After reading about the Tory housing sell off - what is the difference between Local Authority and Housing Association?

[Pipbin]

Just that really.
Are Local Authority houses plain and simple council houses? So who is the Housing Association and why do two groups like that exist alongside each other?

Local Authority housing is owned by the LA which is the same thing as the Council.

I think Housing Associations are 'third sector' organisations, so neither private nor public sector, such as charities and not-for-profit organisations. I'm not sure how Cameron can make them sell off their stock tbh.

Our council moved all its housing stock to a HA. It was something to do with the fact that the HA could keep all the revenue from rent whereas the council had to pass some of it on to central government. I'm not too sure about how it all works, but I remember reading something about it in the local press. The council had to get a certain proportion of tenants to vote in favour of the proposal, and they were really pushing them to approve it.

In my area all the "council" houses were handed over to Housing Associations to manage and own. Housing Associations are not for profit organisations tasked with managing existing stock and building new homes. In my area HAs and Councils do not coexist regarding provision of housing. They might elsewhere.

The big problem with this policy will be deciding which Housing Association stock is the most valuable (probably all in a small more exclusive area) and managing all the disgruntled people in private rented accommodation who are probably paying a higher rent with no right to buy and no hope of getting a Housing Association property. Then there is the perennial problem of getting planning permission to build new homes so there will be a massive delay between selling off (and that assumes the tenants can/wish to raise a mortgage) and building new homes. Hard working people in the private rented sector will be fuming at other renters getting a discount on the price and the right to buy. There will be lots of unhappy people!

Thank you for your answers.
So for the tenant HA and LA are much the same thing?

I disagree with the selling off of council houses. We need more of them, not less.

Now I know this is going to sound like sour grapes, but it isn't. I own my house, yet my neighbours either side are LA. Why should they be able to buy their house at a discount but I had to pay full market rates?

Can someone clear something up for me? Is this policy solely for existing HA tenants to buy the property they rent? Will it be optional? Or will the HA be able to sell a house and kick out tenants if they don't want to/can't afford to buy the property?

I live in a London borough and there are both council/LA homes and HA homes. I live in a 1950s council block. Council tenants have secure tenancies, while HA tenants have mostly assured tenancies. Both are fairly secure, but there are some instances where secure tenancies have tighter securities and rights. For example, with council housing you have the legal right to pass on your tenancy to your spouse. With HA tenancies, you can only assign a tenancy if the HA agrees to it. Both HA flats and council flats are let through the council list which has a bidding system.

Around here, HA rents tend to be slightly higher than council rents (or significantly higher in some cases). My council rent is £110pw. A flat in the same building at private rent is £410pw. A HA flat in the same street is £300pw. But HA flats are often newer and better maintained, so a lot of people bidding prefer to go for HA flats over council, especially if RTB is unlikely to affect them and if their rent is covered by HB. HAs are building lots of new flats in this area, but there have only been a handful of new council flats built - they are mostly 1930s-1970s. HAs are also building a lot of mixed tenure apartment buildings, where some flats are for private sale at market rates and some are shared ownership (mostly sold to professional public sector workers like teachers) and some charged at social rent. So the neighbours are more likely to be professionals than those on a council estate.

Delilah my understanding is that yes it's for existing HA renters to buy the home they currently live in. It will be optional for the tenant to take up their right to buy if they meet the qualifying criteria and can get the finance. The HA can't just kick people out to sell the property to someone else.
There is one bit of the policy which is a bit fuzzy about selling off the biggest or most valuable top tier of HA properties but I'm not sure how that could work.

There is one bit of the policy which is a bit fuzzy about selling off the biggest or most valuable top tier of HA properties but I'm not sure how that could work

I don't get that either. I think the idea is that if they become free then they will be able to sell them off rather than put new tenets in them.
Does this mean that they will be able to sell them on the open market to anyone. Will they sell them at market rates?

Thanks giddy! I've always been anti selling of social housing anyway. The bit about selling off most expense properties freaks me. We live in a HA place in a lovely little village in a very sought after area - most houses are rented through the Estate (feudal!) but the few that sell average about 950,000k so to my
Mind, location makes us a valuable property!

I think they can sell them to the tenants . That is the current discussion on the radio and it is a continuation of the right to buy but extending it to HA stock. If people cannot afford to buy their £1m HA home even with a discount, then no sales! If there are pressures on the availability of land, the new houses will cost a lot to build. There are also problems using brownfield sites. The clear up costs can be huge. Will the sales receipts cover this? This policy is all about wooing a few voters