To think I should be able to have a council house?

[frustratedmumof3]

Ho hum - must stop my addiction to MN as will not have time from next week so my cunning plan is to piss off as many people as possible so I will be frightened to come on here .

So, my local council are building lots of lovely new council or housing association (don't care what they are) homes in my area with brand spanking new kitchens, bathrooms, lovely new carpets etc, etc and I am thinking why should the so-called vulnerable members of society (who are most probably going to wreck the places) be higher on the housing list than us.

We rent privately (since we sold our house 2 years ago as could not afford the mortgage) and I don't see that we will ever be able to afford another house. We pay well over a grand for a 3 bed (3DCs) and have the insecurity of potentially having to move every 6 months at the owners whim which is the worst thing (have already moved 3 times since started renting).

It really makes me mad that quite a few of DCs friends have council houses where they pay only 350 per month and probably earn similar wages to us (the ones that work that is). What makes them deserve one more than us? I know damn well that we will not get one of the new homes as there are about 5000 people in the queue before us and they will probably go to single parents, immigrants and and generally useless members of society who do not work and have no intention of doing so. We pay our taxes and would appreciate any help we were given (as we need it now) but will get sweet FA. Makes me want to scream!! This thread may be unusual as I am not dissing council house tenants as I desperately want to be one (in a new build anyway).

I agree expat about the whole home ownership thing. Council housing and affordable housing should be for rent only. There would still be far more security than with private rental and would stop people getting in on the cheap and then selling at inflated prices which prevents other people having the leg up the ladder that they did.

I know there are some dreadful situations for people in really dire circumstances. But I also think there's a real trap for people in the middle who will never in a million years have enough points to qualify for social housing, yet can't afford to buy either and end up paying exorbitant private rentals with no security. I have a number of friends locally who rent at around £900 per month - and no, that doesn't get the them a mansion, it gets them a poky modern box with just about enough space. And no, they are not rolling in money to pay that sort of rent - very often it is half the monthy income for the household. There are many hard working families in this country who see very little reward for their efforts.

I agree expat that we need mucgh more affordable and decent rentals

If I had the chose I would say that in every building develop of over 5 houses that 1 had to be social housing - thus not creating estates either.

and no more right to buy or shared homeownership or any of that.

rent and rent ONLY OR if you're going to do a buyer's scheme, then the owner cannot sell it on the open market.

it just keeps prices artificially inflated and leads to more boom/bust.

of course, you have to force developers to integrate social housing into their development and they always find ways round it.

pepperpotting is the order of the day with new developments and most councils look for a percentage of afordable housing when giving the green light for the development, this is usually 15-20%

this comes with its plus points and bad points

of course there are no more estates or ghettos.

however sometimes tenants complai that they are singled out by home owners or leaseholders - i certainly find in my job that leaseholders in particular have the right arse on with all tenants. they loo down on them and refuse to engage with them at any organised social level

the other negative is funding.

in days of yore it was easy to say x area is an area of deprivation and therefore we can apply for Euopean funding or government funding to work with the peopleof x estate.

with increasing pepperpotting we get 'pocket' deprivation and so when any one person looks at stats. the area looks like its doing v. well thank you - average wages, employment, lifestyle etc - all look good when you take an overall average and this can make it harder to source funds.

however overall my opinion is tha pepperpotting is the way to go. as risk of sounding like a middle class patronising do gooder, i do think its v. easy to normalise bahaviour that clearly isn't normal within wider society it your friends and neighbours carry out the same activity. however what we do lose is community. as the more affluent a person is- i find - the less likley they are to engage with the community around them, unless it benefits them personally.

'Hopefully Edinburgh council does this properly and invests in the stock creating housing for working families at affordable rental prices.'

I wouldn't hold my breath.

After all, that same council gave permission for all those shoddily-built shoeboxes not big enough to swing a cat in to be built in the first place. As one MSP put it, 'They're for singletons who don't like to cook.'

I remember two years ago, when we still lived there, DH and I took the day off to take the girls to the Castle because they get in free in October.

And you could see all those flats going up and only then could you appreciate how truly vile they are, a blight on the skyline over the Forth.

And DH's first remark was that they looked like all those horrible towers that used to be in Granton and Leith (he remembers the 'jigsaw' towers in Granton/Pilton).

i know two people who own flats there. one is BILs best pal. they were all here last week.

he said he wouldn't want to live in one of those himself .

they've already got damp and many are on reclaimed land.

how dumb is that when sea levels are rising?

my MIL was born and grew up in Newhaven - the tenement is long gone, it's a paint factory or summat like that now.

she remembers the last time they tried to reclaim some of that land.

my SIL lives in the Fort. that building was condemned 2 years ago. but that's what she was offered when she fled abusive partner.

Confession that I have not read the entire thread, but do have a few questions regarding 'pepperpotting' (never heard that expression before):

Are the affordable housing flats in a building/development the same as the 'market price' flats?
If not, generally how would they differ?
Do affordable housing tenants generally own, or rent?
If own, typically how much of a discount would they get off market purchase price?
Are affordable housing tenants bound by same 'rules of conduct' and/or 'bylaws' as other owners?
Do affordable housing tenants make full use of services offered in a development (porterage, etc), and if so, do they contribute fully or partially to service charges/management fees for the building?
Do affordable housing flat owners have the right to purchase a car park space (if available in the development), and if so, at full or discounted price?
Can affordable housing tenants lose their housing (or be forced to move) for anti-social behaviour?

