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 live in a one bedroom flat with DH We dont have kids so are already in a property appropriate for our needs On paper.

A single friend of mine lives in exactly the same size place.Having works done Trouble is with titchy places like this there is nowhere to put anything when having works done Tenants arent allowed to hoard and pile stuff up in the living room but HAs can when they want to do upgrades.

It's the bragging I said stings. "I'm in a 2 bed house that many families would give everything for, I've raised my family in it who have now moved out and I'm going to boast that I'm now in a house that is bigger than I need and I'm keeping it" It's the showing off attitude, rubbing it in people's faces.

In the house we live in now it’s on a housing estate,with homeowners and social housing. One of our neighbours who owns his home quite often thinks it’s acceptable to use our other neighbours garden to have his massive delivery of bricks or soil or whatever delivered and put on her garden because she’s in social housing. She’s now put a border around her garden to stop it happening. Previously we lived on a housing estate where all houses were owned, so not sure if this is a new thing or something that’s always happened but I was very shocked when my neighbour was telling me that this other neighbour did this to her.

Just like you have to show you are trying to get out of benefits by looking for work you should have to try to get out of social housing. It should only be for emergencies.

So @Perimenoanti You are yet another one who wants to turn housing estates into hostels Well unfortunately many HAs seem to agree with you. Its why i have an abusive alcoholic living underneath me proceeded by a druggie/dealer.

MN.......................social housing should only be for the most desperate
Also MN ................eeek Im not buying a house near that estate Its a right ghetto.

Cognitive dissonance and a refusal to join the dots

I live in a HA house, have been a tenant for a very long time, I'm fully aware that we are very lucky and I would never, ever give up the tenancy unless we win the lottery or something.

We both work full time and don't get any benefits whatsoever. Elder DD moved out a couple of years ago so we do now have a spare room, and have been looking to downsize for some time, however we do want to go to a particular area where absolutely nothing has been available or the person swapping isn't interested in our house/area. It's not as easy as saying we should "just move".

That's one person. The trouble is on these threads a lot of people spread misinformation on how it all actually works. I'm baffled that you and others can assume someone can automatically afford the cost of private rent just because they may live in SH. It's giving sour grapes!

Many HAs dont actually have a choice of who they let to.

I work for a national HA, and we have councils with 100% nominations rights on the letting plan meaning 100% of our vacancies go to the Local authority and we are not permitted to refuse unless we have a really good reason and we are not permitted to stipulate "no one with a history or drugs, alcohol, criminality". It's infuriating.

We just built a brand new scheme, 144 flats and the council used it to empty out their homeless drug and alcohol hostel. We now have a scheme full of vulnerable drug and alcohol dependant young men (some women) and are now dealing with the fall out from that.

I dont think we have anywhere that is less than 75% nomination rights. So we struggle to transfer people within our own stock.

Anyway, the govt did try this scheme of reviewsfor tenancies. Briefly there was the old 5/6 year tenancies which were meant to be the means to have people who no longer needed a social house to move on. Needless to say, it didn't last long as it didn't work and was impossible to manage. Those tenancies have all jusy converted to assured tenancies now.

Smdh. This is a ridiculous generalisation, as none of the properties in my little corner offers RTB.

UK is one of the most unequal countries when it comes to income in the developed world and it’s still far more classist than comparable countries. They are not very progressive at all so I am not surprised that there is still sneering.

That must make your job incredibly frustrating and stressful. And its ridiculous
But as you can see by the posts on here its what many of the public want so the pressure is coming from some of the electorate. A fellow tenant with the same HA as me but in a different area has drug dealers living above him and its constant thud thud thud. Hes a NHS healthcare assistant in the cardiac department Its affecting his health and his sleep

Out here in the real world I find no one either cares or knows who lives in "social housing".
You don't know unless the person who lives in a specific property tells you.
Most properties on "council estates" or blocks are privately owned now (thanks to right to buy).
In my area there a load of Victorian houses that were purchased by the borough and converted to council flats (presumably after the second world war). I didn't know that until a friend who lives in one told me.
Conclusion....
No one really knows.
No one really cares.
There is no stigma.

There's always been a stigma, but they used to build council estates, this move to integrating it with all new builds puts it on peoples doorsteps. It's why less people will consider new build estates.

Why a stigma? When did it become a "stigma"?
The big pre-war and post-war estates that almost all towns have were considered excellent and people were proud to get a property on one.

Not a new thing.

Council estates used to be the desired place to live! Go back to their main stream inception and it was filled with community minded people. You needed to be a "professional" to qualify, so lots of teachers, police, fire officers etc. It's only been during later generations that it started to become housing for those who are considered higher in need because they have low/no income, vulnerabilities such as addictions, medical needs, homeless, etc.

Remember, we also have some very old housing institutions in this country. Some have been providing a form of social housing for over 100 years, but the landscape of the country has changed so much in that time, that the reason for needing social housing changed.

It would be better if new housing estates were not ridiculously priced so more people could buy. If we weren't selling to overseas landlords who buy up dozens of properties (sometimes on one estate) and then renting for crazy money. If we were also building new estates with a higher percentage of social housing within it. Not to mention more shared ownership options.

I wonder if other countries have the same housing challenges we do?

Of course there is. It's why whenever you have anyone successful who grew up on a council estate it's always mentioned. Look at Angela Rayner. It's faux naivety to pretend otherwise.

Whether it's right or wrong is another matter, but let's not pretend to be surprised by the suggestion

@JenniferBooth you know full well that a tenancy of 3 or 5 years has nothing to do with hostels. Also, any HA building a new estate has to include a share of social housing units and private sale units, so they are mixed. Pure social housing estates are dieing.

Maybe not annual, but every 3 to 5 years. And they wouldn't be moving if their situation/need hadn't changed.

It's not what I assumed at all. You can't ignore the fact that it provides some peace of mind many in the private sector don't have. No sudden 20pc rent increases, no contract renewals, no paying £150 quid for a signature on a new contract and knowing that it's almost impossible to make you leave.

Just admit to yourself and others that you are incredibly lucky on this and stop pretending as though you are facing the same housing struggles as someone in the private sector without a view to ever get social housing.

Yes I agree. That won't be as common today that was more of a thing 20/30 years ago!.

You don't know me to be telling me how lucky I am. You don't know my circumstances. The reality is I won't be moving out of my street 3 doors down to pay £1,500 per month in rent because it's madness and I wouldn't pass the checks to get the house in the 1st place and lastly it's madness. Who would plunge themselves into that situation just to please you? I'm sorry but it isn't my fault!

When did that start though?
I was a child in the 80s/90s.
My town had 4 large council estates - one pre-war, one 1950s which eventually joined onto the one from the 60s and one which was late 70s/early 80s.
No one cared if someone lived there.
Most people's grandparents lived on the estates - many moved there in the 50s as part of "overspill" schemes from London/Birmingham.
They were modern (for the time) estates with purpose built amenities (schools, shops, pubs, community halls, play parks).
So when exactly did the stigma concept begin?

Not your fault but still your responsibility. Your life is your responsibility and that includes things that aren't your fault. Of course you are lucky to be in social housing. Come on. I don't need to know your circumstances for that. As if it, whatever it is, doesn't happen to anyone in another housing situation.

Social housing is supposed to be a temporary net to help out people.

People bragging about dirt cheap secure tenancy for life don't help. Once we get rid of that "for life", it will already be a big step.

I live in social housing and I'm obviously grateful to have a secure home but due to the circumstances, ''lucky'' doesn't feel appropriate because I certainly don't feel lucky.

The stigma has always been there, as well as the misunderstandings and inaccuracies.