To think if you're sacked from your job, you don't get to keep the accommodation provided with the job?

[user1490607838]

Just that really! A man who worked in a school (as caretaker) for 17 years, has been sacked, and he and his wife are now 'sobbing' because they have nowhere to go!

Whilst it can't be easy to have to move out of the property you have raised your family in, surely they must have known that if he ever lost his job, the accommodation would have gone with it?!

They are trying to make out he was 'unfairly sacked' as he was finished from his job whilst on sick leave. But they have been asked to leave the home several times, and in the end had to be forced out

www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/mum-sobs-we-nothing-family-21489077

AIBU to think they shouldn't expect to keep the home provided with the job, when the job finishes?

Would it be classed as a,council house? When I was at school in the 80,s there was a caretaker that used to have a house in the school.grounds I did used to.vaguely wonder who.owned the house ?

They’re having a bloody laugh! Massive piss takers.
And starting a petition means sod all anymore.
Honestly, some people want everything on a plate and expect people to feel sorry for them with their sob stories.

Personally I think they should have used the last five years of almost free housing to get off their arses and find

a) jobs, and

b) somewhere to live.

You can't expect to keep what is effectively a "tied cottage" when the job isn't there any more.

@NameChange2PostThis

So did they actually evict them or just ask them to leave? You cant usually get emergency accommodation unless your evicted?

And why does their daughter have a sash on? And why are they showing their expensive family portraits?

Evicted - apparently an army of bailiffs descended on the house and they were told to pack essentials. A time has been arranged for them to go back (under observation) and get their other stuff.

They are showing photographs of the awful rooms they have to sleep in, apparently oblivious to the fact that other people are living in conditions as bad, or worse, than theirs, and that they could have helped themselves, but didn't even try to find somewhere where" the whole family could be together"

Stay at home mum, two of the kids are well over 18!

The article doesn't mention whether they were trying to make arrangements with the council to rent the house under new terms or not. If they were trying to negotiate an alternative arrangement, since the council acknowledges that it doesn't have plans for the house yet, then I would be more sympathetic. Not sure how much I believe that the Mirror will have printed the full story (not least because of the shocking proofing and editing).

I think the thing I find most astounding is over 1000 people have signed their petition!

Total piss takers!!

Also as someone with mh issues of may years reading the bit where one of the daughters claimed mum had been “referred” to mind?! I think not!

The mum could have gone out to work when the dad was sacked and they certainly should at that point have contacted the relevant agencies and found out what their options were - same as the vast majority of other families!

Armed forces families accommodation is tied to work too but you never see any of them complaining or going to the bloody press when they need to find somewhere new if the serving person is (to parallel the example here) made to leave for medical reasons - which DOES happen quite a lot.

93 days notice is what they get! They may be able to extend on compassionate grounds depending on the situation but in my experience there has to be very good reasons for that and it’s mostly just the usual 93 days!

If his wage has always been so low (as some are suggesting), they cant save for the future (knowing they only stay in the house while he works there)

How come they could afford 2 more kids since they moved in? And afford for the other to not work?

4 kids AND quite a few pets too! Nah I’m not buying he was on a low wage!

@mrsmadevans nah! 5 YEARS not enough time? Don’t be so ludicrous!! They could easily have found and made a home elsewhere in a few months - MILLIONS of people do every year. If you’re a renter it’s not YOUR home for life anyone with an ounce of sense knows that. They’ve created this situation themselves (having to be moved on officially at short notice).

If they had behaved like grown ups and not spoilt toddlers they could have found somewhere else suitable and made it their home and been able to move properly.

Ridiculous!

@leithwalk - Exactly! When I split from ex he moved back into barracks and I had 93 days notice. The difficulty I had was that as I was also an army brat I didn’t have “connections” anywhere in the country that met council requirements for housing because I’d never lived anywhere more than a few years. Dd and I almost ended up homeless until my MP stepped in (I couldn’t afford deposit and 2 months rent for private renting).

But I didn’t blame the army, service accommodation is scarce and needed I understand that.

As any responsible adult understands that their right to occupy tied accommodation ends when they are no longer in a position that entitles them to that accommodation.

“And how many people really think several years ahead when planning their family?” I would say most. The outliers you mentioned are actually relatively uncommon.

@smallchickbilly the quality of “journalism” in this country at the moment is seriously shit!!

The worse thing about this story is not even the CFs, but the person in the council talking about trying to show "humility" because of the tough situation for the family.

THAT WORD DOESN'T MEAN WHAT YOU THINK IT MEANS!

Argh! *worst

Hoist by my own petard!

THAT WORD DOESN'T MEAN WHAT YOU THINK IT MEANS!

I thought that Fancypants

I wondered if he had said "humanity" and a crap journalist had misheard. Or indeed, if he was stupid enough to say "humility" and not know what it meant.

I think the way the council has done it has been harsh

5 extra years of £90 per month subsidised rent? Even giving them chance to leave voluntarily again after the final appeal. How the fuck have they been harsh?

They are showing photographs of the awful rooms they have to sleep in

In fairness, it makes your heart bleed to read captions like: A wardrobe with no hanging rail inside one of the temporary housing rooms. Broken Britain indeed.

