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).

This with bells on. One-beds are often inadequate and expensive and insecure. And SH providers often don't have enough. I have more 2 beds than 1 beds come up.

A lot of housing associations did fixed term tenancies but review need in the final year of the tenancy. However many have stopped doing this now

I think this would make more people have babies so they can stay in their homes.

If your neighbour is in her 50s and doesn't work she will NOT be getting the full amount of her rent paid - only the amount for a one bed in her area.

It's sounds great in principle people have to move out of their houses when their kids leave home, but that means no one has any sense of community because they're not their long term, there are no older people, no one looks out for each other, you get estates no one cares about, anti social behaviour increases. Whereas with permanent tenancies people value their house and area. It sounds wishy-washy I know, but huge swathes of transients isn't good for society,

Im aware it’s the governments fault hence why I think there should be a system as above. My point about my neighbour is that many people have the entitlement it is now their house for life to do with as they wish. It isn’t because they don’t own it and it was essentially loaned to them to rent as they met the needs for it at that specific time, and now no longer do. And yes it is free because she doesn’t contribute anything towards it in the way social housing tenants do who pay their rent. It’s a house she hasn’t had to pay her way for.
Lilac- why are people pay thousands on a property they don’t own? I wouldn’t do that in my private rented house as my landlord benefits from it not me. If/when that social housing tenant leaves the property they can’t take that thousands of pounds of work with them nor will they get their money back through a sale like homeowners do. From what I have been told from friends in social housing you’re not allowed to work on the property without permission only decorate it. Any work needed is what the council choses as it’s their property.

I agree actually OP. Much like how private rental is generally dynamic and reflects your needs at the time social housing should be too. All social housing should in theory be high quality and comfortably so moving someone from a 3 bed semi to a 2 bed terrace/flat shouldn’t be traumatic. It should also be explained to people when they enter the council system that they will be regularly reassessed and may be moved to more suitable accommodation. A minimum term anywhere (eg 3 years or until kids are 18 etc) could be agreed to prevent anxiety around constantly moving.

My HA does offer incentives to downsize and the council give automatic priority for people downsizing on the housing list. However, there aren’t any properties to move to. My MIL is in a 3 bed house on her own and has been trying to move for years but the only housing available is over and hour away so she’d lose all of her support network and friends. I understand many young people have to move out of area due to financial reasons but it seems harsh to move a pensioner away from where she has lived her whole life.

Where are all these one bed roomed ground floor flats suitable for older people then?

The problem.is people get social housing now when they can afford to rent privately or even buy. I know of many that do not need affirdable housing!!! That is far more problematic than people not wanting to move from the houses they have lived in for many many years and brought their children up in, that have memories amd attachments.

My mum is sort of in this position. 3 bedroom house in London although an adult sibling lives with her now.

My mum was allowed the house because she was a carer for my gran at the time as well as legal guardian for two children in the family.
Gran has died and the kids have left home, she's still there with no plans to give it up.

Main reasons being that it's her home, she's spent a lot of money on the property (kitchen, bathroom, flooring, decorating) the garden is beautiful now but was like a landfill when she moved in, she loves gardening.
Memories are there, her stuff is there, her family and grandkids can visit and stay. She's knows the area and the people.

She can't afford to buy anywhere at her age and if she did give it up the council would offer her a one bedroom in a tower block with a piss soaked lift in exchange.

I don't want my mum living out her days somewhere like that.

I agree there is a housing issue and I'd have loved a council place once upon a time (have paid high London rents most of my life).
It's not people like my mum who are to blame though and their quality of life in their senior years is just as important.

An incentive to give it up would be a better accommodation offer, that's the only thing I can see working. A little garden flat on the ground floor maybe but that's never going to happen.

I'm not sure how this squares with looking out for our elderly neighbours and community cohesion; is it the best thing to do, to move a newly widowed elderly lady to a new area because she has one more bedroom than she needs? She'll lose any community support she had, friends, social activities.

