Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

To think council housing is really unfair??

998 replies

Helpmechooseausername · 05/06/2025 18:12

I totally get that some people need to be housed by the council, but AIBU to think that the system is abused - but it seems to be his the system works?

I know of two families who have lived in their council houses for years and raised their children there. They needed help when they first moved in, and so were quite fairly given council houses. But, now the kids have grown up and moved on. The parents both have got jobs, nice cars, holidays, go out for meals, etc., etc.. They can continue living in their council houses for the rest of their lives.

It seems massively unfair. Is it really not means tested?? Surely the houses should be given to other people who need them? How can it be right that they aren't told to move back into the private property market?

I feel a bit like when I stand in a queue in a shop, waiting to pay, while people come in and just take what they want without paying or queuing!!

And yes, I'll admit that I'm jealous! I can't afford to do any nice things for my kids and I, despite working hard, and it seems to be because I chose to own my own home and get a mortgage instead of getting a council house!

OP posts:
Thread gallery
6
CantStopMoving · 06/06/2025 18:51

BIossomtoes · 06/06/2025 18:47

This whole argument is based on the faulty premise that social housing tenants have money left over to save. There are some people who will never be able to “better their prospects” because they’re working at the top of their capability in a minimum wage job. And they’re the ones who are fishing down the back of the sofa for coins for the meter at the end of the week.

In which case surely they will be reassessed periodically they would still be deemed to need a council property. What they might not need is a 4 bedroom home now they have not got children living there and a 1 bed would be more suitable thus freeing up the house for those who need it. The rent on the 1 bed would be cheaper as well.

InsomniacSloth · 06/06/2025 18:51

Frostiesflakes · 06/06/2025 18:17

No ,but it gets mentioned a lot on here 😂

But I reckon it could be a style piece in vogue 😂

A regular feature! And you can’t help but notice the hundreds of influencers showing off their Council House chic and this desireable lifestyle of which we’re all allegedly jealous. 🤣🤦🏻‍♀️

butteredradish4 · 06/06/2025 18:53

Winter2020 · 06/06/2025 18:49

We redistribute wealth through income tax as you have explained.

Why then should higher earners have to pay more for housing? - they have already paid the amount required of them through their income tax.

Why stop at housing? -
should higher income people pay more for food? (they won't get the free school dinners will they),
childcare? (they already do as they lose entitlement to free hours),
the NHS? (they already do as they pay for their prescriptions and dentistry)
If you find a few more areas to make higher earners pay more you can make absolutely sure it's worth no one's while to strive and we can all be on universal credit until the country goes bust.

We aren't asking higher earners to pay more for housing just not use the state supported ones for people on low income. If a wealthy person went to a food bank because they could get food for free that would be frowned on.

InsomniacSloth · 06/06/2025 18:53

CantStopMoving · 06/06/2025 18:51

In which case surely they will be reassessed periodically they would still be deemed to need a council property. What they might not need is a 4 bedroom home now they have not got children living there and a 1 bed would be more suitable thus freeing up the house for those who need it. The rent on the 1 bed would be cheaper as well.

Edited

Precisely. This “it’s my home and I can stay here forever paying subsidised rent even if I don’t need it” is a huge part of the problem, when we’re talking about a public asset in very short supply.

Hoardasauruskaren · 06/06/2025 18:55

100 years ago when councils started building homes for the masses the objective was to provide secure accommodation away from the slums that many working class people lived in. For anyone who wanted it. All you had to do was apply for the correct type of property for your circumstances & wait your turn to be allocated a home. As long as your rent was paid & you weren’t antisocial you could stay as long as you wanted. If your family grew you applied for a bigger home which you would get in due course( though that might be several years). Council housing provided families stability to thrive.

Unfortunately Thatcher & her govt hated the socialist idea that housing wasn't for profit but to build stable lives & community & destroyed the social housing system that had began in the 1920s & expanded through to the 1980s . By selling off the housing stock & preventing reinvestment of the funds in new housing they created the problems we have now. A housing shortage , house prices & rents that are far higher than what most people can realistically afford & finger pointing & jealousy towards those who do have secure tenancies!

