Or is it unreasonable to complain about overcrowding in free accommodation?

[SomeGuy]

Just caught end of local news, they had a feature about overcrowding in London council housing. They showed a council flat, not quite sure how big it was, but it was occupied by three generations of an Asian Muslim family (a couple were wearing jilbabs), 8 in all, but apparently they count as 6 1/2 people for overcrowding because children under 1 don't count (not sure where the 1/2 comes from).

Anyway my wife's response was 'if they don't like it, they should go back where they came from' (DW is an immigrant, and shared a bed with her sister growing up - they had 7 people in two bedrooms, some would sleep on mats on the floor), given that much worse/more cramped conditions are I'm sure completely normal where they came from. If DW's parents had they wanted a bigger house they'd have to pay for it, though they'd tend to spend the money expanding their business rather than home improvements.

They had an exterior shot of the flat, which is very prime real estate, central London, worth hundreds of thousands of pounds to buy, or several thousand per month on the open market.

Apparently Boris has promised to half overcrowding in 20 years, but it seems odd to me, obviously a family of 8 is fairly normal in Afghanistan/wherever (in large part because they don't see personal space as so important and so you can fit a lot of people in to a small place) but it really doesn't fit into central London, especially not when the taxpayer is footing the bill.

OP,
not only you have started a stupid thread but you don't even have the guts to own your opinion.
You 've started with 'my dw says..blah blah, and she is immigrant (?) blah blah' to test the water and then in next posts was obvious that these are your own vile views.

Next time that you start a stupid thread, at least be a proper controversial op, with style and balls.

Not chicken-controversial.

(i am not even going to comment on people's right to reproduce because it is early in the morning and feeling sick at reading this thread)

I lived with a P and 2 children in one room for 3 years, my then 3 year old found a drug addict fitting on the bathroom floor, we had to squeeze ourselves between the bed and cot because there was no floor space, there were regular fights over soap going missing and stolen giros. My mental health was destroyed. Then I was moved to another room with a broken window and glass in the bath. So 5 years in total. I wouldn't want anyone living like that, immigrants or not, although at the time I felt resentful, but my judgement was skewed. If people can afford to buy a house there should be other options other than reducing social housing. I also know people on 25k a year who have kept their council places. But who cares eh homeless families are just benefit scum anyway aren't they.

LOL @ SomeGuy's understanding of the illegal immigrant situation in the US!

FWIW, with the exception of a few remaining 'housing projects' in major cities like NYC and Chicago, there isn't any council housing there.

Never has been.

Not much of a buy-to-let culture, either. It appears the founding fathers remembered all-too-well the pitfalls of absentee landlordism.

MOST rental stock there is owned by corporations, some of them extremely large, not buy-to-let property speculators, because in most states laws do their best to discourage this practice.

You're not booted out of your home after 6 months because your landlord decided to sell up or couldn't pay the mortgage.

With exceptions, the majority of leases there are for 6 months to 1 year. If you want to stay, you just renew your lease for another year or 6 months or whatever. For as long as you like and as long as you pay your rent and don't act ghetto (eviction happens a lot more there for anti-social tenants).

Instead of council housing, low-income people claim a form of housing benefit known as Section 8.

A landlord is required by the government to accept a percentage of Section 8 tenants based on the size of the complex/number of properties it owns.

Illegal immigrants in many states are entitled to benefits, especially children. They're entitled to use whatever the state's medical programme is for children, to schools, free meals at school, etc.

There is pretty much no social housing left.

That's the crux of the matter. Coupled with stigma and peoples' cultural ideas that everyone in need of social housing or who lives in social housing is a lazy scrounger on benefits.

I'm going to put this thread on watch and link it every time somone spouts nonsense about how racist and ignorant Americans are .

Sorry, missed out the quotation marks:
'There is pretty much no social housing left.'

MissSunny - any "empty" HA/Council houses "taken" for Asylum seekers have been the "hard to let" ones - the ones that had been empty for a long time, and which were in an awful state. Where houses were taken out of the social housing sector - and I again I stress that the vast majority of asylum seeker housing is in the private sector, or detention centres ( in real terms very VERY few asylum seekers are "homed") - the councils were given money for taking these properties.

