Social housing exchange - AIBU

[Brighton5555]

Hey

just need some assurance / reality check I guess. I have managed to find a housing swap after quite some time ( the feedback I get is lovely house but too small) so not beating off offers by any means despite my home being to a high standard and spent thousands on it…

im due to sign a exchange soon. The man has the same bedrooms as me and he has a house in a area I desire but if this house wasn’t in the area I want I don’t know if I would actually go for it..

bonus points are - neighbours on one side only, good garden size, extra toilet downstairs, larger kitchen than mine, larger bathroom and about same size of the 4 bedrooms BUT

its pretty gross. He has 7 animals including 4 dogs, it needs gutted from top to bottom as in complete new flooring and complete decoration and the bathroom will need ripped out. It’s in a very poor conditon but has passed all the checks they do for exchanging .. I viewed it for the 3rd time last week and the house had a lot of flies, I mean a lot I suspect from the animals . It was super clear to me on that viewing just how much money and work will need to be put in whereas here mine needs only a freshen up on the painting upstairs there are no other costs to him..

of course he’s lucky and it’s not his fault that our homes are very different but I just feel am I being crazy to take it on? I’m legit starting from the bottom again and will need to spend a few weeks living outside and at least £15,000 to have it okay to move into.

I have the means to do both but I know it’s going to a long slog. Again the benefits are extra toilet, larger kitchen and bathroom more manageable sized garden and a better area ..

I guess I feel daunted by it all

@Bumpitybumper
I'm finding the discussion about funding/capital interesting (apologies to the OP for derailing he thread )
What do you think of the fact that 38% of private landlords have no mortgage/borrowing? They could reduce their rents if they wanted.
Or have I misunderstood your point about capital?

@LakieLady
I think in HA, some of the rent goes to paying off the debt (often a private bank loan rather than govmt money) used to build the home, and then later as leverage for other loans for more building. (Most of the rent goes to ongoing maintenance and overheads of course)

It will end up costing a lot more than £15k (these things do) plus you’ll have all the stress and work of the renovation while you’re living there. Don’t underestimate how dirty and dusty that would be. Bathrooms are quite expensive to do and it’s lots of aggro spending time choosing all the things you want, colours etc. I’ve lived through three house renovations and they are not fun.

I don’t believe anyone should ever be forced out. I do think there needs to be consideration about some (not all!) lifetime tenancies.

For many people, it’s not about insisting on staying in London - or any other overpopulated area - sometimes there are valid reasons such as; support network, schooling, social care support and medical care. Moving people st certain points in their life may be traumatic for very genuine reasons.
While I don’t think people should be forced to leave council housing, I also think there are situations when people need to stay in the local area. I fully appreciate there are many situations where they don’t have a need to be in a certain area.

Op, I think you should change your username. I searched your username on Google as I couldn’t find this thread (as I wanted to reply). Someone has written an article about one of your Mumsnet posts and there is a Reddit forum post about you.

Location location location. It will be worth it. If it's affordable do it. Good luck!

There's multiple articles about threads she's started on various other sites.

This comment is deeply manipulative. Nobody has said anything like that at all (that people in SH shouldn’t have a comfortable / pleasant house). People are not expressing ignorance either; they are engaging in a legitimate debate about how a really important and scare resort should be allocated.

The point you are trying to make is entirely semantic.

It sounds lovely and I wish you many happy Years there.

Go for it! And enjoy splashing out on it and making it your home. I wish you many happy years there.

The cost of capital isn't just about paying interest on a mortgage but also the opportunity cost associated with having your money tied up in an expensive asset when it could be better utilised elsewhere. This is especially true where there is risk associated with the investment. Plainly in an environment with weak/negative house price growth, increasing government regulation and rampant inflation then not many people are going to want to be not for profit or low profit landlords. It exposes them and their capital to high levels of risk when they can make 4% plus a year just keeping their money in the bank not to mention the potential gains you could make in slightly more risky investments.

I really don't. The housing benefit bill would not go up if the most needy were allocated SH instead of those with lifetime tenancies.

It is highly likely that anyone that qualifies as the 'most needy' will already be recieving housing benefit due to their financial circumstances. In most cases this will currently be being paid to a private landlord.

All the data suggests that there is a reasonable percentage of SH tenants that earn above the average wage and some quite a bit above this. If they were to move into the private rental sector they wouldn't be entitled to housing benefit or if they were it would generally be at lower levels than the most needy.

