Keeping a 3 bedroom council house when your children have grown up

[Iwishitwerewarmer]

Just pondering - what are everyone’s opinions on a single parent raising their children in a council house/housing association house and staying there once their children have moved out? Should they downsize into a one bed flat/smaller property or is it their right to remain in their home/neighbourhood?

Added extra - they have looked after the property well, have landscaped the garden, installed a new kitchen and generally added value to the property.

I know.someone who lived in council housing all their life, married a healthier guy who moved in. He.died, everything went to her. £300k in the bank when she died. Doesn't really seem fair that she got to keep the very cheap council house when they could clearly afford to purchase their own home.

To me, social housing should be offered when needed, but if you no longer need it then you move on and allow those who need it thensame opportunity. Be that when your kids move out, or if your financial situation allows it.

And yes, I feel the same about downsizing in privately owned family homes, to avoid any doubt. I'm already actioning our downsize and my kids are only just leaving home.

Where did I say that I wouldn’t do basic weeding, planting etc??? I said I wouldn’t be inclined to do MAJOR work in the garden! There is a difference!

Except if people did to this (both private and council) it would go a great way to solving the housing crisis.

Because you don't own the house you rent it? It is own by the Council and paid for by the tax payer.

I think there needs to be more education on who pays for UC and benefits. There seems to be the assumption that it is just a given. No wonder people are risking their lives flocking to this country thinking they can get a free house. In their country, they'd probably have to work for one!

I believe that social housing should be allocated on “need”, rather than sentiment. If I own my own home, with my husband but he moves out, there is a good chance that I will have to downsize no matter how much I love my garden and neighbours. If my children move out, there’s a decent chance I won’t be able to afford to keep the large rental property I currently rent. Why is social housing any different? Why should a family live in overcrowded conditions, so a single person can sit in a large home that is subsidised, if not completely paid for, by the tax payer? How would that single person have felt if the shoe had been on the other foot?

For those mentioning families stuck in temp accommodation, be more angry at England still allowing right to buy, 12,000 homes are lost every year with only 4/5000 being built, be angry at that not that someone can’t downsize.

No friends and family that can help? And in special circumstances with people in poor health, the council will help.

Anyway, I didn't come on to argue the toss, just that there are some social housing places which are much better suited and supported for elderly or poorly and the tenant often much happier for it.

Fife Council encourages tenants to make improvements. I certainly wouldn't.

I have a friend in this situation but one of her five children moved back in with her recently and she has frequent visits from grandchildren.

Right to buy is outrageous. However people do have to offer the property back to the council for the first ten years following purchase plus if they sell in the first five years then they have to pay back a proportion of the discount.

It still ought not to be allowed though.

I disagree with the fundamental point of this, that council housing should only be for those with no other options. We should have enough council housing for everyone who wants one, regardless of income. Landlord of first resort not last. I also think people in right size housing works best for everyone.

SH should be based on need. A single person does not need a 3 bedroom property. Yes, more properties should be built but around here developers are putting in the minimum amount of affordable housing they can get away with.

In our village, family sized properties rarely come on the market. In my road we have 38 houses, of 3/4 bedrooms. 13 houses are occupied by a single person. Our village school is likely to close in a few years due to a lack of new children. The problem is that smaller properties are being extended and so there is a lack of housing to allow people to stay in the village. I think morally people should move out of larger homes but where do they go?

@Charlize43 Social housing is not free and aren’t all occupied by benefit claimants, it’s amazing that ppl have this attitude or just ignorance.
Buying or private renting is beyond many, teachers, nurses, police live in social housing, maybe educate yourself before making ill informed comments.

It’s a tough one. Obviously we need more vacant family homes but at the time it’s their home, where they’ve raised their family so no I don’t think they should be forced out! There’s also lack of 1 beds either council or privately - private rent is probably going to be unaffordable anyway.

I grew up in a small street of council houses. Growing up it was mainly older people whose children have moved out, they’ve since passed away, now the houses have been occupied by families. My mother’s neighbour died and a problem family moved in and they have totally wrecked it and ruined the quiet street. For context, my mother still has a teenage daughter and an adult daughter at home.

I think technically they have to ask for permission to fit a kitchen or if they do leave they have to put it back to how it was before.

However with lifetime tenancies and the fact that's lot of old style council houses can be a total mess with no flooring and damaged walls when new tenants move in it's not really feasible to ask it goes back to the way it was. My friends council house had a cooker and four cupboards. Her late husband bought a secondhand kitchen on ebay and fitted it, crucially with enough cupboards for them.

My next door neighbours are an elderly brother and sister, the house has a large garden and would be perfect for a family. If they are on a lifetime tenancy I can from their POV why they wouldn't move - what incentives would make them do that? I believe newer council houses are no longer on lifetime tenancy and you would hope that when the couple die whoever gets it next will have something in there tenancy that means circumstances are regularly reviewed.

It would also house a couple or a single parent and 1 or 2 children

quite a few do, to make it nice. It’s not like private rental where you could be asked to me out in 6 months.

An interesting point. My late brother had a building company that specifically renovated bungalows with adapted access. They were sold on day one.
Old school thinking was that retirees wanted large gardens to pootle in. They might at 60 but at 67 that changes. They're too knackered to do it.
If we built two beds with small gardens (raised beds, proper showers etc) they'd be laughing.
In my neck of the woods a detached bungalow at the same price as a 5 bed modern executive house. If I had the money I'd be building them myself. It's a win, win. And I wouldn't allow planning permission to build up on bungalows.

Council housing doesn't have to be paid for by the taxpayer though. Build more of it so normal working people can also access it. Also, if the people in CH are getting rent paid by the taxpayer, surely that's better than tax payer money paying twice as much to a private landlord?

@EraHere in Scotland lots sell back to the council even after 10 years but look at London areas, SH bought for £20k selling for £1m, none of that will ever be offered back.

Your home is far mote secure if you own it and it is your home. You can do what you like

Even with new tenancy laws, renting is insecure and you can't do what you like.

There is no comparison

Absolutely.

My parents lost their flat to a compulsory purchase and the money that they received for it wasn't enough to purchase another property. They finished up paying full rent for a council property for the rest of their life. (The flat had been fully paid for.)

Dad did keep his garden well, but absolutely refused to pay for improvements to the house, other than decorating and carpeting it, etc.

He did lay a path in the back garden, etc, since that was a necessity for us.

He felt aggrieved at the loss of his ground floor flat and garden and I don't blame him. (The council demolished three blocks to build a police station and car park. The police station is now gone. There's an Aldi's there instead.)

This is easily forgotten. Families are often in flux. Relationships breakdown. People lose jobs. Children or elderly parents get ill and need care. There are reasons why people may move back into or into a family home. There is a long term benefit to society as a whole in encouraging people to create long-term stable homes.

For people on housing benefits, if you have extra bedrooms not needed, you lose some of your HB. People in social housing who pay the rent themselves, bedroom tax isn’t applicable

My cousins grew up on a lovely little council estate in North London, three and four bed semis with big gardens and a big central green area where all the kids used to play out. Went back for my uncle’s funeral and all of these houses have one or two old people living in them. My cousins had been trying to get their Dad to downsize to a flat for years but he wouldn’t agree. Such a shame, it was such a lovely place to bring up kids.