Surprised with the quality of some council houses

[LydieL]

Hi all, so I recently moved to a town in the north west, very low income area, the town is as you’d expect a sea of terrace houses that open to the street with concrete yards, some of the nicer parts have gardens but for the most part that’s not the case. There are also some newer estates.

Anyway I work for a charity, we support families where a parent or sibling has passed away. As part of my job I’ve seen a lot of council houses, in this area it’s mostly the terraces which are small or post war builds which are bigger but these tend to be “rougher” areas to live.

Lately I’ve been working with a family, mums been offered a council house and today I went with her to just go over a list of what she needs to do to get out of temporary accommodation asap and into it. I’ll be honest I’m a little stunned at the quality, it’s a 3 bed terrace, small front garden, mid size back garden (more than most around here), large kitchen, bay window. Council have fitted a new kitchen and bathroom and re-plastered the whole house.

It’s also in a “nicer” area. For the amount this place would sell for, you could probably buy 2 cheaper 3 bed terraces and considering the shortage of council housing stock I’m surprised that hasn’t happened! She will be paying about a little Over half what it would go for on the rental market.

Now I know this is the exception rather than the norm but AIBU to be surprised councils are holding onto higher value properties like this rather than selling them and either getting 2 houses (so 2 families can be housed) or putting the profit into the local area?

I am aware this is far from the norm but after talking to colleagues the council seems to have several properties in this little area, this mum has also got very lucky with her housing situation as she’s only been in temporary accommodation for a couple of months.

So council tenants should live in shit holes?

The post doesn’t really make any sense in terms of your assumptions around the economics but I am 😱 that you have somehow assumed council houses should be shit holes. WTF?

Why can’t council tenants have high quality property in “nice” areas?

why wouldn’t they be nice houses? The council build houses to last 100 years. They’re assets. They’re not supposed to be as cheap as possible.

It’s a little sad that with the line of work you in, you have this judgement. Just be happy she’s caught a break rather than thinking she should be living in a small shithole in a rough area.

This.

You want the council to sell any nice houses they have and put the money into the local area?

So people on need of a council house should have shitty places to live so you can benefit?

What kind of support worker are you? Not a particularly good one by the sound of it.

The problem isn't that councils rent out decent houses. It's that so many private rentals are in such a terrible state. It should not be a race to the bottom.

What an interesting role you have where supporting families equates to snide posts on mumsnet re how nice council house properties are and whether they should be that nice.
are you really suited to this role?

Why shouldn’t it be nice? She’s still paying rent for it.

And - in a small low income town in the North West, housing might generally be quite cheap anyway.

Your job is to support her not judge her, her life or her house.

My sister lives in a CH in the NW, front and back garden (front garden made into a driveway), the back garden is huge.
The house itself isn't anything special but it has a large kitchen and lounge and 2 big bedrooms (one split into 2 for her children). She pays less than half of what I pay for my 3 bed mid terrace with no garden (small back yard).
Working hard doesn't always pay, we could both be sat in the same nursing home in the future and I'll be paying for my care, my sister won't!

I feel for your service users. I wonder if they know how the people who are supposed to be operating in their best interests feel about them

I take your point about selling and buying two acceptable properties. Maybe it would be prohibitively expensive to do so though? Or maybe it’s just too common sense of a solution 😂

You're in the wrong job if that's your take.

Your take should be that all council houses should be nice. None of them should be shitholes

I also feel for your service users. I really do not think you are the best fit for your job role.

Houses in nice areas tend to attract tenants who stay for a long time and therefore cover the costs of their tenancy.

Houses in less desirable areas can also work in this way, but equally, they can be hard to let, they can stay vacant for a long time with the associated loss of rent, tenancies can turn over more quickly as tenants move out to nicer areas and then you have all the costs of refreshing the house, finding a new tenant, doing the tenancy checks etc. So the two houses in the less desirable can actually cost far far more to run than the one house, contributing to instability in the local community, and suck resources away from other services.

this mum has also got very lucky with her housing situation as she’s only been in temporary accommodation for a couple of months

Also what a gross thing to say about someone you're meant to be supporting because they've had a bereavement.

I think this is well said and probably is what the OP is getting at. That, and they could be helping more families if they were sold and more typical properties for the area were purchased.

It’s better if the Council spread out the council properties to avoid high concentration in certain areas only. So they have to hold onto some in more expensive areas. Look at London as a prime example. What should happen though is that the properties in expending areas have to remain council owned.

Modern houses are built to a budget to maximise return to developers. That's why they're crammed in and the rooms are getting smaller. In ye olde days councils built houses with the prospect they would continue to maintain them. They tended to be well built and of good size. With right to buy a large proportion of these have been sold off.

Let me clarify, I don’t think the 3 bed terraces with concrete yards, smaller rooms and in the less nice areas are “shit holes” they are what the vast majority of people in this area are living in.

Im not saying council houses should be the bottom quality of housing but I also don’t see how it makes sense for them to be the top?

Yes, and you will own your property could downsize and spend the money on what ever you fancy.

Social housing isn’t about buying old, poor quality housing and cramming families into them.
That’s pretty much against the whole ethos of social housing.

you’re comparing social housing to private rent, with low level poorly funded landlords who need “market rent”

social housing doesn’t charge, or need, market rent. Market rent is irrelevant. The idea is to build high quality housing with longevity and build communities.

it’s a business strategy as well as a social one. You’re thinking from an inexperienced point of view about how it could work

Because it breaks the economic model of paying more to get more.

So you work your arse off to pay your mortgage, meanwhile, the unemployed or broke family with more kids then you can afford, gets the same as you for way less than you.

And the kicker is that your taxes are paying for it.

I have seen many really decent quality social housing in London when I worked in the field. Some of the flats were simply palatial much nicer than many a privately owned property.

Pity it isn't everywhere though. I see no need to put people into slums.

There is way more demand for 3 bed plus though not 2 beds.

Let's put it this way I won't be letting the one I got keys back for on Monday for at least 2 weeks, till it's been cleaned, cleared, full void scope, new kitchen, 3 windows replaced, all window handles/restricted, several rooms plastered new doors throughout.

What do you want me to do rent it to the next customer with doors/walls with holes in? Only half a kitchen sink, no cupboard doors - left the shit last customer took on the carpet for them!!! It's going to cost thousands to get right for a new customer.

Seems like your attitude is she's been homeless she not entitled to a nice home.
But according to you I should the company to sell it and buy several smaller.
LA need bigger houses not smaller ones!