Council housing query

[user13842]

When there is a council housing shortage, why do Council’s not manage those living in the homes they have better? For example, I know of someone who lives on their own in a 3-bed council house in my area as their children have now left home. I also know of a family of 4 (2 parents, 2 children) who are living in a small 2 bed council flat. I appreciate this won’t cater for everyone but why do Council’s not routinely check up on who they are housing in what and encourage swaps where appropriate so that everyone is housed according to their needs? Appreciate it isn’t as straightforward as all that but surely it would be relatively easy to create a system to flag suitable swaps when they came up based on regular checks on circumstances.

I also know of a couple who were in council housing for a couple of years despite suddenly earning a lot of money and was very surprised the Council didn’t do regular checks on this to identify those who could afford private renting and move them on for those in need.

A lot of the problem is that 'council houses' (now often owned by housing associations after the council sold them off) historically gave 'life time tenancies' so you cannot evict the tenant except for anti social behaviour , non payment of rent etc. My dad is currently alone in a 4 bedroom house, aged 87 and won't even consider moving unless the housing association can meet a long list of criteria. He can't be 'made' to move (we asked as the house is much too big and he's falling a lot) so the housing association will have to wait until he ends up in care or similar.

One answer might be to do what happened in DMIL’s Close. It was a regiment Close where men disabled in the war and their families were housed at a social rent. As the families grew up and left home and the women were widowed, each house was turned into two self-contained flats, thus freeing up one house for a new family. This meant that no one had to leave the area and the support of their neighbours.

Yep. Took me ELEVEN years to get my exchange!

Yes. You have benefitted from affordable housing for your family after sadly losing your private rented home and being in need. Your current/future circumstances would mean you no longer need the space you have, which you appear to acknowledge anyway given you have said you are requesting a swap to a smaller property. With the current shortage, there is definitely another family out there in need of your larger house and make use of that space just as you did when you initially moved in. You would still be housed by the council/HA on the basis you are eligible (which it sounds as though you are) and it would be minimal number of moves, perhaps only one. From PPs views, I have realised Council’s/HAs should really be stepping up to facilitate these swaps rather than make it difficult for those in housing to do so on their own. They need to step up in that regard. And also invest in housing (the age old problem) so there are more smaller homes to assist this.

A home is what you make it, whether that’s forever or for several years. I have moved many times as a child and an adult. I’ve always made my current place my home.

My late mother wanted to downsize from her 3 bed contacted her council they offered her a one bed in a multi storey where the lifts were always breaking down. It was in a really rough area about an hour from all her friends. She didn't drive and was in her seventies. Quite frankly she didn't want to be isolated in her home for weeks on end.

This is a fair point - other PPs have also suggested that there needs to be more investment/focus on the smaller properties to allow a swap system to properly work. Lots of issues with social housing. Interesting your mother was offered a home though, lots of people saying their council/HAs made them do all the work if they wanted to downsize.

Now when they do the next inspection it wont pass so they will be back and forth earning ££££££££ for each call out.

This seems to be the way all HAs operate - the money gets spent but it’s disappearing into back packets and the buildings fall further into disrepair. No wonder the HAs have to charge so much for their shared ownership properties.
And then there’s the service charges…

It’s next to impossible to raise a complaint with the Ombudsman, so the whole situation is just a festering mess.

They were desperate for 3 bedroom homes for families,they still are, but they really didn't have smaller properties that were suitable for her. Interestingly they have since knocked down a lot of the high rise blocks and replaced them with low rise.buildings

Most council tenants have a secure tenancy so can’t be forced out without a court order after breaching tenancy conditions. Most councils do offer priority to people wanting to downsize. It’s mostly older people who are under occupying and they don’t want to move into flats. They want a bungalow which there aren’t that many of.

There is also the Under Occupancy charge for those on Housing Benefit where their benefit is reduced if they are under occupying.

Yep I mentioned breaking lifts upthread Point proven!

I don't think people moving from SH to private rent will be particularly productive long term.
Private rent is unstable, expensive and isn't regulated enough when it comes to repairs and maintenance - meaning you're moving people from fairly priced and stable accommodation that should be (that's another story) fit for purpose, to more expensive, poorly maintained and lack of security. There's restrictions on things like putting up pictures and having children or pets - fine I think for short term lets that people need, but unnecessarily restrictive for long term lets that will be needed to meet the needs of those moving from SH.

That's going to create problems as private rents rise more and more, people are evicted for whatever reason they can be when a landlord wants more money or to sell, and can't find or afford anything else and end up back on the SH register - all of which could have been avoided if they'd stayed in the SH in the first place.

Private renting needs to be stable and done professionally without these 'accidental' hobhy landlords that need to sell when they realise it's not all about just filling your bank account and that you do need to be proactive and deliver more than bricks and mortar. Run as proper businesses that recognise they're delivering a service, in return for what is not an insignificant amount of money.