Example:
Person A currently in SH pays discounted rent from earnings. Rent is set at 50% of market rate so say £500.
Person B currently privately rents and rent is paid by HB. Rent is 100% of market rate so say £1000 which is their LHA rate.

In this scenario the council pays £1000 in HB to a private landlord but makes £500 'profit' either directly or through private company from Person A so net impact for government is -£500

If Person B moves to SH they will pay the discounted rent with HB so Person B will now be entitled to £500 HB that is paid to council/private company arm
Person A then has to privately rent and may well not be entitled to HB.

In this scenario the government would save the £500 it loses in the first scenario through better allocation of the discounted rent. Person A obviously loses out on their discounted rent privilege but they wouldn't be any worse off than anyone else in the private rental sector as would be assessed for HB entitlement in exactly the same way.

Housing benefit does not exist any more. Social housing has to be rented out at 'market rate' so no it isn't subsidised.

One thing I do think should change is

a) stop letting people buy their SH to keep it available, I'm not actually allowed to buy mine as it is designed for someone with disabilities. I'm OK with that.

b) if you are allowed to buy, at the moment, you get a discount based on how long you have been in the property, not how long you have paid the rent yourself. I do think years when you have received HB or another benefit to pay your rent.

c) Benefits should be available to owners under certain circumstances. I remember the 1990s when people were evicted from homes because they could not pay their mortgage, the house would be sold cheaply, often to a landlord and in some cases the same house was rented back to the family who had been evicted, but now they were eligible for HB and the landlord could charge more than their mortgage had been.

If I were in charge I would have something where the family could claim to pay their mortgage, but at the end then had to pay the HB (or whatever) back.

So you are 10 years into a 25 year mortgage, you lose your job and cannot pay, so you get help from the government to pay your mortgage but the government is effectively buying your house so When you are back in work you start paying your mortgage off again, but at 25 years you have paid your mortgage you now have to start paying the government back.

It could be done at a local council level rather than national. Sort of a bit like shared ownership. There would be other caveats, a maximum amount so a single person in a mansion with a pool and riding stables would only get the same as someone in say a 2 bed terraced house.

@Sashh I agree. The threat and worry of people no longer being able to afford their mortgage. Maybe there should be an option to sell your home to the government and have the right to a secured/lifetime tenancy instead. There will therefore be more social housing. You forfeit your 'investment' to your kids. It isn't necessary to own a home, but having a roof over your head is

@sashh
"Housing benefit does not exist any more. Social housing has to be rented out at 'market rate' so no it isn't subsidised"

That is not right, HB still exists. Some social rents are now 'affordable' which is closer but not the same as market rate. But most is not.

Not everyone in social housing is in receipt of housing benefit or universal credit.

Yeah but if some people on this thread had their way, they would be. Scary thoughts.

@LadyGrinningSoul85 Why is the OP more responsible for your kids than their OWN FATHER is?

Social housing does not = benefits. To think that is outdated. Things have moved on. People do love a group to look down on don’t they then they try to manufacture their “truth” as fact.
What makes me laugh is those that are spouting the misinformation wouldn’t want to live in SH anyway but love to chuck these falsehoods about to make themselves feel superior. Incredible

What you're wanting is to chuck people out to give someone else a turn. Then chuck them out later on to give someone else a turn

Exactly Social housing tenants are not chess pieces.

@Bumpitybumper

John Boughton (author of Municipal Dreams The Rise and Fall of Council Housing) on the welfarisation of council housing.

//www.insidehousing.co.uk/insight/the-rise-and-fall-of-council-housing-56139

Inthe 1980s, residualisation may have been a partly unintended consequence of housing policies pursued with varying ideological intent

Since 2010, and more so since the return of single-party Conservative government in 2015, we’ve seen something further: welfarisation – ‘a conception of social housing as a very small, highly residualised sector catering only for the very poorest, and those with additional social “vulnerabilities”, on a short-term “ambulance” basis

i swapped my one bed flat to a 3 bed house, it was disgusting, everyone thought I got the better deal.
But the person I swapped with got Brand new cooker, fridge freezer, expensive sofa, freshly decorated, nice flooring, shower etc, I got a flea ridden, dirty, money pit 😂 so worth it though for the space and garden and eventually the RTB discount definitely made it worth it!
go for it if you like the house and area, it’s not easy to get a swap in social housing, plus if you are in a position to buy later, better to buy a house you like!

Thanks for all the feedback. I’m going ahead 🫣

Best of luck OP! I’m sure you’ll turn it into a lovely place to live.