Family wants me to give up my social house and I'm not - wwyd?

[spicy2001]

I currently rent a three bedroom social housing property and I live on my own. Most of the rent is paid for by universal credit and I have to pay 25% bedroom tax which is very affordable to me which is for two rooms and a shortfall of £30.55p.

I did speak to a housing officer and they said I am legally allowed to occupy it, and as long as I pay the rent on time, tax and shortfall, then everything is fine. I don't feel guilty for occupying this three bedroom house, it's been my home since I was born.

Recently, I noticed that my family were talking a lot about me downsizing. I asked why are they talking about me downsizing? They said because I don't need this property and have to downsize.

I explained I'm legally allowed to stay here, this is my property and not yours. I get that I don't need this property but I'm staying here because I'm allowed too. I found out that they actually joined a site called "home swapper" and a site called "glass bob" my sibling set up an account using her email address to advertise my property. If I'm correct, I've never joined these so I don't know 100% but they're platforms where you can do mutual exchange and advertise your property.

I phoned my housing association and explained the situation, they've started an investigation and they are speaking to various departments to see if they can do it from the end to see if they can do anything as they approved it but they don't know if they can disapprove it.

The other day a tenant from another part of my cul-de-sac came round and told me she knows I'm downsizing and she has a friend whose currently living in a one bedroom flat with his wife and they've got a one year old daughter and another baby on the way. I explained to this person my family have been trying to get me to downsize to a one bedroom flat and I'm not actually looking to downsize so I won't swap with them but told her I do sympathize with their situation.

She told all my neighbours about her friend and now all the neighbours are peed off at me because I'm not downsizing. My family are also peed of that I'm not downsizing. As far as I'm concerned I don't care as I have the legal right to stay here for as long as I like or want.

I just wanted to know though what would you do if you was in my situation?

I take every OP at face value. I don't care if they're a troll. If I want to share my opinion online I will. Other people reading threads can benefit from the advice too. Mumsnet is social media, it's entertainment. I don't come on here thinking there's all these desperate people in horrible situation who needs my advice. They may be genuine or they may be making stuff up for entertainment themselves. It doesn't matter to me either way. Reading and posting on Mumsnet is something I do to kill time.

The state of the housing system is dire. Nobody should be given a home for life at taxpayers expense, especially when it is passed from parent to offspring like that. Yes legally allowed, as wrong as that is, but I'd question the character of someone who has no guilt at exploiting this - while also having the subsidised rent paid by the taxpayer. What a peculiar way to live.

Absolutely agree. It's a ridiculous system. I'm happy to own my home. Achieved by working for it. Not by tax payers money.

How is it at the expense of the taxpayer and how is it subsidised? Not everyone is on housing benefit.

As I said unthread, mortgages have been subsidised for years by low interest rates.

*upthread

What utter rubbish, subsidisation hasn’t taken place.

To keep interest rates low is a way of subsidising mortgages at the expense of savers. Lots of people live in zombie households where, if the interest rates were to rise (which they are predicted to) the mortgages would become unaffordable. The rates have been kept artificially low so that houses aren’t repossessed

If I was you I’d probably downsize if it’s just you - seems pretty selfish if there are people
with families who have to live in one room. Unless you’re willing to pay proper rent …!!! Assume not

It’s not “proper” rent in the private rental market. It’s highly inflated rent. That’s why people are so bitter and twisted about social housing which keeps rents at uninflated levels

You're taking a bit of a leap there.

A person who owns their own home with spare bedrooms is no more entitled to those spare bedrooms than the person who rents through social housing.

If people with money and property were a little less focused on differentiating between the deserving & undeserving poor then we'd have fewer social problems - and other countries wouldn't be condemning the UK for inhumane politics.

If the mention of "private property" triggers you then it sounds like you're perhaps a little too defensive.

@007DoubleOSeven

A person who owns their own home with spare bedrooms is no more entitled to those spare bedrooms than the person who rents through social housing.

How on earth did you post the above with a straight face! 🤣

Of course they bloody are! They OWN
the house. We have two spare bedrooms because we bought a house where our grown up children and any future grandchildren can stay. My house, my rooms. Nobody else is subsidizing it.

Saying someone who bought their own property has no more right to it's use than a social housing renter is one of the most ridiculous comments I've ever read on MN.

