Woman with 1 child being evicted from her 6 bedroom council house ....

[Disenchanted]

Im really torn over this.

It was in my local paper.

Obviously as someone who waited 3 years with 2 children for a 3 bedroomed council house, who had to sleep in a single bed with DH, DS1 and have DS2 in a cot next to us in my mums box room I think its right that this woman should be asked to leave her home in order to house a family that needs it.

There are currently 507 'large' families In South Manchester waiting for a 6 bedroomed home. All who actully need 6 bedrooms unlike this woman who on;ly has 1 child.

However that is her family home. It was her mothers home who had many children and was justified living there, the tenancy was passed onto this lady when her mother died and now there are only her and her son years later.

The reason Im divided is that my granny lives alone in a 3 bedroomed house, she has lived there for over 40 years and by ratios if a 2 bedroomed house is too big for two then on the same principle they could move my Gran out of her 3 bedroomed house.

But I dont think they should IYKWIM. Shes lived there years.

When I needed a house I complained constantly (to myself not the council obviously) about all the old widows/ widowers living in 'family homes' but they have every right to be there.

Or do they?

Should 1 person be allowed to stay in a 3 bed house?

Should this woman and son be allowed to stay in a 6 bedroomed house?

She has been offered a 3 bedroomed house BTW, but not in her 'area'.

To me it seems obvious the woman should be moved but then where does it end IYKWIM.

We'll have 4 kids in a 3 bed, had 3 in a 2 bed before and it wasn't a huge issue BUT have come across famillies (one aprticualr one in mind that I used to work ewith) where there were a large number of kids- 7 iirc- and the reason they were in councila ccomodation was that they were in hiding after being in a refuge for a long time, Mum couldn't get help with childcare because if she did ask her family they would tell her H where they were . So it's important there are some council houses available in larger sizes so that innocents like this can have protection- 4 bed not exactly huge for them!. I know people typically think of the on-benefits-had-loads-of-kids brigade but there are so many variations of eprsonal circumstances out there that need to be provided for.

Do remember (have related this on here before) having to fillin a report for a family trying to get a bigger house for their family of 5 (3 bed) and trying not to PMSl as it was the same house my nan raised 16 kids in......

Somebody mentioned research about elderly poeple dying shortly after being moved, I remember thatresearch very clearly from my nursing college days, it was within a year i think, and it applied to post-retirement. If this system is going to work, it needs to be built into contracts so that poelpe can be aware when they take on a tenancy, and people need moving in their 50's or so, not when they become vulnerable. There also needs to be clear guidelines on adult children who co-occupy (not all can afford to move out these days), and awareness of the importance of providing suitable housing post move, not just shoving in flats that will leave elderly people housebound and immobile.

"Some people just get handed shit and have to make the best of it."

I vote Peachy for quote of the week for that one. So true. It's easy to judge when sittimg way up on your pedastal, I wish people wouldn't.

Message withdrawn

There are many people who own houses who are overcrowded and may never have the option to be able to move to a bigger house.
I am not knocking anyones plight that is in council housing just saying that it happens in the private sector as well.

A lot of the problem is the new houses that are built now are tiny..i mean we have looked at 1 house a 3bed, we need to put 2 children in each room so needs to be big enough to fit bunks in! The 1 room was so small there was no way you would have fitted bunks in it. And also they have made kitchens small, with no dining rooms so no where to eat a meal round a table. They should have a kitchen diner or kitchen and a dining room, we are told time and time again about the benefits of eating meals together, yet they build houses with no means to do so! Nobody in mine or misdees situation wants a mansion or to be handed huge houses just 1 that provides basic normal life for our children and in a condition that we can live in without being ill from it!! I for 1 dont intend on having any more children so the next house we move to will probably be home for a long time, at least until thec children move on and then i will be looking for something smaller, to allow families that need it to have my house! I think it only fair!!

couple days ago i was in the bank in long queue overheard two mean talking. his mum 70+ sold house because her street is now full of asian families, and they knock on door and ask them to sell their house i could not believe my ears. apparently they really abused her and broke her windows etc... obviously its house owned by her but she is got no choice to move as she s no peace.
sorry its OT.

DforDiva this sort of thing makes me angry..i am not racist at all i have good friends that are asian and a lot of them lovely people. But its the minority like this that make it difficult for people to accept them and gives the decent ones a bad name!! Could the police not do anything to help this lady..its just not on is it..it always seems that the victims are the ones that have to suffer and the villians get away with it.

Bitcat, are you saying the house had a bedroom that you couldn't fit a bed in? If you could fit a bed in, why couldn't you fit bunkbeds?

When my mum and dad moved into their newly built council house 35 years ago, there was 6 blocks of flats and about 20 semi-detached houses and then 16 one bedroom maisonette types which were supposed to be specifically for old people.
When my parents moved in, they were given 1 of the 3 bedroom semis. All the others were given to older couples with no families left at home. 2 of the couples didn't even use the upstairs rooms as they couldn't manage the stairs. All the couples with children were put in the flats.
The flats have now been knocked down, all except my mums semi has been bought and all the 1 bedroom flats which were for old people have been given to young people living on their own. .

