Council vs Private Rent Unfair

[UnfairSociety]

Hello

I have a few friends I met in London living in a council/housing association in zone 1/2 and paying lower than the market rate. They had the apartment many years ago but now earning way above average workers' salaries, yet the rent doesn't increase at a similar rate to the private sector.

For example, there is one bedroom apartment that only pays £600 a month. Another 2-bed rooms apartment only pays roughly £700 a month. Do taxpayers have to subsidise the remaining cost of their rent? One of the couples earns a combined salary of £90k per annum and pays this much rent? Note quality of the apartments is pretty good. I hear you they would put the home as a single tenant to earn extra income from their partner and also pay council tax at a 25% discount.

I feel sorry for those in the private sector living in s*tty quality homes and dealing with rogue landlords. Housing crises are a mess in London, and those rich council tenants should pay in line with the private sector or move elsewhere to allow those in need to live there.

Also, they get a massive discount if they buy their council house.

When the vastly overinflated rent is then covered by benefits because the tenants are unable to afford them otherwise (and are totally legitimately entitled to those benefits), all it would do is shift the pressure onto the benefits budget instead. As it is, the cost could go from say, 10,000 houses at £500 in benefit each to 10,000 at £1500 each - plus an additional 15,000 at £750 each where other working tenants find they're suddenly unable to afford the full cost and are now eligible for benefit. It could therefore increase the benefits bill from £5,000,000 to £15,000,000 + £11,250,000 = £26,250,000 in one go.

Strangely, the government isn't that keen upon handing local authorities additional millions in the form of those benefits.

Going round in circles with this…

Only because you think that the fact they could charge more to be in line with (extortionate) market rates is a subsidy.

That was never the point in the houses being built in the first place. At this point they are self sustaining.

The mental gymnastics people take to justify their jealousy towards council tenants is astounding, and a far cry from a few years back where those same people just looked down their noses at us.

However, you cannot argue against my statement that there is a subsidy/opportunity cost or whatever you want to dress it up as in the fact that through those reduced rents the gov/local authority is missing out on potential revenue that by virtue of market forces is available to them should they price according to the market. It is the tenant only who benefits from this, so it is a subsidy in kind.

Legally the rent is ringfenced for housing stock. No matter how much the council charge for rent it will not go towards the council's day-to-day spending on other services. Lack of local council funds is down to Government not council tenants.

I completely agree

Personally, I would have no problem with councils profiting from council housing as long as the rent was still very comfortably affordable. I would like to see massively more council housing, I think the fastest way to reduce poverty in the UK would be through much, much more social housing. If a small profit was achieved from each unit that that could be used to better fund services.
Councils need to build emergency prefabricated housing, it would more than pay for itself in no time and improve quality of life for millions of people.

And I say all that as a private LL myself.

Council and housing associations charge a fair and reasonable rent.

The problem is not that their rents are too low. It's that private rents are too high.

Where would the incentive be for those in council houses to work, if they run the risk of losing their homes once they earn above a certain amount? Given the lack of private rents, where would they go, as many in private rents won't be eligible for council homes due to earning to much?

If you want people to move out of social housing then the private rental market needs to be better regulated and those regulations need to be properly enforced. I moved to social housing a few years ago after decades of suffering in the private rental market. I would only consider moving back to the privately rented market if the houses were rent-free.

I would genuinely rather pay my £400 a month social rent than rent a cheaper private rented house.

Are people actually arguing that councils should change what a private landlord does (who needs to include mortgage costs when pricing rent) so they can make a profit? Making a profit off, what is in many cases, the people who can least afford it? And how would housing benefit work for these who claim?

The issue has never been social housing pricing - it's always been cheaper than private but the difference wasn't quite as stark as it is now. It's the rise in people snapping up houses/flats to let out, pricing many out the housing market. It wasn't helped by mortgages being given for, in some cases 7 x salary etc

People shouldn't need to own several houses etc

To lose their job 2 weeks later and require social housing again because they've dipped below the 'threshold' 😆

people will be constantly moving in and out!

Oh is it one of THOSE threads...

'Let them eat cake' eh, OP.

