To think people dont understand the magnitude of the social housing crisis?

[Arrowfanatic]

I work in social housing. We have endless requests for moves from customers who expand their family whilst in a property which is unsuitable to move them to a bigger property. We advise that family size housing (3 bed+) has a waiting list of around 10+ years and then these customers get mad.

We're accused of allowing them to stay in overcrowded properties, or affecting their mental & physical health and inevitably an overcrowded property becomes prone to damp & mould as it's too full.

These customers also want these houses in the exact location they desire, thereby limiting even more their chances of a move.

We get so demoralised when every day it's the same thing, but social housing is at a massive shortfall for the needs of the country & family size housing is in an even greater shortfall.

My company has an extensive plan to build more properties but it's a 5 year plan!

It's like they think we're lying to them, or the old classic of "you housing immigrants straight away" note, we dont, they have to apply like everyone else. We dont want our customers in unsuitable accommodation, and we really work hard on making the housing stock we do have work.

If you're in this position what could we tell our customers to make them understand the position we are in, and the one they have put themselves in and why we cant help as quickly as they would like.

I feel like I say "we have a shortage of family size housing" 100 times a day & get yelled at 100 times a day for our association not caring.

There is personal responsibility too, exactly dontdisturb.
There is a mother at my school, who endlessly complains about the council not doing x, y or z. She has 4 at the school, the youngest is shoved in a pram (2 minute walk) without uniform, whilst she's in trainers worth almost the same as my mortgage payment.

Helena, I never enjoy reading your posts because you point at all council housing residents people on benefits as helpless who should never have to take any responsibility for themselves and therefore people who should be entitled to be looked after 100% by the government

Did you read the article i posted written by Elizabeth Spring? It says the opposite to what your attempt at gaslighting does.

People keep saying that SH tenancies should be short term and SH only for the most vulnerable Wanting housing estates to become like hostels and then moaning when thats exactly what they become.

Make your bloody minds up. Because i have no alternative to think that the reason you are doing this. The constant goalpost moving is to have a group of people to kick that you can feel superior to.

And im sorry you dont enjoy my posts. i guess i will have to hone my entertainment skills.

So why the fuck did post the article by Elizabeth Spring on this thread then.

Why am i constantly posting about residulisation and the effects of this and how it turns housing estates into ghettos.

Like most, I don't bother to read your articles because you only post anedocts that fulfill the message you want to share.

Anyone can find such stories, they don't tell anything but feed sensationalism.

It is as much a sad fact of our society that vulnerable families are struggling to get decent housing despite all attempts to help themselves as it is sad that a seeming growing number of people seem to act as if they are still teenagers who consider the government and society as a replacement for their parents.

Like most, I don't bother to read your articles because you only post anedocts that fulfill the message you want to share

You dont read my posts then tell me what ive posted PMSL

Anyone can find such stories, they don't tell anything but feed sensationalism

WTF are you on about. Are you denying what people have experienced. Or are you saying the tenants are all lying.

It is as much a sad fact of our society that vulnerable families are struggling to get decent housing despite all attempts to help themselves as it is sad that a seeming growing number of people seem to act as if they are still teenagers who consider the government and society as a replacement for their parents

And if/when the former do get housed how long do they have before you start saying the same things about them.

Six months?

A year?

Two years?

Five years?

Of course, tenants are not one homogenous mass but you posted particularly about you and your DP.

26 years ago, he was 44 and you were 21 so I'm guessing that if it hadn't suited you, you would have been able to do something about it then. You chose not to and in all that time you have had secure housing, which is surely a great boon and not one that most people are able to enjoy.

Are you being ironic when you say "you are staying put for now" because now I would imagine it is more difficult to move than it has been at any time over the preceding two and a half decades. It is a long time to grudgingly put up with something if it doesn't tick the majority of your boxes.

Again, I'm not making assumptions about anyone-merely commenting on the facts that you have provided.

Helena, just curious. Do you think that those who have more kids should be worse off, financially, than those who have fewer (or none)?