Saltire I think the thing 35 years ago was that houses were still being built and the council houses weren't under such pressure; that's around the time my parents got theirs (2 weeks before I was born) and once they could confirm pregnancy had passed six months they automatically got a 3 bedroomed house (most were 3 bedroomed on our estate). very different now, and the selling off is the biggest cause imo.

I do feel for some one who has been in a house for years being "turfed out", but having worked in the social care field I am so aware of the terrible council housing crisis in this country. The service users that I worked with, often faced an indefinite wait, just a hopeless situation with people in real need being left effectively homeless.
So because of this, I am in favour of people being moved to more suitable housing.

I generally think people should be moved to housing which is an appropriate size and condition to meet their needs. I can see the emotional pangs if say an elderly person has lived a long time in that house, but it still doesn't seem right that another family might be in cramped accommodation when a single person or smaller family is in a too-large house.

It all needs to be done very sensitively though, and consideration given to things like trying to keep that person in their local area if the neighbourhood is important to them, and trying to make the move happen at the 'right' stage - it is obviously easier both emotionally and practically for an older person or couple to move to a smaller home in their sixties or early seventies than leaving it until they are much older when it does start to look more cruel.

Juulle only a small toddler bed would have fitted in it and nothing else would have gone in!! We measured it up, our bunks wouldnt have fitted and we cant afford to buy new beds!

They shouldn't be able to call it a 3-bed house, should they, if you can't fit a bed in. Isn't that against some sort of sales regulations somewhere?

For my money, she should move - but only when she is offered something acceptable in return. She should, on no account, be forced to move (not sure if this is actually what was implied but plenty of posters have voted in favour of it).

She will have taken over the tenancy because she was lawfully entitled to do so. If she has continued to pay her rent and otherwise adhere to the conditions of her tenancy agreement then it would be quite unacceptable for the local authority to renege on that. I am inclined to doubt that they would have a legal leg to stand on if they tried. As the OP (I think it was) said, if that was permissible, where do you draw the line?

FFS, tenants who underoccupy social housing are not principally to blame for the lack of affordable housing.

There are a number of things I?d like to comment on;

?... 8ftx9ft or 8ftx7ft? thats the size of the bedrooms here. they are the smallest i have seen. ..?

We have three bedrooms, ours is the largest at 7ft 8in X 10ft; DS?s is 6ft 4in X 6ft; GS?s is 5ft 6in X 5ft 8in

Someone commented that they know a family on benefits who get their mortgage paid ? WRONG ? it is not possible to get your mortgage paid on benefits ? only the interest and then only after somewhere between 6 and 18 months after they go on benefits (thus accruing arrears that are likely to result in them being evicted).

Perhaps the person who said ?...a mortgage is possible for most people ...? would like to tell me how we can get a mortgage. On our income we would be able to have a £75,000 mortgage. The cheapest house I have seen for sale since we moved down here was one over two years ago and was priced at £160,000 ? the same houses are now going for well over £180,000

The same person also said ?... A more positive attitude may help, you could tighten up more, take extra work, try to save for a deposit on a house?. We are left with £20 a month after paying all the bills on our best month, buying the cheapest house available on our income would mean that we would need a all necessary fees, etc and a deposit somewhere between £135,000 and £140,000 - at £20 per month (taking into account the months when we do not have the £20 spare) we should be able to afford a house by the year 2078, assuming that house prices do not rise by then and that at the ages of 114 and 117 ? we still work and could still get a mortgage.

And as for ?... it is not so difficult to rent privately...? I don?t know about the rest of the country, but here around 90% of private landlords do not want children, and/or pets. 95% do not want people on housing benefit (we get £8 per week housing benefit - £32 per month towards our rent of £650 a month) yet that disqualifies us from being able to move. And anyway, our rent is very cheap compared to the rest of the market around here. A friend?s rent has just increased from £750 a month to £825 ? the house she rents is damp, has no central heating, only an emersion heater for the water and the result of her appeal to the rent adjudicator ... the amount is in-line with market rents.

Oh and the same Local authority who believe that £825 is a market rent for my friends house, do not take £125 of our rent into account when they work out our housing benefit - even though the guy who did the inspection said that £625 was very cheap for the house.

By the way if people don't get benefits council housing isn't subsidised - rents are set at a level which covers the costs. The reason the rents are still lower than the private sector is that if you have to pay rent in the private sector you will be expected to cover profits for your landlord, perhaps an estate agent as well, and of course your landlord's mortgage will need to make a profit for the bank!

I've never been a council tenant, I always assumed I couldn't possibly qualify - I was lucky enough to have a mum who was in a good financial position and could help me with a deposit/act as a guarantor. I wouldn't have needed the guarantee about a year later but couldn't possibly have bought then - prices shot up in the 18 months after August 1998 really scarily.

As a result of my good luck, my mum being well off etc, and timing (luck), my mortgage is far less than a social housing rent for a property the same size in this area. I can't afford to move in London though, my escape plan is to return to Leeds - I can't earn nearly as much but it's the only way we'll ever get a 3 bedroom property and I can probably do it with a really small mortgage so low earnings won't matter so much.

