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).

@Cameleongirl good luck, I hope you find somewhere suitable for your dad. You could perhaps also get in touch with your local branch of Age UK, they can sometimes help with info.

You’ve probably been told this in the 700+ replies already but here goes. In the past, when the Uk had an abundance of social housing, people would have been given life tenancy contracts meaning that they could stay in their houses for life, even able to pass on to children as long as they lived in the houses. This is why we have a lot of elderly people living in properties with a few more rooms than they need. My road is full of elderly people that have been here since the houses were built in the 60’s. Our local borough council have introduced 10-year contracts for all in 2015. This won’t actually have an impact for a number of years but they can’t get people to leave houses they’ve ‘promised’ them for life without a reasonable cause. Elderly people being elderly and having extra rooms isn’t one of them. As for bedroom tax, if she is of pensionable age, I don’t think she would be paying it.

I totally agree that it’s annoying. I live in a 2 bed social house with 2 teens (18f,17m) and I’ve got no chance of moving anywhere bigger unless I private rent, which is extortionate where I live. It’s not the elderly people that are all at fault here. Lifetime/legacy tenancies and right to buy fucked it up for everyone.

The tenancy would have only been passed to the son if he was named on the tenancy before the parent died. Even if the family didn’t agree to it, it wouldn’t be questioned because they’re not on the tenancy agreement.

Right to buy fucked it up. Those elderly people with life tenancies could have bought their houses cheaply and taken them out of social housing forever. Instead they will return to be rented out when they die.

Indeed. Right to buy was a crazy idea and I’ll never understand it. Take an asset in short supply, flog it off at a big discount without any restrictions to stop the purchasers selling it on for a big profit in future, and don’t build replacements.

I think I read that 40% of ex council homes that were sold off, are now rented out at market rates by private landlords.

A version of this is often touted in Australia.

Right now if you have an income over $90,000, you pay additional tax if you don't have health insurance. When you pay your doctor's bill, you mostly get some money back through Medicare. It has been proposed that there should be no partial refunds for those with health insurance. Double whammy.

In state education, there are fees, with some consideration for those on low incomes. Often proposed that wealthier families should pay extra fees in the manner of private schools for their children to attend government schools.

The state pension is means-tested.

I'm amazed the Tories haven't looked at this and thought, why not?

Right to buy was a crazy idea and I’ll never understand it.

It’s not hard to understand. It was bribery. A cheap house in exchange for a life time of voting Tory. I bet a lot of people who bought their council houses voted leave.

A lot of them did, some were even given money from the council to buy their houses when they knocked down prefabs in the area as all tenancies then were secure (not lifetime, I just couldn’t think of the word). My Nan lived in her house alone for a few years until she died in ‘02. The tenant who rented it from the council after brought it, lived in it for a few years to get the discount, and now - if she still owns it- rents it out to students.

RTB probably worked years ago when people couldn’t really afford to get on the housing ladder so people weren’t buying and they had an abundance of properties they couldn’t/didn’t want to look after. Now it’s caused a shit show because not only do they not have enough properties to house the 40+ thousand families on their waiting list, they also don’t have any money coming in to look after the properties they do have so they sell off more and more until they have nothing left.

If you RTB you can’t sell it for a number of years yet you can rent it out straight away. If you don’t receive HB, there’s no questions to answer.

Thanks but that's one place. PP implied it was several countries. I am definitely interested to know how Holland manages this as it may be a good blue print for others.

I worked in a two council housing departments, and knew lots of residents who had bought or were buying. Both had strong Labour majority councils, with the odd Lib Dem or Independent. Not a Tory in sight. I knew one tenant who was a staunch socialist who wouldn’t buy on principle. But mostly, financial reward trumps political loyalty.

I'm trying.to work out where people are getting the idea that a council/housing ass house is only £300/month from. I'm in a pokey 2 bed 1st floor flat and it's over £400/month (which we pay) which is tbh around £150/month less than the private tenants in the same road pay (in houses that were previously owned by the council but bought under the rtb scheme). That's not my fault though, that's the greed of those that have bought those flats to rent out at a vast profit.

@firef1y

Depends on where you are in the country. Some people do pay 300 a month for a 3 bed. I pay 400 a month for a 3 bed semi with a big garden.

Where do people pay £300 / month for a three bed?
I live in social housing in the Northwest, where tbh housing is relatively cheap anyway ,my two bed is just under £400 a three bed is more like £500.

@x2boys

To be honest I don’t know. I had read up the thread someone was paying 300 a month for a 2 bed.

400 here in the midlands.

Apolgies I should have wrote I pay 400 for a large 3 bed semi with a big garden. I’m in the midlands.

Mine’s £85/week, large 3-bed with enormous garden. Scotland.

You must be in a very cheap part of Scotland. My Aunt pays way more than that in Scotland for a very small council house.
Some places are still very cheap. Campbeltown average house price to buy is only £91,000, so rents for council houses there will also be way below the national average.

£400 for 2 bed flat, north west.
Slightly cheaper than private for this area, but I had to get the flooring done through out, tiling and various other jobs. Any cost saving has gone on making it habitable.
Don't know we're people get these £350 per month massive houses for.

Low rents for social housing are not that unusual.

I know several people who live in 2 and 3 bed social housing properties; (moved in between 2007 and 2015,) and they pay between £77 and £93 a week for 2 bed bungalow, 2 bed house, and 3 bed house. All in nice areas. (The bungalow is in a rural village, and that's the one that is £77 a week.)

It's not that unusual to have rents around £75 to £90 a week in social housing. Especially if they've lived there a few years.

The rents for those properties are a bit more now. Like, a 3 bed house that's the same as my friend lives in a for £93 a week, has risen to £115 a week now, but the rents were much lower when she moved in some 10 years ago, and it only goes up a small amount each year.

It doesn't have to be a shit/rough/doghole area just because it's social housing, and the rent is cheap. A few people I know live in social housing, for 80-90 pounds a week, on the fringes of a small market town, or in a rural area, (in highly desirable areas.) Indeed, some people pay 100s of 1000s of £££ to live there - when they buy a property there.

They aren't low rents. That's how much rent costs. Its private buy to let landlords that have artificially inflated the cost of renting.

@Thelnebriati

I agree. We pay 400 a month and many of our friends who own their houses pay around the same for their mortgages. (On similar houses in similar areas). To rent my house privately we would be looking at around 1k a month. Ridiculous isn’t it?

I totally agree.

I was horrified to find out that two much loved older ladies on tv (and presumably on telly wages?) are still living in social housing.

For some reason both of them saw fit to (separately) mention their lovely set up recently in a national newspaper ... given for many years I struggled in the private rental sector as a single mum with not a hope in hell of moving into either social housing or getting a mortgage.

Was amazed no one picked up on it actually!

May I add they both 100% qualified for it way back when but now.. I would imagine not so much, so move out!

This. ^ And very few HAs and councils will allow a child - even an adult one - to be on the tenancy of a 2 or 3 bed house.

This. ^ And very few HAs and councils will allow a child - even an adult one - to be on the tenancy of a 2 or 3 bed house.