Page 7 | To think social housing should be means-tested annually like benefits?

EqualLedgerJay · 2025-12-07T17:25:29+00:00

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

Bushmillsbabe · 07/12/2025 18:37

x2boys · 07/12/2025 18:32

I imagine many would if they could
But if there are no one beds available what can they do?

Show quote history

But it's not enforced. My Nanna lived in a 3 bed council house all her life. Offered a lovely 1 bed retirement bungalow in same village as her house. Refused and lived in there for around 40 years as a single person .

usedtobeaylis · 07/12/2025 18:37

No. We should build more social housing and stop pushing people into home ownership. Chucking people and families out of their homes as some kind of warped interim measure is a no for me.

Bambamhoohoo · 07/12/2025 18:38

MrsTerryPratchett · 07/12/2025 18:31

Haven’t RTFT because I work in housing and everyone thinks their uneducated reckons are going to enlighten people in the actual field.

But just a few reasons lifetime tenancies are better;

Stable communities
A mix of ages
A mix of incomes, demographics and challenges
People feel at home so they treat their home well
Community
Not making housing workers jobs involve evicting people for no good reason (morale)
People get a little more money, they’re out, they struggle, they come back. Why bother?

And that was 2 minutes of thinking. The main thing though is your cavalier attitude to people’s lives, moving them around like chess pieces, rather than thinking of them as living people who have homes. You need some empathy training.

GIVE THIS WOMAN HER FLOWERS 💐💐💐💐💐

cestlavielife · 07/12/2025 18:38

No.
The answer is to build and provide more dlsocial housing.
If someone now earning say 100k chooses to stay in the social rental, so what? It is secure .

ChampagneLassie · 07/12/2025 18:38

@x2boys @XenoBitch i don’t think privately renting is a step up; but I think social housing should be protected for those who need it, not for those who can afford other options. There are families living in hostels and hotels on huge waiting lists whilst wealthy people enjoy ridiculously low rents, because they can. I’ve rented most of my adult life, I’ve generally been able to live in more affluent areas and nicer properties than those of social housing. But my rent is 5 x what a friend pays for a similar sized council house 5 mins walk away. My friend who earns >£100k

DonicaLewinsky · 07/12/2025 18:39

It's interesting that the people who work in SH are explaining to OP what a bad idea this is.

Bambamhoohoo · 07/12/2025 18:40

By the way, there is a social housing tenure that does exactly what you describe it’s called rent to homebuy.

you rent at social rent for a 5 year tenancy whilst saving the excess for a deposit. At the end of the 5 years you’re expected to leave and do just that .

giallo · 07/12/2025 18:40

PeonyPatch · 07/12/2025 17:41

No, it’s not fair. People who live in social housing have security that those of us who pay mortgages or private do not…

Show quote history

That’s not the case at all. If you don’t pay your rent you will be evicted just the same as someone who isn’t paying their private rent or mortgage losing their houses.

ChampagneLassie · 07/12/2025 18:40

I’m not jealous, I certainly shouldn’t get social housing. It should be for those geuninrly in need. I’m sure the people I know are minority, but it is a daft system that we acesss other benefits very regularly but housing is once you’re in and that’s it

AutumnAllTheWay · 07/12/2025 18:41

ChampagneLassie · 07/12/2025 18:38

@x2boys @XenoBitch i don’t think privately renting is a step up; but I think social housing should be protected for those who need it, not for those who can afford other options. There are families living in hostels and hotels on huge waiting lists whilst wealthy people enjoy ridiculously low rents, because they can. I’ve rented most of my adult life, I’ve generally been able to live in more affluent areas and nicer properties than those of social housing. But my rent is 5 x what a friend pays for a similar sized council house 5 mins walk away. My friend who earns >£100k

I think cases like that are few and far between.

Not many are in that kind of income, and even less who would choose to stay ona council estate paying rent for life instead of buying.

Most may improve their income, but to a level where they'd still struggle to afford private rents or the massive deposit for a house of their own

BunnyLake · 07/12/2025 18:41

XenoBitch · 07/12/2025 18:29

It is not so much about not wanting to pay for private rent.
You can't even put a poster on the wall in many private rents. You have no choice but to live in magnolia, and be subject to an inspection every 3 months where you get a report back about how your own books were stacked on your own coffee table (happened to my DP).
You are at the mercy of no fault and revenge evictions (I know this is set to change).
And you pay more for this "privilege".

I know private renting has its place. Some people rent a second place away from their main residence due to temporary work, or they simply want more rooms than SH would let them have. But no one in their right mind will earn more money, then want to pay out more in rent... just as some sort of moral duty.

Show quote history

I privately rented for a while and it was awful. The owner (a most sour faced madam you’d be hard to find) complained about my hoovering saying she didn’t think it was good enough on one visit. She even had the cheek to complain about the mold on the ceiling of this sort of old lean-to thing, that was completely out of my control. I requested that the mold be investigated and she refused. The place also had those dreadful night storage heaters which were a nightmare to use. A year later I had to move out because she was moving back in and later the next door neighbour told me once she moved in she had central heating installed and had the mold fixed. Grrrr.