I think she should move but the Council should have made an effort to get her into a 2 bedroom property in the same area.

11 years ago I worked for another London Council, just after I'd been one of many celebrating finally getting rid of a Tory government. My job included typing letters for lawyers dealing with homelessness/rehousing related litigation - cases of people suing their way up the housing list - I'll never forget the letter saying, in much more legal language, your client has been awarded as many points as possible for her circumstances (disability, overcrowding, vulnerability, you name it!) and we agree she needs a 3 bedroom property. She's no 1,423 on the list for a property that size. An awful, hopeless situation and you can imagine that things haven't got any better. I can understand why people do RTB and move to a bigger property in a cheaper area in that situation, but there's got to be another answer.

i don't think anyone should be made to move unless they can find something in the same area or a nicer one.

No-one likes the idea of "forcing" people to move from their homes. How would any of you like to be told you have xx months to get out ? However, so far as social housing is concerned, and especially given the huge shortfall in stock, I think you have no other choice but to be somewhat hard hearted about it and ensure what stock there is is redistributed according to need whenever possible.

Working on the same principle of need, I also feel that existing council tenants should also be periodically reviewed to see if they could actually afford to rent privately, or even get a mortgage. I don't know quite how that'd be done mind you .... I suppose by using P60s etc.

Before everyone gets up in arms about that suggestion, please believe me when I say that I know the vast majority of council tenants wouldn't be able to afford any such thing and I therefore mean no offence. However, I have also personally known 2 sets of tenants who absolutely took the piss and when I say "know" I mean "know" - straight from the horse's mouth and all that, not hearsay. The 1st person I'm thinking of was a single bloke I knew in the early 1990s who inherited the tenancy of a 2 bed council flat from his grandma (IIRC) .... but he worked in the city, and could afford to buy his own house, which he did, and then he sublet the council flat at private market rates making a profit out of something which should have been given to people who really needed it. I lost touch with him years ago so don't know how it ended up. He could still be doing it for all I know.

The 2nd example is a couple I used to know - who told me what their household income was - and, not only was it 3x mine (and I could afford a small mortgage at the time), it was also, at the time, definitely enough to buy a similar property in the area they lived in. They decided however to do a right to buy, surprise surprise .... which I found doubly immoral in the greater scheme of things. They not only blocked a needy family when they could have afforded to be elsewhere, but then they also took a house out of the system as well (though I know this wasn't illegal). I presume this couple were given the house at a time when they did genuinely need it but am I really so wrong in thinking that once they found their feet they should have let someone else have the benefit they no longer (strictly speaking) qualified for ? This couple actually told me that they'd be "mad" to buy as their increased outgoings would mean they would no longer be able to go abroad, have new cars (plural) every couple of years etc ......... meanwhile, for the sake of their bloody holiday, another local family was undoubtedly living in a hostel.

I accept that a very very small minority of tenants will be like those I've just described but when the housing stock is so desperately low, surely the authorities would be justified in checking not only that maximum use is being made of available bedrooms, but also that properties aren't being blocked by people who could meet their housing needs privately ?? Even if it's a drop in the ocean, reclaiming a handful of properties is better than nothing ?

Thats what i think too, juuule but with the council they seem to be able to do as they please..and then have a go when we turn the house down! Wouldnt have been any better off than i am now, only paying more rent for 3 bed that i cannot fit into. Looked on site today at houses only 2 3 beds and both will only except people with 2 children..i have 4 so wouldnt get a look in. Another week goes by, summat will turn up i'm sure!

Catsmother i do agree!! there is no way we would or could get a mortgage! As partner only earns 10.000/11.000 per yr and with 4 kids to feed we just wouldnt be able to do it! not right now anyway maybe when my dd2 goes to nursery in jan09, i will get a job and we could possibly start thinking about saving a little, to see if we could in the future. I'd love to have my own house.

Even if you own your own home sometimes you have to downsize. We used to own a 4 double bedroomed Edwardian house in South East London. My husband's business had to be sold for very little money to keep his employees in jobs and we had to sell up and downsize to a much smaller house in Somerset where property is much cheaper. I did not want to leave my home but needs must.

Having come to the conclusion that we had to move we have made the most of it and are enjoying living away from the hassle of London.

Believe me larry5, its no fun in our house and was very hard after i had dd2,as the housing situation really didnt help with sleep problems which led to post natal depression for me and time of work which made money worries worse. Thankfully i got passed this although it is still quite hard sometimes when the children cant have friends over and such like because we just dont have the room! I mean to have a 6yo and 2yr sleeping in your room with you isnt ideal and has put huge pressure on us as a couple but we are just hoping that we get a bigger house soon, just 1 more bedroom and a kitchen big enough to put a table in so we can have a meal together..thats all we want..not much when we both work very hard!! Larry5 do you like your new house and did it take long for you and your family to adjust. Must admit i'm not looking forward to actually having to pack up and move everything but as you say needs must and the children need some normality..bless them they are so patient..mind they've never known any different but of course they see the difference when they go to friends houses!