To think you should downsize your council house if it’s just you?

[OuchOuchOuchh]

Oh my goodness I have created war at work and everyone is gunning for me.

My auntie has a huge 4 bedroom council house she has lived there since the 90s with her one son. That has now moved out.

All i said was I think it’s unfair that she’s living in such a big family home perfect for a family to bring their kids up in. Large garden backs on to the woods plenty of visits from deers and fox’s it’s beautiful! Anyway all I said is that if you haven’t purchased the property in a certain amount of time you should have to downsize if it’s just you living there.

Theres families overcrowded and can’t get anywhere then you have my auntie paying £100 a week in rent for a massive house for just herself.

please tell me if I am being an asshole! I appreciate it’s her family home but it just doesn’t seem fair to me.

This is exactly what I’m saying. These people, no one else. They are very “Why should I move? It’s not my problem”, when actually they are some of the ONLY people with the power to directly help people living in cramped/substandard conditions, by swapping for a smaller property or by vacating their council property altogether. It’s very “I’m alright, Jack.”

Disclaimer (since people seem to need it): I am only talking about people who can afford to rent privately, not about people on low salaries or pensioners.

I totally get what you’re saying as it makes logical sense as many people are struggling with private rent being so high.

however it’s her home.

but I thought they brought in bedroom tax to encourage people to move

@Eyerollcentral

A lot of people in SH are on low incomes though and don’t have savings.

Not everywhere allows people to buy, Wales doesn’t for example any more.

We won’t leave ours when it’s too big because we have disabled sons and have been told they won’t count them for an alternative when an adult- we’ll always need social housing due to my carer status. Nobody else applied for our house just a few years ago for specific reasons so it would have to be over 55 accommodation anyway which they could not live in- complete nope.

The leases stand anyway so they canteen be obliged to move on as long as they can cover the rent; what we need is more housing not breaking people up from communities and support networks as they age and likely get more vulnerable.

You are wrong. Your income will be assessed. If you have your state pension plus an occupational pension or residual of an occupational pension as a widow/er you probably won’t be entitled to anything like a significant contribution to your rent in terms of housing benefit.

And you only need to be 1p over the housing benefit cut off point and you get no help at all!
A couple of my friends - husband disabled due to very bad health, had retired from a lifetime of outdoor manual labour, was entitled to a small rent rebate, right up until the mrs hit retirement age ( which, don't forget, women are having to wait longer for now ) and because she got a very small pension of a couple of quid because she'd worked in a supermarket at one time, they lost every penny of rent rebate, so there's that bit of good news to cheer some people up!

Not sure what your point is sorry?

If you get to state pension age, have no savings and retire you are classed as unemployed and are eligible for you rent covered via housing benefit

It doesn't depend on that. It depends on your income as well

@Eyerollcentral

I was just saying a lot of pensioners don’t pay council rent. I was answering someone who said the rent has to be paid forever.

You’ve misunderstood this wording. It says you can make a claim for, not you will automatically get. If you have any kind of income over and above the state pension your claim is likely to unsuccessful.

As many have pointed out (and as I stated in my earlier comment) it would be unfair to expect those who signed and abided by tenancy agreements for council houses decades ago to have those terms suddenly changed. There are lots of people living in council houses with spare bedrooms and with an income more than sufficient to pay for private rent, however they agreed to the terms and they have a right to stay out.

Moving forward however, as well as building much more social housing which would be the best solution, would another solution be to include a clause in a council house tenancy agreement which states that once the income/assets of someone living in a council house reaches a certain threshold, they should be expected to find their own accommodation? Such as private rent or buying a house?

While you cannot fairly change existing agreements, surely amending newly issued agreements to ensure that those on the lowest incomes are provided with housing while those who can afford regular private rent or a mortgage are expected to do so would take some of the pressure off the waiting lists for council housing?

I do note that many people have said that they have put new carpets etc in their council homes - would an additional clause stating that this work would be reimbursed upon completion be a solution to cover this? I don’t agree that people living in government owned properties should have to pay for their upkeep and maintenance.

I’m just throwing out hypothetical solutions which may or may not be possible (and are unlikely to be implemented).

@AllThingsServeTheBeam

Thats if you are still working over retirement age otherwise you are classed as unemployed. My Nan paid her rent in full each month. She then retired at state pension age and now her rent is fully covered.

