paulb Posted March 23, 2013 Report Share Posted March 23, 2013 Not only that unless we stop people buying social housing after period time we are not going to have enough emergency housing for those in real genuine need locally, any locals that get into difficultly forget it, the housing list has gone or been supported to those comming from south . It is ill-informed comments like this that make my blood boil... I live in a council house. I have lived in it for more than 30 years. If I bought it, it would make absolutely no difference to anybody other than myself. Unless of course, you are suggesting that I should be forced to buy 'somewhere' in order that some needy(?) person could get somewhere to live.. sadly colin i suspect thats how its going to go. my family moved into a new council house in the slum clearances of the 1930s we were still there when they were pulled down in the late 90s. roughly 60 years of rent. and 4 generations lived there. cant see them allowing that anymore. but obviously buying would have made more sense if your normal worker could have got a mortgage then. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ariel Posted March 23, 2013 Report Share Posted March 23, 2013 Not only that unless we stop people buying social housing after period time we are not going to have enough emergency housing for those in real genuine need locally, any locals that get into difficultly forget it, the housing list has gone or been supported to those comming from south . It is ill-informed comments like this that make my blood boil... I live in a council house. I have lived in it for more than 30 years. If I bought it, it would make absolutely no difference to anybody other than myself. Unless of course, you are suggesting that I should be forced to buy 'somewhere' in order that some needy(?) person could get somewhere to live..It would make a difference, as you will, in due course - I'm sorry to say - pass away, at which time the house should be available for someone else. The problem with council house sales is they are heavily discounted, and what little money comes in for them doesn't go back to invest in housing. Therefore folk in Council houses not only get cheap rent, they get a massive leg up the property ladder, at the expense of rate/taxpayers. If sales were at market value and receipts ploughed back into housing, it might be fair. There has been nothing but profiteering on council house sales. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unlinkedstudent Posted March 23, 2013 Report Share Posted March 23, 2013 Not only that unless we stop people buying social housing after period time we are not going to have enough emergency housing for those in real genuine need locally, any locals that get into difficultly forget it, the housing list has gone or been supported to those comming from south . It is ill-informed comments like this that make my blood boil... I live in a council house. I have lived in it for more than 30 years. If I bought it, it would make absolutely no difference to anybody other than myself. Unless of course, you are suggesting that I should be forced to buy 'somewhere' in order that some needy(?) person could get somewhere to live..It would make a difference, as you will, in due course - I'm sorry to say - pass away, at which time the house should be available for someone else. The problem with council house sales is they are heavily discounted, and what little money comes in for them doesn't go back to invest in housing. Therefore folk in Council houses not only get cheap rent, they get a massive leg up the property ladder, at the expense of rate/taxpayers. If sales were at market value and receipts ploughed back into housing, it might be fair. There has been nothing but profiteering on council house sales. But purchasing ex-council properties is the only way some people can afford to get on the property ladder hence also taking the burden away from the housing waiting list. Plus, if the market is quiet when a ex-council house owner dies, for the property to be sold back to the Council because after all, they still tend to be cheaper than other properties on the market. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silvercloud Posted March 23, 2013 Report Share Posted March 23, 2013 Hi, I have no problem with people applying for social housing so long as they are honest and play the system fairly and not try to cheat the system which could affect others who are genuine and honest and in need, whether here in Shetland or elsewhere in the UK I think in times now we should not be encouraging the selling off of social housing and *some* do look to try and cheat the system and see a potiental of making money further down the line, i'm sure not everyone does but some do . As an incommer myself it was suggested number of times exactly how to go about obtaining housing for my family, by cheating the system here despite not requiring it. I was disgusted and surely I cannot believe I'm the only one who think this wrong? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin Posted March 23, 2013 Report Share Posted March 23, 2013 but obviously buying would have made more sense if your normal worker could have got a mortgage then. One of the few good things that Thatchers government did for the working man(?) was to introduce the right to buy. Unfortunately, there have been several, not so nice, side effects not the least of which is ,coupled to the governments refusal to allow local authorities to build replacement stock, because demand exceeds supply, house prices and private rents remain artificially high.OK, this has increased the 'nett worth' of householders and provided some equity for them to borrow against but, the downside of that is if you borrow, you have to pay back (with interest) and, a lot of people simply do not earn enough to be able to buy in the first place.To take this a little further, local authorities are bound to favour the 'disadvantaged' people