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 don't think they should be subsidised by benefits or cheap rent to live there, but if they are paying market rent then fair enough

I think when someone is given a contract for a council rental it should be for their need. So as their children hit 21 they should down size each time until their kids have moved out and they only need a one bed place. If people knew from the off that each home would be for a few years they wouldn't be as upset at the move. Council housing should be to help those that need it. And a single couple or person does not need a three bed house. And yes we do all fund council properties because the rent does not cover market value and tax money is used to build them etc.

Part of the issue is that moving doesn’t just involve downsizing (and leaving your home, memories etc.) . Very often it involves moving completely out of area, in a different town, no friends, no support network, new GP , new dentist (if you’re lucky to get one), no or shoddy public transport and access to other facilities and so on. It’s not just going down the road to a one bedroom flat (ground floor?) or a nice little bungalow.

Yeah her last sentence did make a good point.......shame she entirely missed the point being that her mum had children she couldn't house which is why she had the council house and needed the cheap rent in the first place.......

Better yourself with money? The snobbery on here is atrocious.

Exactly, if they knew they would have to leave, they could prepare for it. Then the house would be free for another family.

Fuck me !

Generally having extra bedrooms for visitors is considered a luxury, not a basic housing need.

And it’s as unusuable as housing as a second home is. They’re also ideal for visitors and having family to stay.

There isn't enough housing stock to adequately cover people's need as it is.

It’s nothing of the sort.

Yes, of course they pay tax just like everyone else. And they are subsidising council housing rents. But that doesn’t mean they should get subsidised in return any more than any other taxpayer.

Social housing rents aren’t subsidised.

Also, people forget that when you move into council/SH, they are gutted. No white goods, no magnolia walls throughout, no carpets.
You have to provide all that yourself. It is stupid to spend out on carpets, paint etc, only to then be made to move a few years later.
If a relative in SH dies, you get 2 weeks to erase any memory of them from the property.

They’re not subsidised. The council don’t make a profit from them unlike private landlords.

Yes, I am making a small profit on most of my houses. Not on 1 house that is in a higher mortgage fix though. I don't charge full market value because I have tenants I like and trust to look after my houses. I charge £250 less than exact same house next door pay to rent on one hpuse. I make enough profit to cover mortgage, gas and electric certificates, and maintenance repairs as well as about £150 on each house. This money is used to upgrade houses with new carpets, new bathroom or kitchens. There is not much actual pure profit on the houses. Most of my profit gain comes from the value of the house going up in value over time because I keep it well maintained.
increasing over time. Then I can sell off a house, even paying CGT still make a decent profit for my investment.

As apposed to what ? staying in poverty 😂

My mother & Down’s syndrome sister was made to leave our nice council home with good neighbours & moved across town into a small two bedroom terrace next to a prostitute who had men knocking at all hours of the day & night on their door, mum was attacked when she confronted the woman, a fine & probation was all she got handed out, the woman had a young 7 year old son that would be left outside if she was doing her evil business, mum often fed the poor lad after school, so it’s a NO to moving people from their homes when family members have grown up compulsory.

Does that apply to people who own their own home as well?

Oh goodness don’t light the sex work is real work fuse

I didn’t read it. Far too long.

Yes they might be but everyone else pays council tax and either a full mortgage or full market rent as well. Surely you can see social housing tenants especially council tenants pay a lot less overall.

That went well…

Yes that was the norm in the late 50s, 60s and 70s when the regeneration was happening. All those people had to be rehoused.

And don't even get me started on the people that buy council houses and then sell them on, taking that house off the SH market forever whilst enjoying a nice profit. It's gross.

I think if RTB had never been introduced, attitudes might be very different. We wouldn't have such a shortage of social housing if RTB had never happened, all those homes would still be part of the social housing stock and would eventually have been passed on to other families in need.

I know of two different property developers who buy ex-council properties, tart them up, and lease them back to local authorities who use them as temporary housing for homeless families. How bonkers is it that councils are paying top dollar to lease back houses that they used to own and were forced to sell off on the cheap?

You don't get cheaper council tax in council/SH. The rent is the only thing that is less (in most cases).
I don't think it is fair to compare it to mortgages, as some people have tiny mortgages...