To think that there is a misunderstanding about social housing.

[Bitchesbelike]

On social media, lots of people assume that people in social / council housing are getting a free house and don’t work.

i grew up in social housing: my dad worked from age 15 to 65.

my brothers have worked since they were 16 and both live in social housing.

its not “free housing”: it’s rented, affordable accommodation.

*you’re

Yes I am. I have a strong sense of justice.

The issue of social housing extends beyond the idea of ‘levelling up.’ It was originally intended to support those who work but earn low wages or those in need due to various circumstances. However, many families who now earn higher incomes continue to benefit from social housing, preventing much-needed redistribution to those facing real housing struggles. This approach is unsustainable. When combined with the Right to Buy scheme, which depletes available stock without adequate replacement, the result is a system where those who truly need housing are unable to access it.

Well said. I agree completely with you.
That's what council housing and Housing Association houses should be for.
Right to Buy was a disaster. Councils never built enough houses to replace the ones sold off. That is why we have a housing crisis today.

@PluckyCheeksunless you have never ever ever relied on the state for anything which is blatantly untrue if you’re in the uk then you’re a hypocrite.

I guess because people assume it’s for people in need, and that they should move out when their situation changes. Obviously that doesn’t happen, but I don’t agree with lifetime tenancies, if your circumstances change, you should move aside for those with a greater need. People assume that happens, so are surprised to know you could be a millionaire and getting subsidised rent. Doesn’t seem right when there’s kids living in hotels.

Law? No

if you claim housing benefit and you are under occupying then I think you lost £10 per extra room or something

i think many would just lose out on the benefit money and pay it to keep their homes. Nobody forcing them out

Nobody is in ‘greater need’ than your average person in SH wanting to keep security of not being moved on by a landlord selling up…..I need that security thanks, so will stay

as Someone who works in this area I can say this is incorrect. It’s a very damaging narrative, people in social housing are absolutely paying for their house and its upkeep and repairs.

Who do you think is subsidising the rent

Not even that cheap?

Would you prefer in London for example, to pay £900 something for a 2 bed flat, as opposed to £1500-2k!!
Because I know what I would prefer.
And I know what people are paying for their council flats here.
There is also security, which we do not have in private accommodation.

All about supply and demand. They have also built a lot of social housing alongside new estates in a town close to me. There are hardly any private rentals as you can get a council flat fairly easily.

A work colleague moved from a council/ha flat at £375 a month to a new council/ha 3 bed semi detached at £450 a month. No major vulnerabilities etc but wanted a garden for little one.

There's a lot of rental houses near me. There's one that is £1300 a month, the exact same house, literally next door, is £495 for social housing.

Round here a large proportion are druggies, mental health issues, and can’t work etc

The problem with social housing is that there is not enough of it. Right to buy was a terrible policy.
My grandparents got a council house in the early 60s, as part of the post war house building. They were a working class couple with kids who both worked (my grandmother part time). It massively helped them. At the time they were the sort of people who council housing was aimed at. Now, at least in the south east it’s so scarce that hardly anyone manages to get social housing and many eligible people sit in B&Bs and temporarily accommodation for years before they access anywhere permanent, if they ever do at all.

I live in a council house. I know lots of people who do. Most work but some like us don’t and we do get the full rent paid. We are carers for disabled dc though, we worked prior to the dc and will work again at some point in the future.

I think the reason that’s the perception is that a) for most renters their rent is a massive proportion of their income and expensive and b) it’s widely known that social housing properties are in short supply and very competitive and families are living in hotels etc as there aren’t enough homes.
An outsider looking in would therefore assume that social housing is generally for those who need subsidised housing and that support rather than someone arguably lucky enough to have a reduced and secure rental just because.
Personally I think it needs a complete rehaul as it’s not fit for purpose. A single person in a 3 bed house who’s now doing really well no longer needs it compared to some of the people waiting for social housing. It’s not a fair system.

Not around here it's not. Around here social hosing rents are set at the local housing allowance rate which is the maximum amount you can get in housing benefit towards rent in private housing. You then have a 2/3 year tenancy, have to supply you own carpets, kitchen appliances, curtains, etc. Private renting is much better value and often cheaper.

I privately rent and my rent is 40% lower than friends who live in social housing.

Social housing is de facto subsidised when you take into account the cost of capital. Ask any landlord or homeowner with a mortgage and they will tell you that the cost of capital is one of the biggest costs of ownership. In private rentals this is passed onto the tenant, in social housing it isn't in the same way.

I also agree, or have their rent increased to closer to the market rate. I know many people in social housing earning more than we do but still paying subsidised rent.

Why are you all over MN being gratuitously unpleasant to people?

I'm confused who is actually " subsidizing" the rent though? Town next to us has plenty of social housing that was built in the 20/30 years post war. The houses have obviously long been paid for, the council are very slack on doing any repairs so what is the £120/150 a week rent actually paying for? And how is that subsidized as it seems the tension renting are paying far more than the cost to the council so must be almost into " profit" area there

I've been in social housing for 6 years after I found myself unexpectedly a single parent. It's a tiny 2 bed mid-terrace but my rent is £1001 a month!! And we're no-where near London but it's a new build which are always more expensive.

I will soon to be leaving this house...which some may say is mad....to move in with my partner (also a single dad of now grown-up children). With our combined wages we can afford to buy a home. I have had people say to me, you're mad for giving up a lifetime tenancy, but I personally think if people find themselves in a position where they financially don't need to be in social housing anymore, then it should be freed up for someone who does need it.

For me being in social housing and getting UC to top up my wages was always a temporary situation. I am very grateful for the system being there when I needed it. Obviously other people use the system in a very different way but that's between them and the council/ government. We're all in different circumstances so I don't judge.

That's a massive difference in rent.

Rattling around in social housing too big for current needs is a problem. Families need affordable homes and yet some people rattle around in a home too big with a subsidised rent (social housing rents are below market rents). It does need reviewing since there is a housing crisis.

Yes alot of people do work and live in council or social housing but this is actually subsidised housing and not affordable housing.

I guess if rents were nearer market rents it might encourage people to move to rental property more in line with their current needs? Movement from smaller to bigger and bigger to smaller homes might flow more then. Needs led.