Council houses owning brand new cars?

[TheCluelessMum]

I’m writing this post with the hopes of being educated, not slandered

however I completely appreciate I may be just completely shot down for asking this.

i live on a new build estate, 12 houses at the start of the estate are council houses. I don’t know this because I’m a snob, I know this because it’s clearly marked on plans when you buy those houses.

i see so much stuff online about how the UK benefits system is failing people, the higher rise of food banks. It’s absolutely abhorrent people are in this situation.

however, when entering my estate today I noticed that each and every single council house had a car newer that a 20 plate. Mercedes, Audi’s, BMW’s even range rovers.. there was not a single house out of the 12 which had an older than 20 plate car.

I am now confused as to why this is the case? Everyone I know (including those receiving benefits) continually speaks about how hard the cost of living is.

so could someone please answer how/why those in what we would presume lower income families, are able to afford such lavish cars.

It depends where you live.

In many areas, council housing is very much tied to benefits. In some areas you don't even get on the list unless you're over 50, a care leaver, a successful asylum seeker or in receipt of certain benefits.

Exactly! Once the costs of building social housing are recouped via rent, they become a council asset. Who thinks it would be a good idea to remove working tenants so that the rent is once again funded via housing-related benefits?
I'm not suggesting that nobody who has their housing costs paid via UC should be without a home btw. Just that if there's income from rent on social housing, in a sane world that would go towards building/funding more affordable tenancies. Nobody can start to turn their life around, get a job or training if they don't have a secure roof over their head. Honestly, you'd think it was rocket science!

A 20 plate car is hardly new!

Could be around 10 to 15k.

OP also said "these are clearly marked when you buy those houses" so are they "Affordable to buy" ? which near me can be around £300k, so hardly the "poor" buying them

Few councils are building new council houses, usually its Housing Associations buying these from the builder.

I struggle to understand this point of view. Is it morally virtuous to pay as high a rent as you can possibly find while driving an old, polluting, unreliable car? Because if not, why would anyone suggest that is the best route to take?

We need more social housing, not more people subsidising private landlords from their own pockets or via housing-related benefits.

Charging rent at market rates to social tenants was suggested by a previous Tory administration but councils didn't want to do it. It's unfair and not cost-effective.

Don't hold your breath. PIP is hard to claim, being eligible for the enhanced components of both daily living and mobility is uncommon. Be prepared for a wait of up to or over 18 months while you complete the form, do the assessment, get awarded zero points, do the MR, get declined again and wait for tribunal.

But you'll know this, being such a prolific claimant already.

Local council near me are buying private homes to rent out, such is the cost of housing to the council.

The policy of not allowing councils to build council houses, with the money obtained from selling council houses, has, like many Tory policies proved to be an utter failure.

I guess you're 'pro bennies" (assuming you're talking about benefits and not drug addiction) since you've got a toilet paper list of what you've apparently already claimed!

Worked ok in the UK before the housing act in 1988 deregulated the market. Not perfect but better than the wild west we have now.

What do you mean?

ETA I see you've already refused/been unable to explain. So it looks like you're saying Grenfell was deserved.

Wrong again.

I think plucky cheeks is on a wind up and is actually clueless about “ getting as much as I can” out of the system
Just because you claim PIP, doesn’t mean you’ll be entitled to it
in fact the new descriptors will be brought in precisely to exclude “ mild anxiety and depression” which they claimed they have

Uh huh.

I agree. That list... Fantastical.

Research it. Name one of the items listed that is false.

As I explained, mine isn’t mild and anyway I have 2 new physical diagnoses which are on the new approved list. Just need to get my act together and claim. I see it as a tax rebate for all the big taxes I used to pay 👍

I don't need to Google to know you're talking out of your hat.

Enjoy your day.

Keep enjoying that ignorant bliss 👍

Your cognitive functioning here suggest that your anxiety and depression is mild
i have bipolar and at both extremes of mood I am either catatonic or psychotic and certainly would be unable to interact on Mumsnet coherently.

Sure, Jan.

You’re either ignorant or wilfully obtuse
Either Is not a good look, nor are you as clever as you think. FYI, my name isn’t Jan( sic)

If you knew about PIP then you’d know that it doesn’t go on a “diagnosis”. It goes on how you’re able to do your everyday tasks and certain things- and what type of help and support you need to be able to do them.

They really do walk among us....

Exactly. I have tried to explain this to the poster.
Being able to interact on here is proof that her functioning is not impaired enough to qualify.. but you can’t reason with stupid.

That's a PIP myth.

It can be hard to claim but the statistics suggest it isn;t.

The average success rate at first claim for all conditions is 51%, obviously higher rates for certain conditions, at mandatory reconsideration, a 27% increase in awards and 68% of people who continue to tribunal claims being successful.

successful claims have grown year on year, with the majority of awards now being for psychiatric/ND conditions where functional disability should be harder to prove.

So I don't think it's as hard to claim as many people suggest.