NeverDropYourMooncup · 06/06/2025 18:56

Profpudding · 06/06/2025 09:58

But thousands and thousands of people did exactly that and paid the mortgages which were entirely affordable. As they are now, it’s just that the banks won’t lend. How many times have we heard that people are being turned down for £1000 a month mortgage when they’re paying £1500 a month out in rent?
Some people were idiots and overstretched themselves but, Even then they probably were still up on the deal for a good few years.

And the people for whom a mortgage enough to buy a property would have meant it being entirely unaffordable from the outset?

justasking111 · 06/06/2025 18:57

There's going to be more buy to let properties but our landlords will be the likes of Blackstone an American consortium awash with funds. Who will make a bundle off us.

This thorny issue for the government will be solved. The attempts on the NHS are more problematic for the Americans. But housing a gift, no unions, no employees,
.
Just slap them up, sit back and collect rent

InsomniacSloth · 06/06/2025 19:00

NeverDropYourMooncup · 06/06/2025 18:56

And the people for whom a mortgage enough to buy a property would have meant it being entirely unaffordable from the outset?

Such people would continue to meet the criteria to stay in a Council property an appropriate size for their current needs under a system with periodic reviews where the means-testing was repeated.

Teasloth · 06/06/2025 19:00

Dramatic · 05/06/2025 18:38

Once you're in a council house you could become a millionaire and not be kicked out of it.

You think most people that become millionaires would choose to stay in a council house?

If I came into any money at all I'd move away like a shot and leave my home for someone else who needed it.

It's a small 2 bed terrace and I pay about 1/3 less than private in the same road

Not a massive saving considering I can't move or choose the area I'm in etc

I don't get to move if I have bad neighbours like I could private renting or buying

I'm here through necessity and yes, because I was lucky that after 12 years on the list I was finally given somewhere affordable to live

I'm not going to feel bad for that. Anyone else could have done the same as I did and taken the same action I did to wait on a list.

The truth is most people won't do the slog of waiting years and doing all the paperwork week after week after week for years and years, and living in a one bed place with a child for so long while my bed was in the lounge/kitchen for three years

llizzie · 06/06/2025 19:01

ColinOfficeTrolley · 06/06/2025 07:15

Can we stop saying 'council house'. Very rarely do councils own any housing stock. They are owned by housing associations that are businesses there to make a profit.

They are held to account to make sure houses are maintained to a good standard - unlike the unregulated private rental sector, where landlords can run roughshod over their tenants.

Housing associations offer a secure tenancy with a good standard of accommodation. Who the fuck would want to give that up?

People who are under accommodating a property, will be paying the 'bedroom tax'.

Anyone who thinks people should be turfed out after being good tenants, paying their rent on time and having money left over to actually enjoy their lives, need to give their head a wobble. It's pathetic.

It is true that most social housing is housing association controlled, but councils have an interest too. HA are not just a business:

Housing associations are not-for-profit organizations that provide affordable housing and support services. They are considered both a charity and a business depending on the context. While they are not charitable in the traditional sense, many housing associations operate as registered charities or have charitable objectives. They are also businesses because they operate as landlords, providing housing services and generating revenue through rent and service charges.

Dullardduck · 06/06/2025 19:01

You are directing your anger at the wrong group. It’s not their fault that the government sold off the council housing. Why not blame the ex council house tenants now living in their RTB homes?

The people currently living in council homes will give away their homes for free when they die. So I don’t think that counts as stealing houses away from people who need it.

Also, the NHS is there for everyone to use regardless of income. Do you think people should start paying for private healthcare when they reach too a high salary as well?

CommonAsMucklowe · 06/06/2025 19:02

Completely agree with you OP, have even heard of lottery winners staying in their council houses too! Fully agree that tenants should be means tested (regularly) and family sized homes should be for families. My ex MIL remained in her four bed council house until she died, they asked her to move to a smaller place and she refused and they couldn't budge her because she was over a certain age. It was not her house and she shouldn't have had a choice. I'd like to think with the housing crisis as it is now, new council tenants would have a different contract to those tenants of old, probably not.

