Preparation for mass exodus of poor from London

[SkippyjonJones]

www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/oct/24/exodus-poor-families-from-london

yipee! at last...something about horrible, greedy, rip off landlords. as i said earlier-we need more regulation on private renting-not stupid capping. hope this panorama sheds some light for those people on here who think that people in private rented accomodation get it better than themselves.

hope it also sheds some light for people who think those who are poorer than themselves 'deserve' to live in sub standard accomodation just because they don't work.

See this programme just shows to me that the problem isn't the tenants (very often), it's usually the fucking landlords who are charging insane rents and letting out places that are seriously unfit for human habitation.

The rules about repairs are bloody outrageous

I used to live in a house with really awful gas fires (no central heating). The gas people came round and turned off every single gas fire in the house and we were freezing all winter - the landlord never repaired them. :(

If it isn't "right" for someone to be living where they cannot currently afford to live, then can it not also be argued that everyone with a mortgage is living beyond their means?

This aside, didn't someone put the idea of "The City of London" being independent earlier this year? Sure I heard that idea being put out there...

I think that there are important points about personal experiences here but for me it's also about what kind of cities do we want to have?

We either believe in genuinely mixed income neighbourhoods or we don't. If we don't, then we will have areas where similar sorts of people live - the wealthy in the wealthy areas, the poor in the poor, the middle in the middle. No one mixes.

There has been lots in the Guardian about the divide and conquer approach - if struggling workers can't afford to live in cities then why should the poor - but perhaps we should be increasing opportunities for the struggling workers to get into cities, not make sure that everyone knows their place in housing terms.

Or, we just apply the free market, unconstrained ... which is what some folks are desperate to do. It's ideology again.

Some landlords do not rip people off. My neighbour could not sell her house so let it out to cover the mortgage. A couple moved in with two kids. A month later the guy disappeared and social services apparently could not trace him. My friend was told that they would pay her rent but she needed to drop it by £200 and had to let this family stay for at least 12 months. Therefore she had to cut down all her outgoings so that she could still pay the mortgage that was now less than the rent for fear of being repossessed for the family to live in her house.

Needless to say she will never let a house again and this is not the first time I have heard this. Many people are forced to let because they cannot sell their houses.

Good point Whoknew. What about the initiatives for young teachers and nurses to live in these areas? The schools will need staff and so will the hospitals. Many of these people will not be eligible for housing benefit.

The majority of Londoners I know won't be affected by this change. The people I know are in council/HA flats, shared ownership flats, homeowners or paying full rent in a private rental. The only families I know out of those who get HB are the ones in council/HA flats, and their rents are so low that the caps won't affect them. Their rents won't increase because they moved into their flats years ago and the tenancy protects them from huge hikes.

There are relatively small numbers claiming HB in private rented flats. The families I know in private rented homes pay full rent themselves - there aren't many private landlords able to accept HB tenants. I have many friends working in the public sector as nurses and teachers who have shared ownership keyworker flats - London has more keyworker accommodation than anywhere else in the country.

Obviously there will be a few families who will be affected by this, but the article mentions 82,000 families, which hardly represents a huge percentage of the capital's low-paid workforce. Rents are low enough in certain parts of the capital that they shouldn't have to move out of the M25 entirely.

So it's not true at all to say that communities won't be mixed after these changes - even now, there are very poor families on benefits living on the same street as millionnaires. All of the central London boroughs have lots of council/HA tenants and they're not going to be moving out because of these caps - if anything, they'll be more likely to hold on to their tenancies and take advantage of the fact they can pass them on to their children.

Snowy - I don't know all the details - but aren't HA rents due to rise significantly? So even if people are in HA housing they will have to pay significantly more (though less than they would in the private sector).

I've only read to page 5 so far, but can I point out that this doesn't only affect people in central London? I live in a commuter town in Essex, and the average rent for a private 4-bed house is £1200pcm. A lot are more than that. We leave this town - DP can't get to work. average rent for a private 3-bed is £1000pcm.

Thing is, it won't just be unemployed people that have to live in the lowest 30% of properties. It will be people working hard, FT, for minimum wage or not much more besides. Why the fuck should DP work his socks off for a property that isn't fit for habitation? Why should we bring our dc up in a house riddled with damp (which is mostly what the lowest 30% of houses are like).

