How is this life?!

[starbaby858]

I’ve name changed for this post and a recent one I’ve just posted.

I live in a council estate however the flat I live in is owned privately. So I private rent within a council block. My rent is £1180 for a one bedroom (I was previously in temporary accommodation due to being homeless and the council actually negotiated the rent price from £1340 to £1180 for me).

Funnily enough, a mutual friend has moved into the flat directly above me. When I went upstairs to her flat I asked how much her rent is and she said £465! We then started talking about private renting and how crazy it is to pay private prices when living in a council estate.

Sorry if my post isn’t making much sense as this is more of a rant then anything but I can’t believe a council flat that had a rent price of £465 is being rented out for £1180 (or £1340 for most people!) I just think this is crazy.

I bid every week for a two bedroom but the borough I live in is so overcrowded, there’s no real chance of getting a place within the next few years.

@JustCleaningtheBBQ that’s just the price that the council charges for a one bed for this block. Even when bidding, the rent prices range from 500-590 for a two bed in the same area

I can see your point completely, landlords are profiteering from social funds, just like large corporations are profiteering through UC by paying below living standard wages.

I think there is an argument for removing the housing UC element completely, to reset the market, but only if they were to enforce some regulation simultaneously that meant they couldn’t leave property empty or something. So many corporations and individuals globally are invested in the London property market as a long term investment, and they’d have no qualms of leaving the property empty and dormant rather than let the market crash. If the housing element UC was removed, and the landlords just refused to rent below a certain level, you’d have a massive issue of homelessness.

it’s such a layered issue, without a one answer fixes all.

I really feel for you but its a tough one. Council lists are likely over subscribed across the country but im sure outwith London there are many places where homes would be easier to come by or rent is simply far lower. People dont have an automatic right to live somewhere. For many young people, London would provide them with untold career opportunities that they will never get in some other areas of the UK but they will never get to take these up because they cannot afford to live in London in the first place. Its simply supply and demand. It is definitely unfair, but life is unfair I suppose. I say this as someone who previously lived in London, lost my job and had to leave the city as I simply couldnt cover my bills.

“I’m currently on maternity leave so my whole rent is paid for by UC. However once I go back to work, I’ll obviously be the one paying this.

That’s another thing though. LLs are able to do right to buy and rent the property out at market prices but then the rent can be paid by the taxpayers money?

So in a nutshell, whilst I’m on maternity leave, other people are paying my rent because of rent to buy. It’s all very interesting.”

The system is utterly fucked up.
Private landlords can charge you £1100+ because the government is paying, and tenants can move from unable to afford to rent (in private accommodation arranged themselves) so homeless, straight into maternity leave with fully paid rent.

so homeless, straight into maternity leave with fully paid rent.

@Testina these threads always tend to go this way. My rent is paid WHILST I’m on maternity leave. As soon as I’m back to a full wage, I’ll be paying that myself. People always want to focus on one person’s circumstance instead of looking at the government and why thing’s work the way they do

But it is about the whole system @starbaby858
You said you were homeless so in temporary accommodation and then into this place costing £1100 a month.
Are you saying that once you’re back at work, you’re really going to not receive any benefits?
Because if you’re earning that amount when back at work then you were earning enough to not be homeless before, surely?
I don’t have an issue with benefit claims - people have to be topped up, or they’d be in the streets, baby and all 😕
But I do have an issue where those benefits are going straight into the pockets of private landlords at huge rents.

I’d love to see some computer modelling of what would happen if the following happened:

• NMW was increased to a level that rent at current council level was affordable without benefits (rent + life)
• no housing contribution was paid

Would that mean no-one could afford the private rents as there was no housing benefit / element to prop up the high rents, so they’d fall to council level?
Or would there be enough people who could still rent at that cost from their higher incomes, leaving the poorest now without benefits on the streets?

I don’t know - it depends on the number of people and incomes involved - and doubtless many other factors!

It just seems to me, that benefits are a part of propping up the high rents - and it makes me sick that that money is going to a private landlord not a Housing Association.

Yep if you manage to get a council or housing association property never leave the system. If you have to move then sit out the waiting lists, look for swaps etc. The difference in cost is huge. Which is why plenty of decent earning individuals and families, particularly older generations are happily sat in council houses despite being able to easily afford private rents if required.

@PremiumPiglet how is anyone stupid enough to spend a million on a council flat.

Council housing just needs to be for 10 years and then you need to leave. Council give you a good reference if you've looked after the property.

It's crazy.

We are not in London but SW.
Fam of 5 in a 2 bed council. Rent is 500 a month. Badly insulated, really expensive to heat in winter. Huge garden though and good storage.
We swapped to this house from a TINY 2 bed with a tiny garden, Housing Association 'affordable rent' of 600 , air source heating but really expensive council tax.

If we were to move out and private rent a 3 bed we would be paying double the rent.

Oh and we have tried to swap to a 3 bed council for years, plenty of people whose kids have left home and they have 2 spare rooms..but they don't want to down size.

We rented in Essex/Northeast London over 5 years ago and paid 1300 a month for a one bed. I live in ROI now and own, but the average rent for a house in my town is 1700. I think rents are only going one way everywhere.

You'd need to ask Margaret Thatcher that.

@Testina I think I misunderstood your previous point as I’m in agreement with you. Also, no I’d still get UC top ups as I’m a single parent but I meant my salary would cover my housing element so I’m only getting the full amount whilst on maternity

Oh this is the plan!

Because it is listed, amazing and in Central London? They don't even tend to go onto the open market.

Not all council flats are 1960s tower blocks.

@starbaby858 I understand you're not bitter, that's why I said I'm not accusing you.
Maybe I could have worded it better.
I've private rented in a council estate, where I lived though about 2/3 were private rented. I found a lot of my neighbours who private rented were bitter towards the council tenants in the street. I did like to point out to them that it wasn't those tenants or the council who were charging almost double the rent and maybe their resentment was pointing in the wrong direction. But I realised it was pointless arguing with people like that.
I tried in the past to bid for council but long since given up. We've thousands on the wait list here and I stand no chance. I hope you have more luck.
The point is the LLs shouldn't be allowed to get away with it.

We rented for 1000 and the HA tenants next door only pay 400 and she always boasted about her cash in hand too.

But... that's why you're in this situation. If everyone's plan is to keep their council place even when they're earning well and can afford private rents, then how can there possibly be any homes for the new homeless people who need them? I'm not saying it's wrong from your POV to hang onto your place, but at the same time you can't then be baffled/frustrated that there's nowhere available for you to move to. And the 'build more homes' isn't the solution in Brixton/Streatham where there's not the space not the infrastructure to keep building more homes and people won't move further afield. again, not saying you're wrong, everyone will look out for themselves, but that's why it's all such an unfair shitshow and I do agree with PP about the need to rethink the (lack of) time limit on social housing, as well as getting rid of right-to-buy and being able to pass your home on to the next generation instead of it coming back into the system and being fairly allocation. There's lots that can be done, but I doubt it will be sorted and so the spiral goes on.

Think it may be your area.
Morgage is 10% deposit would be around 650 a month here and the rent is pretty much the same.
The issues is the lack of affordable council housing not rent prices for private housing.

I think you are very lucky to live in zone 2 next to all of your friends and family, some people simply can’t afford that luxury, yes it is a lot but it’s also the luxury of living in London, I live in a run down part of London where no one else wants to live so prices are much cheaper here, my 3 bed council house is £450 a month, yes I get being near support is great but you could move somewhere a bit further out and travel to see family, many people can’t afford to live right next to family let alone in zone 2 in London.