Figsaregood · 06/06/2025 19:02

Dramatic · 05/06/2025 18:38

Once you're in a council house you could become a millionaire and not be kicked out of it.

Quite. The former head of the RMT union, Mick Lynch was earning over £100,000 but still lived in his council house.

Dullardduck · 06/06/2025 19:04

Figsaregood · 06/06/2025 19:02

Quite. The former head of the RMT union, Mick Lynch was earning over £100,000 but still lived in his council house.

How is that a bad thing necessarily? Might take away the stigma.

Council housing was introduced to be like the NHS. Anyone could use it, regardless of income.

InsomniacSloth · 06/06/2025 19:05

Winter2020 · 06/06/2025 18:17

My "self interest" in believing we should leave lifetime tenancies alone and not means test council housing is that Britain needs ambitious/high earning people to pay taxes to support our public services and our vulnerable. Squashing ambition and encouraging people to be under employed in order to stay in their council house is not going to pay the countries bills.

I don't live in a council house and I'm not a high earner. I could do with a second job to bring in a bit more money for our family but by the time I will lose 40%+ to tax, national insurance and student loan (from what will be about minimum wage) I can't really be bothered so we'll probably just tighten our belts. You don't motivate people to strive by penalising them and taking from them.

As an aside I'm interested if it is the same people arguing that private landlords should not be able to evict people and should have the rent they charge capped that are in the next breath saying that social housing providers should evict people and/or raise their rents.

So “ambitious/ high-earning people” should pay even more tax than they do already (the UK has one of the most top-heavy and redistributive tax systems in the world as it is with out highest 10% earners paying more than those in pretty much any other country) because you “can’t be bothered” to work more when you state that you could do so, because then you might have to pay more tax?

People with your mentality are precisely the problem and the reason that UK living standards are falling off a cliff.

vodkaredbullgirl · 06/06/2025 19:05

I know if I won millions I would look to buying a house outright.

CantStopMoving · 06/06/2025 19:06

Hoardasauruskaren · 06/06/2025 18:55

100 years ago when councils started building homes for the masses the objective was to provide secure accommodation away from the slums that many working class people lived in. For anyone who wanted it. All you had to do was apply for the correct type of property for your circumstances & wait your turn to be allocated a home. As long as your rent was paid & you weren’t antisocial you could stay as long as you wanted. If your family grew you applied for a bigger home which you would get in due course( though that might be several years). Council housing provided families stability to thrive.

Unfortunately Thatcher & her govt hated the socialist idea that housing wasn't for profit but to build stable lives & community & destroyed the social housing system that had began in the 1920s & expanded through to the 1980s . By selling off the housing stock & preventing reinvestment of the funds in new housing they created the problems we have now. A housing shortage , house prices & rents that are far higher than what most people can realistically afford & finger pointing & jealousy towards those who do have secure tenancies!

Which is fascinating but how does that help the situation now? The past has gone. The houses have been sold. There is a finite supply now and there will never be enough- demand will always outstrip supply unless the population declines. What is the solution to the issue now?

InsomniacSloth · 06/06/2025 19:07

vodkaredbullgirl · 06/06/2025 19:05

I know if I won millions I would look to buying a house outright.

Presumably you’d be salivating over purchasing one of these Council houses that apparently everyone is oh so jealous about. 🤣

justasking111 · 06/06/2025 19:07

InsomniacSloth · 06/06/2025 18:51

A regular feature! And you can’t help but notice the hundreds of influencers showing off their Council House chic and this desireable lifestyle of which we’re all allegedly jealous. 🤣🤦🏻‍♀️

Edited

Funny you should mention influencers. I've followed a young lass, single mother do up her council house and garden. This year she's had two holidays abroad and one in the UK. She makes her money from tik tok and Instagram which is a precarious income and so much payment in kind. Gawd knows how HMRC would unravel that.