Fuck sake we wernt grudgingly putting up with it. Were perfectly happy. Lives change People get older and infirm. People are always banging on on here about people having kids they cant afford. I didnt and still get this shit. Its proof beyond all doubt that its just about kicking tenants. DH became disabled in 2006. He also has COPD . Its a progressive condition Have a little think about sheltered housing and the age ranges of who is eligible. Thats if there are places available. The over 65s are a large part of the population. Remember the baby boom. There is a lack of accessible housing. And age restrictions on who can live there.

No because i dont believe in kids going without. Then you have instances like domestic abuse and reproductive coercion can be part of that.

However, you're quick to mention (repeatedly) that you have no children due to your choice, but you have a disabled partner. Do you, perhaps subconsciously, think you deserve better?

It is tricky for you. I suppose they can't offer to house you in an over 65 housing development because you are almost 20 years under that age limit.

Then again, that would also apply if you were buying in an over 65 development.

Would it make life easier if they offered you a ground floor flat? Ideally, what would you like to happen with your housing situation?

You do have a really extraordinary world view.

Kids require an enormous amount of resources and very few people are forced into having them. Please try to have a sense of perspective.

No ColdWinterChild i dont Please dont try to psychoanalyze me..

Interesting that you should ask though. It confirms what i already thought.

Coldwinter the reason i posted those details is to demonstrate why sheltered housing may pose a problem and when it comes to tenants/families one size dosnt fit all.

pauline we are still discussing it. When we are done i will get back to you

No. I'm just irritated at you ruining a really interesting discussion from someone who deals with the customers on the other side.

Social and council housing is an amazing boon to this country.

@Menora - that some people are financially subsidised is response to a pp who said they were not as they “contribute in other ways”. They may or may not (personally I’m not sure that those who pay less tax are necessarily contributing more in a non-financial sense) contribute in a non financial sense but they are being subsidised financially by others.

The idea that everyone is subsidised as a pp claimed just isn’t true. Ultimately over our lifetimes our financial position may change but the end result will be one or the other - a net contributor or taker. You might not like it but doesn’t mean it’s not true.

Also housing benefit is irrelevant- social housing is subsidised in itself by current or previous block grants from the taxpayer. Even if you have always and have always paid full rent there is still a cost to the public purse.

I’m not saying that to attack social housing residents - again I don’t have an issue with social housing and grew up there. But it is subsidised housing so should be allocated on that basis.

Goodness! No need for such sarcasm. Asking you what you would ideally like your housing situation to be doesn't really warrant a bite does it?

It makes me think that you and your DP have sat around in your secure accommodation since you were 21 and he was 44, getting older and gradually becoming more and more dissatisfied and want someone to step in and help.

Two and a half decades later, he's 70 and you're 47.

I would imagine there isn't much to discuss other than to request a ground floor flat but from your snippiness, you've probably got a list as long as your arm but know it would sound unreasonable to post it here.

I think you have a massive chip on your shoulder.

I already said that more people claim tax credits than there even are in existence living and breathing in social housing so it isn’t limited to that demographic of people

And if you are the type of person who personally believes that low paid workers make zero to little contribution to society then I think you are either a goady fucker or just very ignorant.

Unless you are a nomad who lives a complete self sufficient lifestyle, All the little people in service and factory industries you use every single day to facilitate your life are paid minimum wage jobs (or less) and keep not just the economy going but everyone else’s lives. As we haven’t all been replaced by robots yet, we still need these people to clean our streets, offices, hospitals (and homes often), care for other people’s children while they work, serve you in shops, stack the shelves, work 12 hour days caring for the elderly, clean your car and collect trollies. The government and the corporations - and people like you - do not recognise the value of these people and therefore can get away with paying them a pittance and in the process widen the divide between the people who resent ‘paying’ for the pointless low paid workers and the low paid workers who work manual jobs to serve everyone.