😁

Oh, I've got a counter suggestion....which I'm sure you will like (tongue in cheek).

I think we should ban/get rid of public (private) schools because they are subsidised in the form of tax breaks - and the money from this could be used to fund the state school system properly...

We'd save money with that - and would gain a different perspective i.e. we can't keep electing Eton Boys - to government as not only do they not know the price of bread etc but they keep inventing policies that harm people and families...

but then I'm sure that lots of people out there just want the peasants dead anyway...

The problem is the lack of council housing available for those who want it because of, among other things, the Tories right to buy scheme. No one should be allowed to buy public housing.

It’s also the free for all that is letting in England (not sure about other part of the U.K.) You could reset rents in one go buy taxing the shit out of any profit made by letting out more than one property. All the profiteering landlords would sell up.

I think it’s also the lack of stability/security that comes with private renting. At least with the council houses, you’re guaranteed a roof over your head as long as you keep up the (cheap) rent payments. But private renting - you’re paying double, sometimes triple, what people are paying in council houses and you’re living in fear that the landlord will decide to sell up.
i don’t think those in council houses should be turfed out when they start to earn X amount but I do this we need way more of them. Most people have been on the council list for decades and gotten themselves a place they’re now sorted for life. Trying to get on a list now? Almost impossible. Unless you’re homeless, they just won’t (can’t) help :(

we tried to just at least get on the list (we have 2 kids - I can’t afford to go back tvowork as the full time childcare would be more than I’d earn, and we are paying almost £1500 per month in rent for a 2 bed flat - which is the cheapest we could find!) but the council said no and declined our request to be on any kind of council house list. So now we’re in the hands of a landlord worrying about whether/when we’re going to be told they’re sellling and start the viewing process all over again, forever paying absolutely extortionate rent prices. Paying someone else’s mortgage in a home we can’t even properly decorate like our own.

I just want a stable, secure home for my babies. Unlike all our friends, we don’t have rich parents or inheritances, so we’ll never get on the property ladder. not a pity party, just frustration that we have no chance of having (enjoying) the rent prices that people in council houses do xx

I pay £400pcm for my two bed council flat. The market rent is not comparable, because private two bed flat rentals are not usually on large council estates. And besides, the market rent for a similar flat to mine locally is about the same as what I pay anyway.

My estate (as many were) was conceived in the 1940s/50s as a place with decent, affordable homes for working families. The idea was to create communities where people from all walks of life would live. The idea that you should be turfed out once you earn a fairly ok wage is preposterous - what happens to those communities then? And what would be the point of 'bettering yourself' and getting promoted to a job that pays over the threshold when you're going to lose your home if you do?

Council/HA rents are not unfair. Private rentals costs are. Insisting people lose their homes because you have to pay more rent than them is ridiculous. Campaign against RTB/extortionate private rents and for more decent, affordable social housing, instead. These are things which would benefit everyone.

Again, why have you reposted this?

Nothing like starting a goady thread and not coming back to it is there OP? What a sad life you must lead if this is your "entertainment".

I think it was a duplicate thread, but someone with agenda bumped it.

Social Housing has been destroyed by the Tories, so very few people can access the help they need.

If our economy carries on it's current crash course, there will be many homeless families who earn relatively good wages but who have had their home repossessed and can't afford private rent.

It fills me with dread to think of a generation of children facing the insecurity of homelessness.

Meanwhile there are a fuck tonne of people who have second homes and plenty of money in the bank. But nobody seems to find that unfair.

Oops, I didn't realise this was on the London board. Obviously my rent isn't £400pcm in London. When I lived there 25 years ago the rent on my bedsit was more than that!

Great idea lets look at the lowest income to solve the problem..

We all know more social housing needs building.

But blame the people who need the service.

Is it only people who can afford a mortgage can have some home security ?

£600 for a one bed? I'm in a 2 bed new build semi with big gardens & a driveway for £470

I don't agree that council housing should be retrospectively means tested. Not least because these things demand resources to administer that no doubt would exceed the revenue generated.

A las @mummybearcub2022 ! not everyone has enjoyed the pleasure of micro econ 101