You do realise that not everyone who lives in social housing gets housing benefit don't you
Op I live in social housing my rent is comparable ro private rent ,i live in the ,the Northwest the problem is there is not enough social housing .

I’d be more inclined to blame Buy to Let. Housing stock has been snapped up by landlords so 1st homes are no longer affordable as they were pre 1996. There are houses being built all the time, none are truly affordable to those earning less or even national average. But to let landlords buying ex council houses and sometimes doubling the rent of what the LA sets. You are absolutely not being unreasonable about paying private rent and feeling a bit of resentment to those who are housed in new builds paying far less rent.

I think it wouldn't be too difficult to create a financial incentive if the rent was proprtional to market value (even if less) so say the 3 bed house was £500 but the 1 bed flat only £300.

I have often thought if people who got housing benefit were given their housing allowance rather than just the amount of rent paid (although I know it is capped) that would help.

So following on from the example above a family with 2 kids in a certain area might have a £500 allowance and if they are in a one bed flat costing £300 they can pocket the extra cash. If the housing allowance for the single adult was £300 and they were in a 3 bed house costing £500 they have to find the extra money or move.

The main problems being the rent of small modern flats can be more than big old 3 beds. Also there is a lack of all properties for anyone to move on to so everyone is to some extent stuck.

I work in housing and it's a real problem. People who moved in in the 70s/80s did so when lots of social housing was being built. They (correctly) expected their families to be adequately housed. But now don't want to move to somewhere smaller. But we can't keep building more and more large homes. So where do new families live?

However, it does make for nicer mixed communities, some people that have lived there for a long time. If everyone had lived there for only a few years and were the most in need then I think there would be a less stable community.

And people have emotional attachment to their homes.

Overall I think there should be less under occupation of ALL tenures. Lots of spare rooms in owner occupied housing too. Why don't those people downsize as well?

My relative lives in social housing, he and his wife earn upwards of £60,000 each and have gold plated pensions to look forward to and three brand new cars between the two of them. Their work is hardly onerous and they have loads of foreign holidays, no children.
I can't work out if this is what social housing was intended for 🤔

I agree. It should be a leg up when you need it, which you give back when you can afford to private rent or buy, which would free up the home to be a leg up to someone else.

Perhaps something should be done about extortionate private rents?

The right to buy also fucks everything up. Stock is lost forever

I know a millionaire who lives in social housing blah blah blah.

I think I agree. I think getting social housing is seen by many as the equivalent of buying a house, when really it should be seen as moving into rented accommodation. I rented for several years - obviously if my landlord wanted me out I would have been given notice, maybe because he wanted to move back in, that is fair it’s his property. You’re always aware this could be a possibility. There is no expectation of it being a permanent home for me to decorate at my whim and have rooms for grandchildren in the future.

Right to Buy killed 'social' housing. There simply isn't enough. Why should someone leave a house they've lived in all their life to solve a crisis not of their own making? Would you be happy to see your elderly parents forced out of their home? Barbaric suggestion.

I don’t disagree with you in principle but it’s there isn’t an enormous pile of 1 bed homes to move into also that do exist are often flats so stairs could be an issue. I own but I grew up in a council flat. Hardly any of those flats are still council/ ha as were bought up under right to buy. My mum paid less than 10k 25 years ago. Edinburgh so maybe worth200k now.

we should be investing massively in social housing imo

Honestly this really worries me. When my kids leave home I will be living on about 27p a week (3 bed HA house) even if the council offer me a 1 bed flat how the actual fuck will I afford to move? I get £60 a fortnight for me to live on. I'm guessing that I will need to go through the long and degrading process of trying to get whatever is the equivalent of pip (stroke and mental health difficulties).

The £60 is after they have taken out water rates, social fund debts and energy costs (which barely touch the sides these days, so I will acrue many more thousands in debt) eventually they will put me on a card meter and then I guess I will go to bed at 4pm in the winter. The only slight blessing is I will probably be dead by then. Swapsies op?

Where I work we just give the ground floor one beds to the next person on the list. Don't prioritise people that actually need a ground floor. It's frustrating.