Housing stigma

[Antiquedoll]

Has anyone else noticed an increase in bad attitude towards social housing from property owners? I hought the UK was progressive and believed innequality but it seems to me the division is growing?

I don’t think it’s jealousy
I think there’s a view that people in council houses are milking the system and getting the taxpayer to subsidise them.

I think this is in part due to stories about people refusing houses because their dc haven’t share a room or demanding a bigger house due to having an extra dc whilst private owners just have their dc share. It makes CH tenants look entitled.

I think it’s also because to get a council house you need to be approved and this will be based on need. And people often look down on people in need with the attitude that ‘good’ people manage themselves without state/taxpayer assistance.

I’m not saying I think people are correct. I’m just pointing out that it’s not jealousy at all.

The thing is though, people can demand an extra room for their child all they like but they aren't going to get it and it's been like that in housing for a long time now.

People at the top of the housing list will have medical needs and/or need an adapted property.

And even they wait forever. I work with severely disabled children, several on my caseload are currently waiting for surgery to reduce their pain, but can't have it due to being in housing which prevents their families from providing safe care post op. Children in constant pain, developing life threatening deformities due to waiting for surgery they can't have. So yes, it is really frustrating to see posts where people are refusing to move out of council properties they no longer desperately need. There is no money to build more social housing, what we have needs to be used in the fairest way, going to those in the highest need.

We waited for 1 month but my son was in hospital and they wouldn't discharge him to our previous property.

Not in my day to day life as most people I know are in social housing. But on MN, the stigma is real.
The insistence that SH is subsidised. It isn't. That people in SH have a "free house" that they can pass down to their kids. Um, only in very specific circumstances.
There are also rules with SH that wont apply with people who own their homes. Homeowners can't be evicted for acting like twats. They can't be evicted for refusing access to contractors.
I grew up in council housing and my parents are still there. They have always paid the rent from their wages, and not benefits. They have been in SH all of their adult lives so have paid way more in rent than if they had bought a place. They were offered under Right to Buy, but didn't as they didn't think it right. They now regret it.

You are saying social housing rent is comparable to private sector rent if properties are identical?

Social and private are different things altogether though. Apples and oranges.
Private landlords can literally make up what they charge as they go along, and impose silly rules like no poster on the walls, and regular inspections making sure your sofa cushions are fluffed up, or you have certain things in certain cupboards (both real examples I have seen on here).

The rent that councils/SH associations charge should be be norm. Not the inflated rents that private landlords charge.

BTW, when I lived in a private rental, I was paying less than people in the same size property that were in SH. Work that one out.

I'm so glad you got housed quickly, but yours is sadly the exception rather than the norm. Being in hospital waiting dc gives the highest possible priority, as it should.

Yep. Definitely the exception just because we literally wouldn't have been able to even get him through the front door of our old property.

Though I think what is tricky with adapted properties is that if someone has been housed, it's likely their disability or their child's disability isn't temporary so they will stay in the adapted property for a long time.

My son will always need an adapted property now.

There has always been stigma against council tenants. When I was growing up all you heard about were rough council estates and people causing trouble. Today it seems to have shifted to a degree of envy in that people are stuck in expensive private, insecure rentals and want to have a council property.

I am currently living in a 3 bed council house, I have raised four children here as a single parent. I am from a line of council house families - my parents and grandparents were all renting, however that does mean that there has never been any inheritance to pass down the generations. My children will never have a helping hand onto the property ladder because there simply isn't any assets. It is much better to be able to buy and have at least something to hand down and give the next generation a helping hand. So, everyone who might be envious, it is still much better to buy if you want to help your children and grandchildren one day. I will have to pay rent until I die, I won't ever get the respite of having paid it off and be able to free up money for other things.

I see 3 beds for rent privately at £3.5K onwards. Are social housing tenants paying that (no benefits)?

A 3 bed place for rent for £3.5k is obscene if you ask me. I assume it is in a posh area. Where are the low paid people who work there meant to live?

I'm paying the same amount on my social housing property as I did for my private rental. Social housing started out £50 cheaper but actually went up by that amount a few months after I moved in.

Nowhere near £3.5K though.

Two identical properties in the same location. One is ex social housing and one has only ever been privately owned. The ex council house will always be less desirable than the privately owned one. Same with areas with lots of social housing.

15 years ago, me and the ex were house hunting in the area we are in now. We viewed a property that was on the market for £120k. Prices here have gone up about £90/100k since then. I have seen the exact same house now up for rent and they want over £2k pm. It is ridiculous and not even the same as the other rentals in the same road. Totally taking the piss.

We need much much more social housing. In an ideal world people could choose to live in SH if they wanted, and it would be available. Alternatively they could buy their own home if they wanted, and have an asset. The OP's argument is stupid, we need equality not increasing poverty across the board

Had a discussion today with my retired policeman neighbour. We live in a traditionally very low crime good area, but there has been an increase in crime over the past few years after a large new estate was built which included about 20% social housing.

A burnt out car was left in a layby, he said it was likely stolen. He then said that the sociological experiment of mixing social housing with privately owned housing with the idea that it would improve antisocial behaviour and crime levels has been a disaster, all it leads to is an increase in crime.

It made me wonder why do new build estates now always have to include an element of social housing. In previous times council houses were built all together and were separate from privately owned estates, why has that changed? There could still be legislation to ensure that local development plans include an amount of social housing but it could be restricted to certain areas.

For example, I live in an affluent village on the outskirts of a city where because of the attractive environment and good schools our housing is much more expensive to buy than some other parts of the city. The social housing part of the new estate is bringing a different type of person into the area and crime is increasing. What would the problem have been with building the new housing yet make it all privately owned here and build the social housing elsewhere in the city. That's what used to happen.

and by certain areas, you just mean anywhere as long as it isn't your area?

There are some awful homeowners where I live, and lovely people in social housing.

I think you are buying into stereotype of people in social housing being dodgy etc. I have known nurses etc live in SH.

Most just want to live their lives in secure housing, and not having to worry about a roof over their heads.

I have a friend who was entitled to SH and got a flat in a new build place. She has been bullied by the home owners around her because she has MH issues and sometimes has an ambulance/police there.
I have experienced the same but I am not in SH.

Yes, quite frankly.

There was no social housing in my area previously, it's one of the most expensive areas for housing in the county and I and many other people in my village feel that the increase in social housing and crime will diminish the value of our property as well as increase the number of undesirable people in the area. ( Of course not all people in social housing are criminals or behave in an antisocial way, but the proportion who do is much higher in social housing).

There are other areas of the city and county where there is new development which are nearer the already existing areas with high numbers of social housing, I think the social housing should have been concentrated in those areas.

I think jealousy. When those on the property ladder realise how much they’d have to pay to own or rent an ex council home, the thought of someone having a secure home for life at a social rent (even if they become super rich) and paying council tax to subsidize this person getting cheap rent, feels so unfair

Of course you do because that isn't where you live.

Some people in those areas will feel that there is enough social housing and some should now be in your area to spread it out.

As you said, not all people in social housing are problematic and they have to live somewhere. Many are just regular people.

The only reason I live in social housing is because an adapted property was needed.

My parents are in a council house and pay full council tax. So what are you on about?

But my original question was to ask why should social housing be spread out, why shouldn't it be concentrated in certain areas like it used to be?
If you're in a position of needing social housing, for whatever reason, then you should be happy to be housed in any part of the local area, and not expect to be able to live in the best areas where other people have paid a premium to live there.

Why should it be in one specific area? Are you saying that homeowners should not have to mix with SH tenants? Why is that? What sort of bias are you displaying here? Who hurt you?