AIBU to think social housing homes should be temporary?

[Shannoncakequeen]

I know a lot of people won’t be happy about this view so I’m prepared to get flamed for it.

I don’t agree with people living in their social housing homes when they’re no longer ‘entitled’ to them.

By entitled I mean their children have left home so they have extra bedrooms they don’t need but continue to outlive their life there, and so preventing another family from enjoying a suitable home.

It’s not a bash about social housing per se as I know it is there for a very good reason. I was raised in council properties myself so I understand the importance of them being available to those in poverty. I feel many people abuse the system that keeps it fair for those who need it.

As an example, I have a neighbour who lives alone in a 3 bedroom house, large garden, garage and driveway. Ideal property for most of the population. Her children left home over 10 years ago and she is in her early 50s. She told me she had decorated the spare bedrooms for her grandchildren to sleep over in the future (they are currently babies). Whilst I’m flabbergasted she would want to stay put rather than downsize to something small and suitable for one adult, I am human and understand the memories/emotional connection/a house is a home etc, but it isn’t her property and is rented from our local council and therefore I’m shocked the council haven’t got stricter policies on this type of thing. I understand they can’t legally turf out people from their homes, but there should be an incentive to rehome these people so families aren’t stuck in one bedroom tower block flats whilst single adults live in luxury.

Maybe I am bitter because I have to rent and pay extortionate money for the privilege as I cannot get a deposit to buy so I will never be able to raise my child in a home like she has. The house would be £400k+ if it was owned privately, yet she gets it for free and for life just because she joined the list many years ago when it was easy to get social housing. I know many other people in similar places to her and they all believe they morally own the property and have no concern for the housing crisis.

Does anyone else agree that there needs to be stricter rules to make it fair for everyone to have affordable housing whilst in need only (up until children leave home) and not for life? If you are in this position what makes you stay and not give up the property to a family in need? If you plan to stay in your property when your children leave home what offer would make you rethink staying? I’m aware there are new rules for new tenants but this is aimed at long term tenants.

Again I understand this will trigger some people, but morally I can’t come to grips with the entitlement of some people (excluding those who still need the property for health reasons).

I have to agree op and I'm in social housing myself.

If my dh and I find ourselves in a position to buy then we would absolutely.

Sil is in her 50's divorced from DB. Lives alone in a 4 bed council house. She's worked hard all respect to her and is now a high earner. But come on why doesn't she downsize at least! 4 bed council houses are like gold dust! Someone out the desperately needs that property.

But then again my next door neighbour is in a 3 bed trying to downsize to a one bed with no luck for the last couple of years.

Hard one

Of course! Single people do not need a bedroom house.

OP the energy price increase may encourage her to exchange her property to a smaller one, like the bedroom tax did to some people a few years ago.

Mind you the only people I personally knew in social housing who moved to smaller properties were exempt from the bedroom tax as they were working but in living wage roles. They just didn't want the hassle of maintaining the inside of a larger property than they needed especially as they had disabilities/long term health issues.

Councils do offer people incentives to downsize. The trouble is not many do. Some councils don't even have their own housing stock anymore because it was all sold off. Although assured tenancies are no longer given.

I agree with you OP. Social housing should be there for people who need it, but when they no longer require it, they should downsize and make that property available to a family that needs a property of that size.

I work in housing and my job is difficult enough usually but it's becoming harder and harder each day. Client's becoming more frustrated, which I understand. Its frustrating for me too. I wish I could give them what they wanted, but it's just not possible.

Agree there should be something in the tenancy agreement that says you can stay as long as the house meets your needs after that should be offered a smaller property to allow another family to benefit.

My neighbour doesn’t pay rent and doesn’t work so it is free for her

Do you you class everyone that gets full housing benefit as having a home for free?

Aren't the elderly exempt from bedroom tax? They used to be

I'll quite happily move to a 1 bedroom when the dc leave home

Yabu and confusing houses with homes. Many people have spent thousands on their homes they should not be turfed out.

I lived in social housing as soon as I left home at 19,I stayed for 10 years while we got better jobs,we gave up the house for someone that would need it more than us

You are just scapegoating people who have a roof over their heads for the complete crap the government has acted since Thatcher sold off the houses, while too few are being rebuilt.

THAT is what you need to get angry about.

Succession rights are to the tenancy not the property. Poor management in this case

It should be mandatory that you are put in a one bedroom flat once the kids leave home.

This would be a good idea. If you don't require it anymore, you shouldn't be able to stay in it. There's a shortage of council houses and it's not all down to selling them off. It includes people who remain in council houses and don't need them, including if they could afford to buy their own.

Many people have spent thousands on their homes they should not be turfed out.

They are not their homes. They are places the council has given them to live to keep them off the street.

That is a sharp way to ensure people stay in poverty.

Social housing isn't for people in poverty, it's for everyone. Just those who might be deprived are at the top of the list. This is not a failing on their part but on the part of the state who don't build enough social housing and thus restrict who is entitled.

Social housing isn't free, people pay rent to live in them.

It's not as simple as that there isn't necessarily the housing available.
People do have to pay bedroom tax.

She's 40s, no children at home, never worked and is on permanent forever benefits. Really? With no disability? I'm finding that very unlikely.

I work in SH and if she's the kind of tenant who is keeping the place nice, looking after it, helping out with GC, paying rent (or HB is), not disturbing her neighbours, I'd keep her.

What we actually need is more units. Many more.

Yanbu. Once the grown dc have flown the nest the parents should downsize and let another family have the privilege of a family home.
They certainly shouldn’t be ‘spending thousands’ on a home that isn’t theirs to keep.

I agree with downsizing providing there is adequate housing to downsize into and not see people threw into private insecure rental accommodation at an age where they need support.

I do agree the system needs reworking - the entitlement to stay in a property with more bedrooms than needed is vile. But it’s part of a bigger picture:
build more homes- houses not just sky scrapper flats!
build more social housing
clamp down on renting portfolios
stop people who don’t pay tax in the U.K. being allowed to buy property

without implementing all these I don’t think just going after the old woman who’s lived in her London council flat for 50years who is being told she has to move to Manchester is worth it

And by the way, I do know why people think that someone in a big unit should move. Frequently, however, it's one-beds in very short supply.

I agree. We own our home but once the kids leave we intend to downsize. There’s no way I want to hear and keep a larger hime than I need. I’d rather a two bed on a beach!

I think people need to shift from the idea of a home for life - the country is getting over populated and we need safe places for the older generation to feel.