Forgive my ignorance - if these are ignorant questions. Just trying to understand a bit more, and wondering how/if the 'rules' and 'rights' of a building/development extend to all residents equally.

i didn't even like to drive by the Fort when we were living in Leith! DH got a puncture in a tire once going through there (she has one son still in primary school there and another, now in a gang, in secondary school).

but she took it because it was that or B&B.

she's on everyone's list.

but hey ho, now she's officially classed as housed, she hasn't got a snowball's chance in hell of moving till they actually knock that place down, and then they always do so with no guarantees of being moved back to the area.

besides, they still haven't knocked down several towers in the west and south ends of the city that were slated for demolition years ago.

the ILs were here last week, and DH had to break it to them that we're never going back there.

we couldn't afford it then and we definitely can't now.

plus, we really don't want to deal with the whole trams crap and paying for that, or those schools in bad disrepair or catchment fracas.

it's nice not to have to worry about stuff like that.

besides, we hated living in flats, all we could ever afford to rent, and at least here there is a chance of renting a detached caravan or house for the same price as a pokey 2-bed which wouldn't have room for the 5 of us.

they took it hard, but they had to know it was coming.

it's not the easiest place to live for a working poor family.

oh, poor you! DD1 used to nag us to go to Waterworld.

Earlybird, I live in a HA property and what people don't realise (even our own residents oddly) is that we don't pay rent as actually we own our property. We only pay service charges towards the services that we recieve, they're worked out amongst the resident's of the estate. Does that answer your question?

Going back to someone's comment about estates, I'm not sure what the problem is with them, but maybe I'm biased by living on some very nice ones and knowing the others under our HA and being involved as much as I am I know how much work goes into keeping them nice. I know of a lot of other HA's too through my work and they're all the same, we're far from being the best.

Just read this thread with what can only be described as horror. My dp died 6 years ago suddenly and i was 5 months pregnant and had a ds of 5. We were living in a private rented property which was being sold at the time so i had to move out. I went to my local council and was told i was not a priority and filled out all the forms and went on the council list. I had no money, my dp had left no will so anything he did have, which wasnt much was frozen. For 6 weeks i stayed with a friend and eventually found another privately rented house, which had no bathroom only a shower in a cupboard. You try lifting a baby bath in and out a shower after a casesrian and to top it all the council did not pay the whole rent so every month i had to find a 150.00 towards the rent out of the other benefits i had to claim. It was a very desperate time but i made that little house a show home, it was clean and in a better state then when i went in and before me it was rented to professional people, not immigrants or single mothers. After 18 months i was granted a council house and again i have made it lovely and really appreciate it. I needed this home after everything i went through and believe me grieving for my dp whilst pregnant was the only tip of the iceberg. i had gone from a nice life with my dp earning well to nothing overnight and had to go down the benefit route, it was demoralising but people kept telling me thats why its there and i was a geniune person in need. Do not judge every single mum you see, because there is a story behind everyone, perhaps not all as tragic as mine but all the same we mostly do not ask to be in the situation life has dealt us.

Marmon - sorry to hear your story. You sound like a really strong woman.

and to everyone that was being a tosser on this thread. Marmon is only one of thousands with circumstances you can only imagine and have no right to judge.

ToThrottleABlackBird - What exactly was it that you posted that was so bad it had to deleted? Very interested to know considering the tone of the others? And don't worry, I will not take it personally!

Tinkerbellesmum - YES EVERYONE HAS THE RIGHT TO A COUNCIL/HA PROPERTY but everyone is NOT on a time-waiting based order on the God Damned list are they, FFS. People, quite rightly in many cases, with extreme circumstances (whether self-created or very justified) jump straight to the top, with anyone struggling financially but not actually (claiming to be?) homeless/addicted/very very overcrowded is shunted down again - possibly permanently.

Finances don't earn you point, so claim poverty as much as you like it won't help. Your application is given points and then you are placed on the list accordingly. It may seem to some people like others are getting points for their financial status but you don't know without seeing their forms after they've been marked what they were given points for.

You also have to prove your financial circumstances so that they know you can either afford to pay or are entitled to claim housing benefit.

We were bumped up the list when DD nearly died from a bleed caused by overcrowding. She looks perfectly healthy, (if a bit bruised), so you never really know.

'We were bumped up the list when DD nearly died from a bleed caused by overcrowding.'

that's awful!

but how does a bleed result from overcrowding?

i think the OP is seeing this from teh point of view that being top priority on the list means you get a nice, new, spacious house.

when in most councils, it's a B&B and then some shithole the council classifies as 'hard to let'.

She does have medical condition causing the bleeding / bruising. I didn't batter her to get a house although I'm sure some people might think so

X post expat

We were already in a tiny 1-bed and there were a series of accidents over the four years we were waiting due to lack of space or garden.

Medical need and overcrowding are the two highest priorities. The council is supposed to move you within a certain amount of days for either of these, so that means whatever is next available that's suitable. Sadly for most people that does mean B&B or something just as dire, but some people are fortunate and they go on the list just in time to be offered somewhere nice.

Unfortunately HA isn't the same as I've had to move Tink to my parents as the problems with my back are making it hard for me to care for her here (top floor of a lowriser). The HA aren't being very helpful, I think when the baby is born and I'm unable to return here they may pull their finger out or I can mail drop my estate (on my crutches) to see if I can find a mutal exchange or create a void (empty property) here.