To think council housing is really unfair??

[Helpmechooseausername]

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!

Sorry explain the connection? Why should they as it is their property not a socially owned asset

Someone’s financial position improving, doesn’t mean they are in a position to buy a home or afford private rental prices…..

but what rankles even more, is that when you get old and infirm you'll be expected to sell the house for your care fees.........meanwhile folks who've lived in a council house and used their money to enjoy themselves, and never saved will get free care.....

Then the means testing would show that and they can stay where they are surely?

Someone I know has a 4 bed HA house and it’s only he and his wife there now as the kids moved out years ago. How is that fair when the list is so long?

You cannot compare social rent to mortgage, only to private rent. When you have a mortgage you are only paying on a proportion of the house that the bank owns, not on the proportion you own, and you have already spent a lot on the deposit, stamp duty, legal fees etc which a council tenant hasn't.

It's only relevant to compare it to a similar private rental.

So selling those properties didn’t help a poor family get a bigger home.

It’s very easy to suggest a poor couple/single person downsizes if downsizing for yourself means having a pretty penny to choose a nice place to move to.

YABU

I grew up in council housing (80s baby). Back then, council housing was more plentiful and a lot easier to get. When DM was pregnant with my DB, I remember going to view several houses with my parents. We were housed in a 3 bed before my DB was even born.
Me and my siblings have long since moved out, but my parents are still in that 3 bed house. They have looked into downsizing, but there is nothing out there that would suit them. They have a dog and DM is a keen gardener. They don't want to live in a tiny 1 bed high rise flat. Plus 1 bed places are in huge demand already from single people without adding couples downsizing into the mix.

People who stay in council housing when they can afford private rent, or who are over occupying... are not actually doing anything wrong.

So they deserve to be kicked into private renting and live a miserable existence, pay check to pay check?

Not everyone in council homes are flashing the cash and living the high live. Some are disabled/caring for someone who is.

This. ^ I'm choking on my coffee laughing at @InsomniacSloth's posts on this thread 😂 (and they have a lot of competition as some posts have been batshit.) It's been a while since I've read such ludicrous, farcical, and nonsensical posts.

OP pointed out both parents work and are now doing well but still occupying a cheap council house.

Let better off parents rent in the PRS and give cheaper council housing to those less well off. Seems reasonable to me. Council housing shouldn't be permanent regardless of changing circumstances.

Why does it need to help a ‘poor person’ get a home.

it simply frees up housing stock for those that need it.

No, just to downsize within the HA stock if they are eligible

Social housing is a benefit and should treated as such. Someone has to work to fund the housing that is given.

but what rankles even more, is that when you get old and infirm you'll be expected to sell the house for your care fees

Doesn’t rankle with me. If I’m in a care home I won’t need a house. And paying for my own care means I can choose where I go and not have to accept whatever shithole the council deems suitable for me.

My dad is retired now, but both he and my mum worked are in a council house. The don't claim any benefits at all.

The housing is funded by the people who pay the rents.

That will be the occupants than

It's still a benefit as you have security that someone in private housing doesn't have. It's government backed....it's a benefit just accept it.

Well it is.

It’s not a benefit and no I won’t just accept an untruth because you say so.

Absolutely agree OP. I know people who went from private rent to council as had partners child staying,needing another bedroom.That child then moved out .They are still there.Good jobs.Have now got a caravan to visit& go on several holidays .They are abusing system,they could afford private rent letting someone else live there.

All you snobs so concerned that “Rich” council tenants are taking up all the homes…I hope you’re not taking up poor people’s doctors appointments and places on NHS waiting lists

Some people in private housing have good landlords who have no desire to evict them.
And people who own their own home also have that security.

People in council/social housing are bound to lots of rules that people in private/owned housing are not.