Vynalbob · 06/06/2025 19:08

It can be solved politically. We were in mountains of debt, a lot of male working age people had been killed in WWII yet it was done. To say it cannot be done is false. Politicians now need a consultation about what tie to wear at donators dinner.

But locally if the councils said for every 5 new builds a social house was provided it would be a slow start but heading in the right direction.

Comments on these big issues tend to be more about what is the least worse outcome rather than real solutions.....it's almost like political Stockholm syndrome they've spouted so much 💩 it seems easier to believe.

llizzie · 06/06/2025 19:08

Hoardasauruskaren · 06/06/2025 18:55

100 years ago when councils started building homes for the masses the objective was to provide secure accommodation away from the slums that many working class people lived in. For anyone who wanted it. All you had to do was apply for the correct type of property for your circumstances & wait your turn to be allocated a home. As long as your rent was paid & you weren’t antisocial you could stay as long as you wanted. If your family grew you applied for a bigger home which you would get in due course( though that might be several years). Council housing provided families stability to thrive.

Unfortunately Thatcher & her govt hated the socialist idea that housing wasn't for profit but to build stable lives & community & destroyed the social housing system that had began in the 1920s & expanded through to the 1980s . By selling off the housing stock & preventing reinvestment of the funds in new housing they created the problems we have now. A housing shortage , house prices & rents that are far higher than what most people can realistically afford & finger pointing & jealousy towards those who do have secure tenancies!

It goes back even further:

Provision of social housing started in the late 19th century when the 1890 Housing of the Working Classes Act allowed London's local councils to build houses as well as clear away slums. In 1896 London County Council developed the first council housing in Bethnal Green.

I dug that out just now and it surprised me, because I thought the 19th century slum clearance was by charitable institutions like Rowntree.

Having researched my family tree back as far as anyone can, a lot of my ancestors were far from well off, even with jobs. The most social housing was the workhouse. I bet there isn't a Londoner today who hasn't had family in them at some time or other.

I hope we have moved a long way since then.

category12 · 06/06/2025 19:08

CommonAsMucklowe · 06/06/2025 19:02

Completely agree with you OP, have even heard of lottery winners staying in their council houses too! Fully agree that tenants should be means tested (regularly) and family sized homes should be for families. My ex MIL remained in her four bed council house until she died, they asked her to move to a smaller place and she refused and they couldn't budge her because she was over a certain age. It was not her house and she shouldn't have had a choice. I'd like to think with the housing crisis as it is now, new council tenants would have a different contract to those tenants of old, probably not.

Bit soulless to boot someone out of the home they brought up their family in, out of their community, away from their support network and life they've built - to force them into where exactly?

Your poor MIL, did she realise how coldly you regarded her?

CantStopMoving · 06/06/2025 19:08

Dullardduck · 06/06/2025 19:04

How is that a bad thing necessarily? Might take away the stigma.

Council housing was introduced to be like the NHS. Anyone could use it, regardless of income.

But we aren’t living in the times when council houses were conceived. We are living in 2025 and the country is completely different.

vodkaredbullgirl · 06/06/2025 19:09

InsomniacSloth · 06/06/2025 19:07

Presumably you’d be salivating over purchasing one of these Council houses that apparently everyone is oh so jealous about. 🤣

I would buy a house in the country away from everyone 😂

Dullardduck · 06/06/2025 19:09

CommonAsMucklowe · 06/06/2025 19:02

Completely agree with you OP, have even heard of lottery winners staying in their council houses too! Fully agree that tenants should be means tested (regularly) and family sized homes should be for families. My ex MIL remained in her four bed council house until she died, they asked her to move to a smaller place and she refused and they couldn't budge her because she was over a certain age. It was not her house and she shouldn't have had a choice. I'd like to think with the housing crisis as it is now, new council tenants would have a different contract to those tenants of old, probably not.

Do you live in a council house? Curious to know if you are planning to so easily give up your house when it’s “too big” for you?

Or do you own your property and not actually have to worry about this?!