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 completely agree!

You have the risk of awful neighbours at any time. Your next door neighbours could decide to move and their replacements are an asbo family straight from hell. It happens. Lots of people whether tenants or owners uproot because of bad neighbours leaving behind expensive garden updates and wallpaper.

@Shannoncakequeen

Well that is stating the obvious isn’t it?

Fact remains that if you currently have good neighbours (who also have lifelong tenancies) no one really wants to upset the apple cart by moving. Particularly to mythical one bedroomed flats that wouldn’t accommodate elderly peoples needs.

Yes that makes me so cross

The councils need to sort this out

I agree.

Friend has a council house which she was given as a teenager and single parent. She's now married, her child is 18 and the couple earn upwards of 60k per year. They would never be entitled to a council house if they applied now, so why do they have one?

@CakeCrumbs44

Sceptical to be honest. I have known high earners in council housing and they have always ended up buying their own property as it makes sense to leave some property to their children. You cannot pass the tenancy down.

I think that salary is hugely unlikely outside of London for a council tenant. I mean I’m grateful for my house but it’s certainly not in an area of affluence.

That's 60k combined as a couple, not each. Probably slightly.above average in my area (south east)

My lovely big 4 bed HA house will be mine for as long as I need it. I have the old secure tenancy so it’s mine for life. But one day my kids are going to leave and there will be a family just like ours desperate for our house.
I will leave with good grace into a smaller property more suited to my needs. DH and I have already agreed that this is our plan. We do not wish to stop a family making this their home when we are finished with it. We’ll have probably been here 20 years by that point.

I don't believe in life-time tenancies. I do think that if you haven't got the funds that you should be entitled to a house, but once your children have left the property you should move out of the property you are in, into a smaller one. That said, councils have to have the stock to move people from larger to smaller properties. For example, my grandparents have a 3 bed council property. All their children and I have moved out and they still get to keep the property. Now it may sound harsh but they should really be pushed to move into a 1 (or 2 if absolutely necessary) bed property rather than taking up a 3 bed.

The other thing is eligibility. Life-time tenancies are all well and good until you start earning enough to be able to privately rent/own. I can't stand it when people on a higher salary are allowed to stay in their council properties. These are supposed to be for the poor/less-well-off.

@Luckydip1 is that truly the case, that anyone in social housing gets rent paid through benefits??? My experience was that my Dad worked bloody hard shifts and my Mum worked part time to pay our rent. Apart from child benefit (which wasn’t means tested back then so every family got it regardless of wealth), no benefits were ever claimed.
This was the same for most families in my village.

Totally unfair. Social housing is subsidised by the tax payer and in VERY short supply. It should, absolutely, be available to those that need it, for as long as they need it. If circumstances change, kids leave home, then should be moved to smaller property. If get a good job and can afford to go private then should be moved out, allowing someone else in need to have the house!!!

@Burgoo

If this was made policy people wouldn’t bother bettering themselves to go on and earn more money. They would simply coast along in low paid work whilst ensuring they remained within certain criterias in order to keep their homes. Giving people a lifetime tenancy enables them to pull themselves out of poverty without the risk of going back into it. That benefits society it doesn’t hinder it.

@CakeCrumbs44

60k isn’t that much as a combined income. Not in this day and age. They’ll be living comfortably for sure but not extravagantly.

Social housing is NOT subsidised by the taxpayer. It is illegal for councils to do this.

Yes not extravagant. But my husband and I are on a similar income and wouldn't be eligible for a council house or any benefits, so it doesn't make sense that they are? Shouldn't they have to private rent like everyone else in their situation and free up the house for someone who can't afford it.

Of course people in social housing do not automatically get housing benefit. The same income rules are applied whoever you rent from.

Well first of.all in some parts of the country private rent and social rent are comparable, and unless your buying why would anyone move out of secure social housing house ,to put themselves at the mercy of private landlords it makes no sense .

Why should child benefit be taken away when the children are 18? You have children forever and expenses related to them. Similarly with widows pension, it’s not as if your partner comes back after 18 months, it should remain for life 🤔

No that is not the case at all. I pay my own rent as I work full-time as does DP. Honestly there are more fictional stories on here than in the local library. 🙄

@CakeCrumbs44

I am in a council house and I’ve never been entitled to benefits. I’m a self payer due to my income. I initially got my house due to being homeless and then I was put on a waiting list for 9 years. During those 9 years I rented a 1 bedroomed flat and all 3 of my children shared a room.

I have been here for a few years now and in that time I’ve managed to get an OU degree (a first class) which now means a higher salary. Due to this high salary I am now saving up for a cash purchase on a house. That’s not something I could do if I was in private rent so I class myself as lucky.

Having said that if there were certain financial criterias that needed to be met in order for me to keep my house I most certainly wouldn’t have done my degree or indeed gone for my current job role. I wouldn’t have made myself at risk of homelessness again.

The reason it’s not replaced is because when social housing is sold the proceeds go directly to the treasury not the council. The council only see a percentage back which isn’t enough to replace lost stock.

Watching the George Clarke program on it is very insightful and I wish he then followed it up

YANBU

I personally think people and families should have to reapply every 2 years.

Well thankfully you don't get to make the rules 🙄

I work in a senior role in a housing association, please do share with me how you'd resource this. I'm presuming that you've done the sums of how long it takes to review each tenancy, visit them, ask tenants to reapply, review the information, escalate for approval, issue a notice, deal with property issues relating to void properties, deal with press/mp/homelessness team complaints regarding the customers who you have turfed out on the street.

Please share your insight, I'd be happy to consider it.

More I read, the more it’s obvious. It’s just jealousy. Imagine the banks going back to the boomers and saying, actually, we’re in a crisis now, your house price went up, just change a contract like that 😂 or tell them morally they should sell at a loss to help the next generation. Seriously, Tenants sign legally biding contract, they/me have every right to stay put

Council tenants are means tested for Housing benefit just like anyone else