gives a shit. The only people anyone judges are house about 8 houses away from me. 3 houses all got issued asbos for being complete wankers, partying all night, causing a nuisance, fighting in the street etc

No one judges them for being in social housing. They judge them for being wankers.

Chocolatecoffeeaddict · 20/09/2018 08:25

I used to live in social housing before I moved to my private rented house where I am now. I started a thread about something to do with my home and got some pretty nasty replies. Some were saying I should be grateful to the council for housing me and my family at all, never mind the fact we paid full rent with no housing benefit and my husband works up to 60 hours a week. So yes I would say there was stigma, but I only ever experienced it on MN.

IfNotNowThenWhen1 · 20/09/2018 08:32

because downsizing families see it as their house, not a govt house
What the fuck is a "government house"? Isn't that a prison?!
Council houses were built in the main from after WW1 til the 1970s. Some in my town were built in the 1890s by the town council not the government.
They are not "govmt houses" they are homes, for which tenants pay rent, to the local council-sometimes for 50+ years.

It would be good if councils would help older single people downsize if they want to, but when you have brought up a family, as well as grown a garden, plastered walls, put in a new bathroom, carpeted, painted and generally maintained a house, as well as relationships in your community you may well feel as though you, yanno, want to keep your home.
Interestingly people are always raging about forcing tenants out of too big homes in nice areas. They couldn't give a shit if Mary lives in a 3 bed flat in a shitty tower block in a crap area. That flats not worth owt.
And you are quite right about the levels of corruption and collusion in Housing Helena, and the propaganda fed to us by people with vested interests. This propaganda (free government houses, taxpayer houses etc) has fed the anger about the housing crisis that government's have directly caused.

When we start talking about "property" instead of "homes" it goes from a human right to a priveledge to have a roof over your head, and thats where you get the "us and them" mentality.

Notacluewhatthisis · 20/09/2018 09:47

Our council does help people downsize. However, lots don't want to. They don't see why they should move out of their house. I can see both sides tbh.

I know one family who have been in their house 20 years. The (now adult) daughter never moved out and is now down as a main tenant so she doesn't have to leave the house when her mum dies. Which seems really unfair to the people left on the waiting list.

Social have it good. Especially compared to private renters. There's shit to deal with either way.