To think social housing should be means-tested annually like benefits?

[EqualLedgerJay]

Situations change, why should lifetime tenancies exist if income rises? AIBU to think fairness cuts both ways?

This thread has really opened my eyes to just how envious people are to anyone who has something they don’t have. The why should they and if I can’t have it nor can you mentally.
Just be grateful if you’re in a position where you have bought your own home, after all maybe they didn’t qualify for a mortgage because they didn’t earn enough or if they do now are too old, do you think you shouldn’t be able to get a mortgage then because if they can’t why should you? Or why should someone inherit when someone else might not get to.
The jealousy in society is unreal.

Some people have been to pass it down.

They are when you're given it. I think of it like an ambulance. We all agree that if you are in need you should get an ambulance to take you to hospital. Sensible people then think when they no longer need the ambulance it should be used to help other people, whereas some users of social housing think they should get to keep use of the ambulance forever (it's ok they will pay to cover the cost of the fuel and MOTs).

Err it is!

Try getting a Council house if you re earning well.

Taking away someone's home should they go above certain earnings is batshit, what happens when they lose their job or earnings for whatever reason... say pregnancy.

On your previous post, of course housing is an economic asset to a council or a company.

What's your suggestion for getting the most vulnerable in to social housing?

Social housing should not be seen as charity. It should be for everyone who wants it. A sane and just alternative to private letting. We should build absolute shit-tons of it.

Not not envy at all. It is sadness that some of our fellow citizens are proud to consume charitable consume resources that are needed by those with greater need.

You'd be surprised at how wheelchair inaccessible some schools are, especially old mainstream schools.

I was able to get SH in the same area which meant my son was able to stay at his wheelchair accessible mainstream school. The only reason I need SH is due to my sons needs, before that I was working and in a private rental but that isn't possible now.

Putting us somewhere random and leaving my son with yes, a suitable house to live in with absolutely no thought as to other factors that may need to be considered such as a school which accommodates his wheelchair simply to punish me because I'm unable to work due to having a disabled child makes no sense at all.

There needs to be more social housing where the criteria has to be that the applicant works, but earns under a certain threshold. I've had to go on the housing list and the rule of thumb for maximum chance seems to be long term unemployed, 'mental health issues', DC under 5 and a serious dose of entitlement.

The only solution has to be to get the least vulnerable out to make space. Which would be achieved by means testing.

You still don’t understand the post do you?

whether it’s an economic asset (did you make that term up? Do you mean something worth money?) is neither here nor there. What do you want them to do with it to realise that?

I don’t know why you’re telling me that taking away someone’s home is batshit, I have been against ongoing means testing for SH all my life, and certainly in this thread. You seem jumbled.

In my area, the highest housing priority goes to those with disabilities who need an adapted house, care leavers etc and has nothing to do with unemployment or having children under 5.

Different areas will have different requirements.

I’m pretty sure that’s the case everywhere tbh.

Can you not express yourself, without sounding very jumbled?

I said earlier, that asset can be sold over time, RTB, with monies reinvested in new housing.

I’m perfectly clear, but nice try.

end of life assets are sold all the time and the proceeds used to build new housing. Why would you think this doesn’t happen?

its not a particularly volumous activity in councils, because as others have said frequently in the thread, many councils sold their housing stock decades ago.

Most of these families manage to have at least one 'disabled' child, and by that I don't mean an actual diagnosis, more they keep going to GP to say child can't sleep, is stressed, self harming, soiling themselves etc because of the housing situation. They get letters from health visitors, GPs and so on as evidence. These people (who 99% of the time grew up in SH) know how the system works and what to do and say. They also phone their housing officer daily to "torture them". I'm on local SH groups and the advice is always that those who shout the loudest get the quickest.
It's extremely difficult to get an adapted house, I'm in this situation. Even with an OT report and recommendation it can take years to get somewhere, it takes a long time to get approval or you have to wait 5+ years for a new development to be built with bungalows/ground floor accomodation that are designed for wheelchair users. In my LA they only build apartments now that are disabled friendly and vast majority are 2 bed maximum, so if you are assessed as needing 3 bed you will not be eligible.
ETA: I'm very much in favour of care leavers being top of the list, in my LA this is not the case, it's very hard for a single person to get housed, s they end up going from hostel to hostel.

In my area, the requirement is that you want a house. The waiting list is only around 2 weeks long. Points are given based on need, and those with the highest points are given first refusal. Different houses/areas have different requirements.

I was offered first refusal on our house because I'd been on the list for 10 days, I had 2 children sharing a bedroom, and DD1 had 'mental health issues'. I'm not sure why that has to be in quotations because it had to be evidenced via letters from her GP, social worker, and CAHMS. This house was close to her support network, so we were given a higher priority than others with the same number of points. I also had to be in full-time employment. That was a requirement for this particular property, not all properties with my HA; some of their properties are available for people out of work. I'm not 100% sure how they determine which houses have the requirement of employment, but I think it is based on the area, e.g the level of unemployment in that area, to guarantee a mix of tenants.

It’s probably so you could afford the rent. There are still affordability checks.

some areas are low demand. People never believe it, but they are. Often it’s because market rent is so cheap people can live elsewhere for a similar cost to social rent.

Instead of going after people fortunate enough to have a council house, let's crash the housing market, and improve renters rights so that private landlords can't buy up property as an easy money making scheme while they sit on their arse doing nothing.

I don’t think they should have to move but its not unfair to recalculate rent according to income if that changes in the future.

The injustice in society is unreal.

I put MH in quotations as it's an easy one to pull if you want to play the system. Anyone who wants to can go to their GP and say they are suicidal, in my borough a GP letter for MH gets you extra points. Obviously there are plenty of people who have genuine MH issues.

Where is this? Majority of places in UK are years long now.

It isn't always easy to get a diagnosis, waiting lists are years long in most areas now. If they have evidence that they are in unsuitable housing then they have evidence, unless the GP and health visitors are lying? I'd be surprised if that was the case.

You do have to chase things up, make sure you have the required evidence etc I don't see anything wrong with proactiveness.

I'm in an adapted SH property due to my sons needs, it took a month to get the house so we weren't waiting for long at all thankfully.

In my area it is a banding system. Anyone can join it but those who are considered suitably housed will be at the lowest banding and waiting years and years.

Due to my sons needs and our situation at the time, we were right at the top of the banding and and we had a house a month later.