Nobody is subsidising social housing either.

Do not give up your tenancy and ignore the "morally wrong" contingent.

Why should people who refrain from pumping out kids they can't afford to house be relegated to 1bedroom or bedsits? So that those who had more kids than they could adequately house can take over her home?

She might need a room as an office, for crafts, for guests, storage, whatever. Not to mention potentially a future spouse or kids. She shouldn't have to downsize because others made imprudent choices, or because her "needs" are considered second-class because she's childfree.

Saying someone who bought their own property has no more right to it's use than a social housing renter is one of the most ridiculous comments I've ever read on MN

That isn't what I said.

I simply disagree that the op isn't entitled to continue to legally occupy her home because she has 2 spare bedrooms and it's social housing.

Legally, those who own private property obviously have the legal entitlement of that property and exclusive use of it - that's obvious.

But the debate on here isn't about the law, is it? It's about whether the op is morally wrong for not leaving the property. I don't believe she is.

It's not her responsibility that the government hasn't provided enough habitable homes - any more than it is yours or mine. Those outside governed who bear any responsibility at all are those who voted in the cuts.

The law aside, essentially one human isn't worth more than any other. That means that one human isn't entitled to more of anything than anyone else.

If you look back at the quote history I was responding to, a pp said that it was people like the op "hogging resources" who were to blame for the inequalities in our society. Which is ridiculous, its not the fault of those without. The people with private property to dispose of are the ones who have hogged resources - whether that's land, money or influence. Now that probably doesn't mean your average Mr or Ms Bloggs who saved and took out a mortgage for their 3 bed semi - but those multi millionaire and billionaires who hog resources and deny everyone else? Absolutely.

Often, it's worth reading comments as part of the context they've been given, which is why the quote history exists. And of course, if you did and still disagree with me then that's fine - no skin off my nose.

However, it's not going to change my opinion that its the politically & economically powerful who are chiefly responsible for what's wrong with our society and the op.

*and NOT the op, that should say

It’s a bit like saying the poor people have nicked all the money when in reality it’s the government and their rich mates. The govt don’t want more houses to be built because it would drive down the price of them and that wouldn’t suit them would it

Why should OP? Her parents paid the rent from post tax earnings presumably for at least a couple of decades if she's in her twenties, and now she is paying the rent herself from post tax earnings. Collectively they've more than paid what the house cost to build. As for paperwork, as she's an assured tenant she has a legal leasehold occupancy for life. So financially and legally she has as much right to her home as you do to yours. Therefore if she is obliged to hand it over to those less fortunate, so must you be with yours.

If you're not, then she isn't either.

It is not what the house cost to build. If you buy home insurance, you know that rebuilding cost is small compared to the cost of the land. They are legally entitled to live in the house (much is made of the law, which needs reform), but they do not OWN it. OP paid a fraction of its worth now. She does not OWN it.

Well nobody OWNS any house really. We're all going to die and mostly our houses remain standing afterwards. Unless you get into some kind of Fall Of The House Of Usher situation, but that's kind of niche. OWNing just means you can occupy it for your lifespan, if you wish. Same as OP can.

How many years did you pay your mortgage for? Twenty? Twenty five? Same time frame as OP's parents and her have paid rent for.

If she's obliged to hand over her home after that, so are you.

They are!
Via taxes.

Actually they're subsidising private landlords far more. £28bn a year at last count.

Owner occupiers are also subsidised - help to buy, LISA, stamp duty holidays, the lot.

How many intensive care beds would £28bn buy?

Yep, forgot about Help to Buy.

I wouldn't ever consider giving up a housing association property for private rent. If you were going to do that, moving and downsizing anyway, it would be better to get a swap to another affordable home as it gives you the security of a home for life.

Ignore people pretending you should downsize. It's not your fault successive governments sold of affordable housing, nor that they refuse to put sensible rent caps in place, nor that landlords use tenants to pay their mortgages for them. If people with larger properties downsize, they're giving in to these policies and supporting the idea that it's ok to expect people to leave the homes they were born in, ok to sell off our housing, ok to pretend people who own second homes shouldn't therefore be offering their spare houses instead to families living in overcrowded, mouldy rooms owned by unscrupulous landlords and let out to councils because they're short of social housing.

This has to be a joke? Social housing does not exist to give people a spare room for 'crafts', jesus christ