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.

But it’s not nice though is it as according to the OP the house is too beautiful and the tenant hasn’t contributed enough to deserve it.

Am just waiting to find out that the tenant claims loads of benefits and works cash in hand too as a florist!

As a SH tenant I cannot believe you are saying this. You do realise that having a stable home means she’s more likely to go out to work and provide a stable upbringing.

DH and I both work, we aren’t lounging around on benefits enjoying handouts from the state. You’ll find that most SH tenants are the same.

Agree. It only makes sense to use the money for two houses instead of one.

Fucking hell. I hope your employers see your thread and recognise the type of person they've employed. What an unbelievably cunty way of talking about someone who has lost her partner.
Your tone hasn't been read wrong by anyone. You repeat the same nasty tone here. You've shown us exactly who you are.
Maybe you'll get lucky though and be bereaved and forced to move country so your kids aren't homeless. Lucky bitch that she is.

I think you need a new job. This is horribly unprofessional.

I think it's likely you are in the wrong profession if that's your attitude.

The guy who did the flooring in my last flat commented to me that the terrifyingly expensive privately owned flats in the new build opposite were smaller than the social housing flats in the same block because social housing has higher minimum sizes than privately owned homes. Additionally some homes built by councils in the 1970s are now incredibly sought-after because of their fantastic architecture.

Oh here we go, the "better of having a thought, that perhaps the normal people who have to rent from the council should live in a shit hole because that is what you see on TV right?

Or perhaps the nicer properties should not be going to such people?

No wonder there is a divide in society with thinking like this

Only if you're trying to make financial profit over having a decent society.

@TheHerboriste hasnt read the whole thread explaining why buying 2 shit properties rather than 1 decent one is a bad idea

@Augustus40
remember that the interior of council houses have to maintained by the residents. The palatial fixtures and fittings are added by the residents because they mostly have long term security of tenure.

What a nasty post. For someone who is supposing to be supporting families your not!

council houses come in all shapes and sizes and all sizes are required. Why should the council house people in small properties because they shouldn’t be having a nice property

Nasty

Your assumptions, judgements, tone and personal politial views are atrocious for a support worker. Utterly fucking disgusted the poor woman is being fake supported by a jealous opinionated person. Support work is to enhance and add quality to a persons life. Even if you think you keep a lid on it i dont think your outlook is suited to your role. Perhaps go into politics and make a better living standard for yourself

No. You must work harder and stop scrounging if you want nice things. Get 2 jobs, 3 if you must. I have nice things but I deserve them because I pay more tax than you. You don’t deserve them because you obviously just can’t be bothered to work for them. 🤪

/end sarcasm (for those who missed it)

There were very strict rules regarding council houses. I had to read them for a Uni project in the 80s and they’d been in force since post WW2. The build quality, sizes of rooms, storage, all prescribed. I’m sure there was also a ratio of windows:walls. There were rules over how many how could be housed, how many children could share a room. These are the bits I remember but there was lots more.
Exactly what the concept of social housing was, good houses for families at affordable rent. I remember looking at some estate plans and the houses had really long gardens, the idea being they could provide veg growing and a leisure area.

Your tone hasn't been read wrong at all.

You have simply confirmed that you are absolutely in the wrong job.

Wow! I work for a Housing Association and as a business we're proud of the high standards of our properties.
Just because they are not for profit doesn't mean they should be substandard.

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

Why should the best quality thing be provided to one family at a subsidised rent, when another family must pay twice as much from their own pocket for something worse?

People in council houses pay tax too.

Because there isn’t enough social housing?

💯

Anybody in the UK Is entitled to apply for social housing, why would you want someone miserable because you can't afford a better house if you think you qualify apply.

Is it an older council house, eg 1960s? They are often lovely, because they were built to minimum standards re space, room size, number of toilets etc (called the Parker Morris Standards if you want to google them).

My MIL lives in a council house from that era on the very outskirts of Croydon. It's a brick-built semi, with a 60' garden, a driveway to park in and a large brick shed for garden stuff. It has a decent sized kitchen, approx 9' x 10', a large through lounge, and 2 good-sized double bedrooms. The council have improved it over the years, with new windows, doors, a recently refitted kitchen and she's due to have the bathroom and separate toilet refitted later this year. And the council have put in loads of insulation to make it energy efficient.

It's very similar to my privately built house in Sussex, (the main difference is that mine has a full-width kitchen-diner at the back and a separate lounge), but worth around £390k (according to Zoopla) compared to mine at £450k-500k.

I think everyone is entitled to a decent home, be it owned or rented, private or council/HA. And older properties tend to be better built than those built later last century, possibly because building methods changed but also because the Parker Morris standards ceased to be a requirement. I used to work for a local authority that had a lot of 70s and 80s built properties and they suffered much more from damp, condensation, mould etc.

The notion that families who are in housing need and can't afford or get private sector rentals should have to put up with inferior properties is something I find rather offensive, frankly.

In my local area a percentage of the houses on new build estates are reserved for social housing stock. Not sure if it’s the same elsewhere.

Back to the OP though - and I say this as a former support worker who is now training to be a social worker - your attitude is vile and I hope your employer recognises you. If I knew who they were I’d report you myself.

No it’s a Victorian Terrace - not sure how or when the council acquired it.