It is a pretty grotesque black and white view you have of simply cash flow that drives you, not value in people that I am disagreeing with you about. You can sit and gloat over how correct you are about your point avoid tax payers, but your other comments just show how little regard you have for humans - just cash. No one is forcing you to live in the UK if you fundamentally do not believe in a fair society where the more fortunate assist the less fortunate. You are free to move to a society that has no benefits system and you can keep all of your tax money and never have to worry about other people misusing it or being less valuable as it will not be your problem anymore

I think it is even worse to post on here about how social housing tenants are a drain to society when you admit you grew up in one, that is like saying something racist then saying I’m not racist I have black friends

The mn ignorance on benefits and social housing rides again.

Proving once and for all income, stability and wealth are not the products of hard work and intelligence.

There but for the grace of God go you, and you know it.

So landlords ‘purloin’ properties? Purloin from who? I thought they bought them ....

This has turned into a rather contentious thread. The minority of council tenants are the heavy breeders with an expectation of rehousing with all the benefits. However, no one should be forced into housing in notoriously dangerous areas. Again, on that note, the social housing issue runs deeper than just finding/building more houses for those who need/want/demand it. It's indicative of a system that's been failing for generations and nothing new is happening as popular increases and cost of living increases and minimum wage is low!

OP, i am sure it's a hard job and you are fighting a losing battle. Don't let your health suffer in the long term tho. As PP said, there will be tenants who will remember you as the lovely council worker who gave them the good news about their new home

And if you are the type of person who personally believes that low paid workers make zero to little contribution to society then I think you are either a goady fucker or just very ignorant.

Unless you are a nomad who lives a complete self sufficient lifestyle, All the little people in service and factory industries you use every single day to facilitate your life are paid minimum wage jobs (or less) and keep not just the economy going but everyone else’s lives. As we haven’t all been replaced by robots yet, we still need these people to clean our streets, offices, hospitals (and homes often), care for other people’s children while they work, serve you in shops, stack the shelves, work 12 hour days caring for the elderly, clean your car and collect trollies. The government and the corporations - and people like you - do not recognise the value of these people and therefore can get away with paying them a pittance and in the process widen the divide between the people who resent ‘paying’ for the pointless low paid workers and the low paid workers who work manual jobs to serve everyone.

A point that's always made somewhere in these threads and never addressed by the 'be self sufficient' brigade. People rely on, and use the services of the low paid workers they like to slag off every day - they are quite happy to turn a blind eye to such workers pay being below the cost of living, zero hours contracts and no job benefits at all apart from ones decreed by law, but like to start shouting about tax payers money when it comes to social housing - the need for which is a lot to do with so many people being in low paid jobs.
Let's see how many people are still 'self sufficient' when they're at home looking after their own children because there's no childcare, or their own elderly and infirm relatives because there's no carers, and if they don't have to do that where will they spend their money with no hospitality and retail staff to demand perfection from?
Some people just need another group to kick.
And I don't mean the OP, I think they have a valid point tbh because I have met people with the attitude they describe, I'm in social housing after years of private rent, I work full time, the rent is a bit cheaper - maybe because it was bought by the sainted 'tax payer' to start with (of which I am one btw!) And the service I Pay for is better value, because I actually get stuff done when it's needed, there's all sorts of help available to those more vulnerable than me from my HA - my rent goes into that and I'd much rather that than even the best private landlords pocket tbh.

@Menora - that’s bizarre that your post is in response to me (I can only assume that it is due to the weird comment about racism/growing up in social housing).

I did not at any point say people who live in social housing are a drain on society. I said social housing was subsidised (ie partly paid by the taxpayer) so should be allocated accordingly.

I did of course not say that low paid workers make no contribution to society. What I did say was I don’t think those who don’t financially contribute necessarily make more non-financial contribution than those who do financially contribute. A dr for example may contribute much more on a financial and non financial basis than a checkout assistant.

As I said, it’s a fact that there are net contributors financially and net takers. The idea that everyone is contributing financially equal to the services they are using is not true. But as I said on an earlier post, that’s the core of the idea of taxation and public services and it’s generally a good thing in a fair society that certain things are distributed on basis of need but paid for on the basis of ability to pay.

But it is still a fact that some are paying for others.