If you sort out the private sector and it works for everyone, not just the landlords then more people will be not just willing, but able to use it, freeing up spaces for those that aren't able.

I would be, but I'm not giving up a secure tenancy where I'm dealt with somewhat professionally (there are exceptions to that, it's not all moonlight and roses) have fair rent, can put a picture on the wall and have a dog or cat, and generally live without fear that something will change in my LLs life that will then upend mine. Spent 10 years of that, with a child in tow, and I'm not volunteering for it again!

Totally agree, but Labour won't rock HAs boat! The real issue is why costs for all rentals are not properly controlled and developers / councils / HAs are destroying huge amounts of old council/ social tenure and focusing on affordable (don't make me laugh re. the unaffordability of affordable) and market rent, whilst taking huge dividends and HA Directors taking salaries of 6 figures!!

@housethatbuiltme where would you draw the line though? I was involved (through work) with a family consisting of a couple and 9 kids. Naturally it wasn’t easy to find social housing for such a large family, but eventually they got an 8 bedroom house. Heavily subsidised because, of course, it was a massive house, and they had a very low income. This was a long time ago, so all those kids will have grown up and moved out by now. Do you think it’s OK for a couple (or possibly even one person if one of the parents has died) to occupy an 8 bedroom council house? It just feels wrong to me.

An SH tenant already in a tenancy cannot be held responsible or expected to make way for a couple who have 9 kids. Its ridiculous
Im child free by choice but it seems to me we are expected to be the "village" and take all the shit bits re. kids but get none of the perks

1. IN SH? you should give it up to make way for someone with kids.
2. You need to work an extra shift (Christmas shift) Jane has got no childcare again.
3. oh shit I didnt realise Johnny had nits. Never mind its not the end of the world Just go to Boots and get some Hedrin.
4. the social housing model that thinks you dont have to wear and wash and dry clothes if you dont have kids. (eyes up the washing lines hanging around the flat)

I know this view might not be appreciated but I think we (in terms of working for Social housing providers ) need to start bringing back consequences and evictions for those that abuse the privilege of a affordable home and who don't pay rent or cause ASB on a large scale.

That would free up and allocate housing to tenants that can actually sustain it and appreciate it. The amount of arrears I deal with is extortionate and the consequences for them is so minimal it's laughable if it wasn't so shocking.

And what happens to them? To their kids?

Not saying the behaviour should be tolerated but to save the cost of their HA rent you'll kick them out so councils have to house them in emergency accommodation which is likely extortionate private HMOs or even hotels? Or house them in the private sector that is triple the amount of rent in HA?

I do understand what you're saying. There are a lot of people in social housing who do not respect it or appreciate it but keeping them in low cost housing is probably the best thing economically.

What about their neighbours?

What about their new neighbours if you evict them?

They don't just dissappear down a hole when evicted, they will have to go somewhere else you know?

There needs to be consequences for their behaviour, absolutely, but evicting someone doesn't fix their behaviour it just passes it on to the next person at a huge expense.

Councils aren't allowed to force people to downsize, unfortunately imo. In my area 45% of council properties are under occupied. The council have tried everything to persuade tenants to downside, including offering them cash, all to very little affect. One small close locally has six three bed houses (two have been bought) and six two bed flats on the other side of the road. Five of the three bed houses are occupied by a single person and one has a couple. The flats all have families. Nothing the council can do to make them swap.

Speaking of expense it cost DH £200 to fix the door of his mobility scooter shed when the druggies in the next block tried to break into it

I lived on a council.estate for 17 years. You don't have to tell me about antisocial behaviour!

It doesnt just come from the tenants though. I was at a friends last Thursday when scaffolders were dismantling scaffolding but were throwing it to the ground instead of coming back down the ladder with it, narrowly missing the car. there is a very small patch of grass under the building..........the rest is a car park.

Yes I agree.

Existing Council/housing association rents have been falling in real terms for a long time. In 2015 George Osborne scrapped the CPI+1% annual increase formula, and replaced it with a -1% cut each year. The aim was to reduce the level of housing benefit being paid, but it eroded the financial capacity of these organisations.

A few years later (I think 2020?) policy went back to CPI+1%, but in 2023, when inflation was at 10%+, rent increases in the social sector were capped at 7%. It was supposed to protect low income tenants from unaffordable rent increases, but it was another cut in real terms to affordable housing providers' finances, when all their other costs were increasing. The result has been much less money available to maintain or renovate existing homes, and barely any money at all to build non grant funded new affordable houses.

Existing Council/housing association rents have been falling in real terms for a long time.

The service charges have been rising at the same time.

It is the corruption within Housing Associations which needs to be addressed and tackled.