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 used to work with a go that lived in a HA house. He said to me that he has no plans to ever try and buy his own place because if anything goes wrong, boiler for example, it gets fixed for free

Him and his wife were both driving brand new leased cars, he always had the latest Apple Watch and phone. When him and his wife moved into the house they needed help but not anymore. She has two degrees and is now a teacher, he was earning a reasonable salary

It never sat right with me as I always thought that HA houses were for people who needed help and who were struggling. I guess you only need to be in that position initially then once you get the house if you better yourself and don't need help you're never asked to leave

One of my colleagues made the comment that the guy will never have a property to leave to his kids which I thought was an interesting way of looking at it. Personally I would want to buy my own property if I could and move on but that's just me

we should all have access to this so rather than punching down and being bitter at the wrong people get furious wages have be stagnant compared to house prices

pie in the sky is nice but in reality means nothing and helps nobody

No but it sounds like he could save some serious cash to leave them or gift them, through not paying market rent

If they can afford to spend thousands on their council property and buying a new kitchen then why didn’t they private rent? The council have a duty to replace kitchens and bathrooms every 15 years where I am, and it has to be in useable condition when the property is offered. The houses are often dirty but there isn’t any damage or work that needs doing. A few tubs of paint or wallpaper and carpet doesn’t cost thousands. The council have a duty to you once you’re housed but anything can happen and you could be evicted. If you lost your job and couldn’t afford to pay rent they would evict you, why spend thousands on a property that isn’t yours? I decorated my child’s bedroom with my landlords permission in the knowledge if/when he sells up I have lost the value of the decorating, it isn’t an investment.

I would have been quite happy with that but rules are rules!

But why should people give up their homes for families that keep having kids even though they can’t afford/ have suitable housing for them.
To many people(not all) assume they can keep having kids in their 2 bed flats and the council will magic them another property.
How about people take responsibility and stop having kids they don’t have room for.
If your already in cramped conditions unless there is a genuine reason why have more children? And then expect the council to turf someone out so you can live there? Probably not a popular opinion but unless you can afford a big family don’t have one.

YANBU.
I find hardworking are hardly given a hand up, yet some can just live on welfare for life. I can't afford a home in the city on my salary and can't get social housing as I don't have kids, disability etc. But I know a few people who work in the dark economy so don't pay taxes, have Council homes that they then sub-let.
Just look at the people being given support payments for the cost of living crisis? One would have thought the tax-paying citizens should be encouraged to keep going.

Pensioners don’t have to though and they are the ones that most need to downsize

You’re forgetting the reason most of the couples are in big Council homes to start with is because they did exactly that…

YABU. I grew up in a HA house and my dad now lives there alone. It's been the family home for 40 years and as he's now quite elderly, it would be utterly devastating for him to be chucked out to make room for a family. And besides, where would he go? There is virtually no social housing available? Just make him homeless?

I would have been happy to but that's not the way it works

@Glittersparkle76 sorry to hear about your son. I read a lot on mn about those who lose a child 💐💐

I have thought this for a long time. People who can afford to buy should move out and give other families a home. Absolute disgrace people are allowed life time tenancies on these social housing schemes.

Oh now we have a women have kids to get council houses.

I used to think like this. My home is a council house and when I moved in, I planned on downsizing when my kids grew up. It’s not a big property but it has 2 bedrooms. My children are now teenagers and I’ve had second thoughts about moving. I waited a really, really long time to get my house and over the years have scrimped and saved to make it my own. I also live in a location very specific to work so moving would cost me along of money in terms of travel. I pay full rent and council tax and always have done
If the council were to offer me a flat in a good location in year to come, id definitely consider it but I wouldn’t just move out to an insecure tenancy because other people might need my house, after legitimately waiting my turn (and I’m talking years)

There are some people who live in social housing because they havent long been allocated it, are usually on benefits and have a very low income.