If the councils failed to use that money to use that money to provide extra social housing to replace the small numbers taken out of "service" then again - that's not the fault of the asylum seekers.

why shouldn't we be entitled to buy our (social housing ) home?

i for one have the right to,and i plan to buy it!!!

its my kids home,my youngest was born upstairs,and i've done major improvements on the place,at my own expense. so i WILL be buying it.

you're lucky to have had that stability. My 10 year old has moved 7 times in his life.

because what about all the other people that need social housing.

If you're in a position to buy a house - go and buy one that's wouldn't have been allocated to another needy family.

because we have roots here....its our home.

i have redesigned the garden,done loads to the whole house. i made it our home,so i'll be buying it!!

its easier to buy the home you're in already,why should i uproot my kids? who for??

Private renting should also be more stable. I've had to move 3 times from private places through no fault of my own (honest). Families don't want 6 month contracts.

so because you've decided to spend money on it you should be entitled to buy it.

Even though that means another NEEDY family will then be left on the list even longer because the social housing that you are currently fortunate to have would be taken out of the cycle.

God kids move from their homes all the time and make new ones - big deal.

Same thing happens when private renters suddenly find themselves in the position to be able to buy - they up sticks and move.

yes,stability,after a life following ex husband around with the armed forces,what happened when he left??

armed forces families NEVER were able to go on any social housing lists. we had to live in married quarters where we couldn't make alterations or lay down roots for our kids.

this home is their first permanent one ever,and eldest is now 15!!! though we've been here almost five years.

so we're staying. and in meantime,we've got security with our tenency,which i believe are like gold dust.

comes a time when you've got to put your own first!

you think private renters can make changes to their houses or make roots?

Count yourself bloody lucky that you were given social housing when you needed - I think the whole right to buy idea is disgusting.

right to buy of social housing should be abolished immediately.

i'm glad to see moratoriums placed on it and i hope this trend continues.

wow.......NASTY!!!

er,no you don't quite remember rightly at all.

i was also in a dv hostel with 4 kids for a year before i got this tenency,was thrown onto benefits when my ex became extremely violent and was sectioned. you know nothing. very little

i work 17 hours in local farm shop,but looking at having hours reduced. i claim what i'm entitled to. tax credits and CB. thankyou very much!!

oh,and my partner lives 50 miles away and i choose not to have him live here.....is that alright with you?

The main problem with Right To Buy is that the properties are sold with a discount of 35% of the market value. If people want to buy their council homes for 'permanence' or 'stability' then that's fine - but it should be at the full market rate. That way, the council can buy another replacement house to provide a home for people who need it.

Exactly, FlyingDuck, especially because after buying the home at a deep discount, they can sell it on at full market value.

Correction to my post - up to 50% discount, after 20 years residency. 35% after 5 years residency.

oh sorry - obviously missed that you'd got a job - as at one point - not that long ago you were saying you couldn't possibly afford to work.

Yes the discount is very unfair. It's like winning the lottery in some areas. If you got RTB in Kensington or Islington or somewhere you've basically been given several hundred thousand pounds.

Which is hardly fair to everyone else.

i'm not sure its 35% here after 5 years flying duck,but i know it goes up the longer you're in a property. its only recently that i've been able to start work again,not much of a job,but am in last year with ou so hope to get something better as time goes by. but for people like me,who have been out of work market for so long,i have no chance whatsover of getting a brilliant job straightaway. have to start at bottom again and work up. and then theres the deposit issue.

fields across from us are being built on,apparentyly 3,500 houses. some will be HA. so it evens out. in the end.

thanks for rubbishing my attempts at bettering myself FAQ. hope it makes you feel good about yourself.

oh F*ck off Tiffany - I distinctly being one of the people on the thread in question giving you ideas of how you would be ABLE to work - I think you even thanked me at the time.

But no - it won't "even out" - it never does - there's a gradually reducing stock of HA/Social housing homes in this country

er,no,i will stay on the thread if i choose to. my choice,

that thread was good few months ago. so what of it? i remember it well,yes. so?

you are coming across as rather nasty and bitter.

does it bother you so much that i have a tenancy AND now a smallish job,with no room for manouvere? i don't have much,but it seems to make you happy to (try) and put me down.