Privately renting is very stressful. Luckily I bought after.

x2boys · 07/12/2025 18:43

ChampagneLassie · 07/12/2025 18:38

@x2boys @XenoBitch i don’t think privately renting is a step up; but I think social housing should be protected for those who need it, not for those who can afford other options. There are families living in hostels and hotels on huge waiting lists whilst wealthy people enjoy ridiculously low rents, because they can. I’ve rented most of my adult life, I’ve generally been able to live in more affluent areas and nicer properties than those of social housing. But my rent is 5 x what a friend pays for a similar sized council house 5 mins walk away. My friend who earns >£100k

Most people in social housing are not on £100k
Lots of council estates are in less desirable areas
I
My estate is not somewhere people aspire to live

DonicaLewinsky · 07/12/2025 18:43

It's a lot of money and resources some of you want to spaff on what'll be a tiny number of very high earning SH tenants, who we couldn't even guarantee would choose their jobs over their tenancy anyway.

XenoBitch · 07/12/2025 18:43

giallo · 07/12/2025 18:40

That’s not the case at all. If you don’t pay your rent you will be evicted just the same as someone who isn’t paying their private rent or mortgage losing their houses.

Show quote history

You can also be evited for anti-social behaviour (home owners wont be subject to that, and I am not sure private landlords care so much), and also be evicted for not allowing contractors in.

Grapewrath · 07/12/2025 18:44

Well no because private housing is in such high demand with most landlords demanding a guarantor. In my area there are at least 6 applicants per property so trying to shift council Tenants into private housing just wouldn’t be an option

usedtobeaylis · 07/12/2025 18:44

Bushmillsbabe · 07/12/2025 18:37

But it's not enforced. My Nanna lived in a 3 bed council house all her life. Offered a lovely 1 bed retirement bungalow in same village as her house. Refused and lived in there for around 40 years as a single person .

Show quote history

My granny lives in a two-bedroomed home that she has lived in for her entire adult life. It has adaptations that were made before my grandpa died, that she now uses. She's just about to be in her 90s. There's nothing to be gained by making her move, nothing. It's her home and she's not responsible for the housing crisis - in fact she and my grandpa didn't buy their house during right to buy on principle. So she can live in that house until the day she dies as far as I'm concerned. That was the basis on which she entered into social housing in the first place - a home for life.

Right to buy absolutely destroyed social housing in Scotland when prior to that he vast majority of the country lived in it. There was never anything wrong with the model. Making ordinary people continue to bear the burden of it by removing them from their homes and communities and families is wrong, wrong, wrong.

Dollymylove · 07/12/2025 18:46

shellyleppard · 07/12/2025 17:31

Another benefits bashing thread.....fa la la la, la la la la

How is it benefits bashing?
Seems more like working people bashing to me

BunnyLake · 07/12/2025 18:46

Bambamhoohoo · 07/12/2025 18:40

By the way, there is a social housing tenure that does exactly what you describe it’s called rent to homebuy.

you rent at social rent for a 5 year tenancy whilst saving the excess for a deposit. At the end of the 5 years you’re expected to leave and do just that .

At least you know what you’re getting into there (and sounds quite good really). A yearly check to see if your income has gone up sounds completely unworkable.

TofuEater · 07/12/2025 18:46

EqualLedgerJay · 07/12/2025 17:36

I’m not talking about sudden eviction or punishing people for improving their circumstances. I mean a gradual, transparent system. For example, clear income thresholds, long transition periods, options like increased rent contributions, downsizing incentives or time-limited tenancies once income is well above need.

Right now the system has no meaningful mechanism for change at all, even when households are earning far beyond eligibility. That’s what I’m questioning, not whether people should be destabilised overnight.

Show quote history

And how much will all this cost to to administer and where will that money come from? Surely it will ultimately make social housing more expensive

YorkshireGoldDrinker · 07/12/2025 18:47

YANBU. And if your life really looks up, why stay in a council house when there are nicer properties available? Because of the subsidised rent. Free money stops people aiming higher and keeps them poor. It's their choice, however.

x2boys · 07/12/2025 18:47

YorkshireGoldDrinker · 07/12/2025 18:47

YANBU. And if your life really looks up, why stay in a council house when there are nicer properties available? Because of the subsidised rent. Free money stops people aiming higher and keeps them poor. It's their choice, however.

Free money ??

giallo · 07/12/2025 18:48

Sirzy · 07/12/2025 17:51

I think a system whereby if your wages go into being a higher rate tax payer your given a year to either move or pay market rate would be fair. I don’t think leases for life works anymore when so many people have no housing.

Market rent? Are you serious? Market rent is artificially high and pushed up by landlords. No-one should be forced to pay artificially high rent by a social housing provider, we should be looking at providing more genuinely affordable housing for everyone.

Fundays12 · 07/12/2025 18:50

As someone who owns there house no i don't. There is already very few incentives to work hard ans better yourself in this country so taking away more is crazy. However I do think anti social behaviour policies need to be better and enforced by housing associations and local authorities. Why should anyone get to keep a home from social housing which are already in very short supply whilst making neighbours life a misery and destroying the house.

FairKoala · 07/12/2025 18:51

giallo · 07/12/2025 18:40

That’s not the case at all. If you don’t pay your rent you will be evicted just the same as someone who isn’t paying their private rent or mortgage losing their houses.

Show quote history

I can assure you that isn’t the case.

They usually come to some arrangement with SH Dept and pay back the amount at a little extra each month which means they go to HB and get their HB paid to cover the higher amount.

ColourThief · 07/12/2025 18:52

I think once you have reached the point where you are sitting in a social home way too big for you then you should be given a mandatory downsize to another social housing property.
When I was made homeless with my children we couldn’t get social housing, even though our circumstances were beyond dire, because all the big social homes were unavailable.

Too many older people sat in them long after the kids have grown up and moved out.

By all means, keep the security of a social housing property, but downsize.
Don’t be so selfish.
Think of how happy you were when your kids were young to have that security, maybe pass that on?