Legally, as a "service occupier" although there's no notice period beyond that in your employment contract, your employer and landlord must still go through the courts to evict you. (Unlike the situation for a lodger, for example). Which the council have done.

england.shelter.org.uk/housing_advice/private_renting/accommodation_that_comes_with_your_job

As others have mentioned, if you want your local council to provide housing nearly all of them demand you stay put until the bailiffs come or they'll call you "intentionally homeless". In this case even though it's the same damn council doing the eviction! But this family has no excuse for not knowing it was coming.

entitled!

Had they planned wisely, they probably could have bought a small house of flat back when he started working there on a peppercorn rent. House prices were decidedly lower. As for being split from their 2 adult children, I despair. Cheeky fuckers. I also struggle to believe the bullying allegation. Had his accusations been genuine, they’d have fought them dismissal, surely? They’re clearly fighters. I cannot believe this drivel is newsworthy. What is our country coming to ??

If this couple had got off their bums and applied to the council for social housing when he was sacked back in July 2015 they would have been entitled to a 3 bedroom property.

As their 2 daughters are now classed as adults they are only entitled to a 2 bedroom property for themselves and their 2 boys and as this is the most in demand property size it's likely they'll have a long wait in temporary accomodation before they're made an offer of permanent housing.

Some blame must lie with the lawyers who seem to have encouraged them to pursue this through the courts when it should have been abundantly clear that they couldn't win - they only had possession of the bungalow because of his job and once the job was gone the tied housing went with it.

I wonder if anyone has contacted HMRC? This is a benefit in kind and once he was no longer working as a caretaker it stopped being tax free.

Entitled and dumb cheeky fuckers.

Well clearly they had to leave the property but it’s very sad for their kids.
Without the tied bungalow they would have applied for a council house 20 years ago when it was arguably less difficult to get one. Nowadays they’re in for a very long wait in unsuitable emergency accomodation, possibly with the threat of the council offering a private rental in Birmingham as the solution before they discharge their duty.
Obviously these people could have made ‘better’ choices, such as both parents working, training for a career, having fewer kids and saving for a house of their own. But they made decision based on their perceptions of the situation at the time. How many women on here have given up their careers to raise kids and then been shafted when their husband leaves them for another woman? Whilst their choices seem foolish to some of us they are still deserving of compassion.

No, I am sorry they arent deserving of compassion.

They lived there instead of renting (privately or a council property) because it was cheaper. They made decisions that suited them. I get, that sometimes things dont work out.

However, instead of dealing with the situation they have stayed in the house for 5 years causing a lengthy legal battle instead of trying to act sort it out. Then gone running to the papers, plastering their kids all over, instead of sorting themseleves out. In the mast 5 years she could have worked part time and saved enough to rent somewhere.

The only people to blame for the kids position, is the parents. Who seem I capable of acting in their kids best Interests or making sensible decision. The you gest kids deserve some compassion. The parents are in a situation of entirely their own making, that they havent even made an effort to sort out in 5 years.

I know the school., my DC went to school close by. It was in special measures for a long time before it changed names and became an academy and that was a few years back.
They obviously had their head in the sand about having to leave .
A grand a month is a lot for rent. Where I live that would get you a very nice house
You dont much for a grand a month in Hoddesdon It's too close to London £1000 a month will get you a 2 bed flat.

While their choices seem foolish to some of us they are still deserving of compassion

Sorry but I disagree. They are obviously not poor, vulnerable people. Anyone lacking in confidence and resources would not have been able to fight through the courts for five years and find themselves in the newspaper complaining about their treatment.

I would rather save my compassion for people who have find themselves in desperate straits through no fault of their own and need support. These people will clearly find their way through the system and get social housing eventually because 'they know their rights'. But that doesn't fit the poor me narrative that people have been done by the system and heartless bureaucrats that is so pervasive in our tabloid press and commercial broadcasters.

I don't know why people want to read this stuff. Does it make people better to feel they're not going through the same problems? Or are they addicted to being angry against faceless people in authority?

There are often so many holes in these stories, as in this one. Even though they are presenting only their side of the story, there is clearly more to it as we don't know the council's side at all. Yet still I don't feel sorry for them because they could have done lots of things to improve their own situation but chose not to and instead wanted to manipulate everyone into getting what they want regardless of need or fairness.

Rather than giving a three bedroom house to them, I'd much rather it went to someone who really needed it with small children, a disability, severe mental health issues etc as there are bound to be people like that on the housing list.

I do think the council should have been more understanding and helped them more and used a mediation service to try to get this sorted

Seriously? How do you know they didn't?

In any case, I'm sure the costs of the action will be more than recouped by the huge amount that will be made from selling the property on the open market

Unlikely. According to that report it went all the way up to the Supreme Court, i.e. there were at least three separate court hearings - and Court of Appeal and Supreme Court cases definitely don't come cheap. Add that to lost rent and the sale costs of a bungalow would have to be fairly astronomical to outweigh the overall costs.

Some blame must lie with the lawyers who seem to have encouraged them to pursue this through the courts when it should have been abundantly clear that they couldn't win

To be fair, you don't get permission to appeal to the Supreme Court if the law is "abundantly clear".