But we could have afforded to rent privately. But why would I give up a secure tenancy? Next door was private and they only paid 10 quid more a month than us. My friend who had a way nicer house and an extra room rented privately and only paid around 60 quid more than us a month. You can get housing benefit regardless of if you're renting private or HA.

Yea to being jeans tested!

I used to work with someone years ago in a 4 bed council house, all three children had moved out, gotten married and had children of their own and her and her husband now had very good jobs (there earned £60,000 combined 10 years or more ago).

I asked her why she didn't moved so another desperate family (like she had been) could use the home 'why should I?!' Or why she hadn't bought the home 'council rent is cheaper!'

Now I know more about it, I'm against the selling of council homes and think that they should be reassessed on need including income, regularly.

There are positives and negatives to renting/owning. Renters take advantage of being able to move more easily when their family size increases but don't seem to want to do the same when it decreases.

She hasn't worked since she was 60. She's 85. She only has her pension and my late Grandads. She's also on PIP but that isn't counted

Did your nan only get the state pension? If so that is why. If you have any other income over the state pension you will be unlikely to get anything or any significant amount. Most people even in council tenancies will have an occupational pension too if they have worked.

Why should they? Aside from you think they should. If they were privately renting at the same rate as they pay council would you still say they should downsize?

@Eyerollcentral

Income meaning pensions I presume?

guess I’m just going from what my Nan did. She paid her rent in full until she got to retirement age. She then retired and put in a claim for HB and now that’s paid for. She had no savings though. I work in health and social care and I know a lot of elderly SH tenants getting their rent paid for via HB.

personally it’s not something I rely on I’ve made peace with the fact I’ll work forever

and by the time I get old the retirement age will be 90 anyway 😂

@Eyerollcentral

Yss just state, she didn’t have an occ pension.

People are entitled to enjoy the property they signed an agreement to live in for as long as that agreement lasts.

So a couple in their sixties, both on great salaries/successful business/final salary pension etc, both recent inheritances. Should get to stay in their three or four bed council house for another 30+ years, just because that’s the agreement they signed?

Is it currently allowed? Yes
Is it selfish? Also yes
It is the definition of “I’m alright, Jack”

Some people could literally change to private renting and rent the same type of property down the street. Or dig into their retirement fund and buy the same property over the road. Some people could afford that. Or at minimum, swap for a smaller council property. But they don’t want the inconvenience or to deplete their savings. Of course it is selfish!

Also as another user pointed out, almost all home owners sell up and downsize when they retire in order to afford to live in retirement. I don’t know anyone who hasn’t. So this “why shouldn’t they get to live in their family home with their nice garden and neighbours for life” stuff is so, so tone deaf.

She didn’t have her husbands pension she was widowed very young.

Not unreasonable. People kick off like but it's my home or I've invested in it, decorated it etc. But you've not bought it so it's not your home. This was a driving factor in the "bedroom tax" when it was bought in, to encourage people to downsize to where rent was paid for them. Very little has been done to encourage families who underoccupy a council property to give it up where they don't receive benefits and pay it all themselves though. These are generally people who only have council houses because they were easy to get way back when, now there's no way they'd be considered for them.
My council for a while was actually offering cash incentives for people to move into smaller properties and they still didn't get much uptake. It's why they've stopped offering lifetime tenancies. It's not your home for life, your borrowing it and when you don't need it you should be giving it back. There will be loads of families overcrowded in smaller properties happy to swap.

Yes private pensions, a pension paid in to through the workplace or that she has the benefit of now that her spouse has died.
If she only gets her state pension that is her only income and because it’s so low she will get housing benefit. Pensioners don’t automatically get housing benefit.
They also are NOT classed as unemployed. They are classed as retired and there are technical and tax differences that are an important distinction between the two.
So in short yes many council tenants do end up paying rent until they die

Would also point out that council houses are often leased in a much more basic state than private homes. It’s normal for them to be bare floorboards etc, we needed £1k to get ours to a liveable state for our sons and a few years in still have some rooms in need of a carpet. Not just a ratty old carpet, no carpet. Bizarre huge windows that we couldn’t find second hand or standard curtains for, bare floorboards with gaps between upstairs- how would a pensioner on a state pension cover that?