But I think the people that OP might be referring to are those who have been in a social housing tenancy for a long time and due to the rents being so low are well off compared to a similar person who has paid a mortgage or rent

OP - I think your view has some theoretical merit, but in reality there wouldnt be anywhere for your neighbour to move to. You say that housing stock has been built but that will have gone almost instantly to those on the list

The ideal is that there should be a social housing system for those who either cant or dont want a mortgage and to protect and diversity the private rental market. Private rents require huge rents and deposit up front and often a guarantor which many people dont have. Social housing should be there for people who dont have those options. It also avoids instability in terms of needing to move each time a landlord says, and you can have pets whereas a lot of private rents you cant

There is room for a private rental market, Im not against that, but we have a rental market which is more or less solely private rented and it doesnt work, causes social immobility, instability for children at school/health care/social networks and is inaccessible to people without the funds. Not to mention costing the tax payer huge amounts of housing benefits

I love my cat- I completely agree with you about those who have child after child and get rehoused to larger properties, though I’m not having a dig at peoples circumstances it’s those who can make a difference and chose not to that I’m questioning.
As much as it would be perfect for there to be affordable homes for everybody we know it’s unrealistic and will never happen. But changing the rules would make some improvements over time if people had respect for the fact they were housed when in need and not for a free home they can treat as if they’re paying a mortgage. Elderly people wouldn’t need to be turfed from their home because they would have been adequately housed between the age of 40-60 depending on when their youngest reached adulthood, and would be settled and secure by retirement.

I know a very close “friend” who lived in a council house with her other half when they were low income. They then got better jobs and ended up earning over £70k+ combined… but still loved in the social housing. Fair? I think not!!

The answer is lots more social housing, it's very obvious. You're just going round in circles...
.The housing situation in this country is dire. Houses need to seen as homes and not investments.
Council housing was not originally built for desperate people, it was for anybody and that principle should still apply today.

I'm sorry but you're painting a picture of social housing being akin to a depraved squat.
I don't think it's a very realistic view. I have helped people get into social housing (friends & family) within the last few years & it's nothing like you're describing. As a matter of fact I'm helping someone now, a young person made homeless by her mother, she's in comfortable temporary housing (for under 25 year olds), it's not heaven but it's nothing like you're describing, ensuite & kitchette. People like this girl is what social housing is for.

My DM when in her seventies went t our local authority saying that she didn't need the 3 bedroom house she was living and would be happy to move to a one bed so that a family could have the house. They found her a one bed in a tower block where the lifts were always breaking down, as far away from friends and family as it was possible to b and still be in the same borough. It was not an area that was safe in daytime let alone after dark. Neither her not her friends drive she would have been isolated from everyone and most of the time been unable to get out. Her and my father made a decision when offered the chance to buy their home in the 1980s that it was unethical to do so.
she made the right decision to stay in her home, when we were young before they got the council house we lived in one room with a shar ed kitchen and bathroom. She didn't want that for another family was she awful for her decision not to move, I don't think so

A better solution is to make it easier for people to get on the housing ladder & access schemes that allow people to purchase houses & produce reasonably costed housing stock. There's been some really good schemes over the years.

this - I have friends who pay £1500/1600 a month on rent yet if got a mortgage payments would be 200/300 less a month

but banks say they don’t earn Enough and can’t afford it ….

well obviously they do manage to pay it for rent

If you have an income limit, you put people off earning more money.

YANBU. others are subsidising this. When raising a family, people in council housing have a much better QOL than those on equal incomes than those not in council housing (ie higher disposal income) but some continue to think they are entitled to this when they are pretty well off and adult
children are long gone.

It’s a really hard situation all round, there isn’t enough housing for families or single people. So many places could be freed up but ultimately it is impossible to move people on if they don’t need or want too, i am trying to house swap to a bigger property as we are overcrowded, Mine is perfect for a couple or single person but do you think I can find a swap🤔.