And why should we move to the other (shitty) side of town when the only school that can deal with DD's SN is the one near where we are renting? School in shitty area, where rent is £100 less a month - 45 minutes help a week for DD. School where we are, in dearer area - 11 hours help a week for DD. Without this help...DD will never get a job, and therefore never pay tax. which would you choose? Do we have to fuck up DD's only chance of a productive life because our LL charges an extortionate amount of rent (to cover his mortgage) and DP's greedy bastard employers only pay him £16K pa for a ft job?

Without hb, we couldn't even afford to rent a single room in our area for the 5 of us.

Here's an insight into being a low-paid employee: DP was offered a promotion, that involved a LOT more responsibility and paperwork, and a change of hours that would make public transport from ANY other area of our town a physical impossibility. Do you want to know what wage increase his bosses offered him? NONE. They wanted him to do a much more demanding job, with worse hours, that doesn't fit in so well with his caring responsibilities, for NO extra money on to of his oh-so-wonderful wage of £16K pa. It's great being working poor'

He did tell them to fuck off, most politely, I might add. They won't pay him any more because they only pay his manager £17K. Great wage to rent ratio here, eh? Manager - £17K, average 3-bed rent £12K pa....

That Panarama thing I found pretty funny, it's nothing to do with the fact they are on Housing Benefit there are plenty of people doing the same thing to low paid workers, no one cares in this country it is ruled by greed.

I used to live in a studio flat (I.e one room with a shower room and kitchennet in the corner) it cost £650 a month and for that I got dodgey electrics, water regularly pooring in via the ceiling, mice, carpet beetles, bed bugs, a buggered fire alarm system that went off so often the fire brigade threatened the landlord about it so he switched it off and he never turned the heating on until about November and turned it off in February if he bothered to put it on during the winter at all.

I couldn't wait to get out but it took ages to find a place I could afford that wasn't just as bad, as for the old place there is a new idiot living in there now, as long as there is a steady stream of poor people who have no choice but to take crap holes there will be landlords raking it in and things are only going to get worse.

Loudlass good on you for bringing a bit of reality into the discussion. Some posters seem to be far removed from it IMO.

I rent out a 2 bedroomed terraced house in Blackburn to a single pensioner. 7 years ago I wanted to charge £75 a week but THE CAP on benefit for a single person in this LA was £68 a week. So we charged £68 a week.
What am I missing here? If other LA's introduced caps years ago why have the London boroughs allowed it to get so out of control in the first place.

Oh, and both the areas where we rent and where we live are both subject to landlord licensing schemes to ensure that the properties are a) well looked after and fit for habitation, and b) only rented to 'good' tenants. This includes people that are on HB. It's aim is to decrease the concentration of drug dealers, violent crime etc within our communities.

London will become like Paris or Manhattan- almost theme park-esque in the nice city centre parts but venture out to the burbs and you will be in trouble. Its a shame, it leaves cities for the rich only and London was one city that I thought could be classed as cosmopolitan.

Its still a good point though that the rich and those on benefits can live in London but the middle classes need to move to the burbs

THe real problem with housing is the previous Government allowed there property prices to rise out of control as it fueled their economic boom. Property prices rose at a mucher higher rate than wages which is why we have so many dependent on housing benefit in order to pay the rent.
There doesn't seem to be an easy solution to this though.

I'd blame the previous tory governments who were really pushed home ownership, managing at the same time got rid of social housing stock and removed rent controls and encouraged buy-to-lets.

"if struggling workers can't afford to live in cities then why should the poor"

I don't think most people In the UK actually want to live in central London - they would rather have a house with a garden.

Central London might be expensive, and it is handy for the theatre, but if you don't have any money, it's not actually that nice, HB or no HB.

There have been caps until now in London too - it is just that the LHA calculations more accurately reflected actual rents of the local bottom 50% of properties. Some months back, in Camden, for example, that was revised downwards, shaving a hundred pounds or so off the maximum. The new moves slice another £200 or so off. There is nothing you can get in this area below the proposed cap.