in society because (quite cynically) those people (in general) are the most unlikely to ever raise enough cash to buy their home. Personally, I have a problem with "alkies, druggies and baby farms" (not my words) getting preferential treatment for social housing and firmly believe that they should, instead, be placed in supervised accommodation until they can support themselves independently.Working people should get preference simply because they are contributing to the economy and, not draining it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin Posted March 23, 2013 Report Share Posted March 23, 2013 It would make a difference, as you will, in due course - I'm sorry to say - pass away, at which time the house should be available for someone else. NOT SO....Ist, I have no intention of "passing away" anytime soon But, When I do, I hope to be survived by my wife and youngest son (who still lives at home because he cannot afford private rent on his earnings and just cannot get into social housing) either way, they are both covered by the 'protected tenancy' agreement that the SIC introduced a while back and, if they so wished, could remain in the property. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paulb Posted March 23, 2013 Report Share Posted March 23, 2013 i would beware of that view. its how they are bringing in benefit caps and the spare room taxes and localization. trust me the normal tenant will suffer. they target one group get folks steamed and then hit everyone. those alchies druggies and farms each have stories. lets be very careful that we easily could be in there situation. putting difficult tenants in special accommodation should only happen in a treatment process not as a social punishment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ariel Posted March 23, 2013 Report Share Posted March 23, 2013 But purchasing ex-council properties is the only way some people can afford to get on the property ladder hence also taking the burden away from the housing waiting list. Plus, if the market is quiet when a ex-council house owner dies, for the property to be sold back to the Council because after all, they still tend to be cheaper than other properties on the market. I beg to point out that they are not taking any burden away from the housing list if they are also taking a property away. To go back a few pages, the idea of making residential caravan sites available would be a good option for many people who neither want to clutter up the housing list, nor are able to buy a house. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silvercloud Posted March 23, 2013 Report Share Posted March 23, 2013 Its the level of those that try to *cheat the system* that needs sorting out . No easy task i'm sure, because it can be cleverly done . I feel sorry for the housing officers, they probably aware that it goes on but trying to stop happening must be very difficult and very frustrating. I guess they have to appear hard in some respects because for every application there is probably or perhap another trying to abuse the system in some way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paulb Posted March 23, 2013 Report Share Posted March 23, 2013 It would make a difference, as you will, in due course - I'm sorry to say - pass away, at which time the house should be available for someone else. NOT SO....Ist, I have no intention of "passing away" anytime soon But, When I do, I hope to be survived by my wife and youngest son (who still lives at home because he cannot afford private rent on his earnings and just cannot get into social housing) either way, they are both covered by the 'protected tenancy' agreement that the SIC introduced a while back and, if they so wished, could remain in the property. that maybe changing shortly. hence beware of them messing with social housing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin Posted March 23, 2013 Report Share Posted March 23, 2013 The problem with council house sales is they are heavily discounted, and what little money comes in for them doesn't go back to invest in housing. Therefore folk in Council houses not only get cheap rent, they get a massive leg up the property ladder, at the expense of rate/taxpayers. If sales were at market value and receipts ploughed back into housing, it might be fair. There has been nothing but profiteering on council house sales. Hit the Submit button before I had finished.... Council house sales ARE discounted but, they are discounted according to the length of time you have paid rent. The fact that any monies received from these sales is not re-invested in new stock is government policy and is no fault of SIC or any other local authority..People in Council Houses DO NOT get cheap rent.. They pay a realistic rent. It is the deliberate shortage of suitable housing that keeps Private rents so high.As for getting a "massive leg up the property ladder". This is nonsense. If the housing in this country were properly priced in the first place then, most working people who are able to pay council rent would be able to obtain a mortgage of their own. Furthermore, if you equate years of rent to a mortgage, where is the 'discount'?Profiteering? More nonsense. Those who have purchased their Council house after years of paying rent and have then used the proceeds of it's subsequent sale to build or buy a better property can hardly be accused of profiteering in so much as they are unlikely to get much more than the current market value for the little box that they used to live in and which, quite possibly, cost them more than that in total anyway. Additionally, their new home will probably be in a more expensive Council Tax bracket. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sheltie68 Posted March 23, 2013 Report Share Posted March 23, 2013 I personally know of a single mother who 10 years ago got a 2 bed house in Lerwick - and has never lived in it! she lives with her boyfriend but has always paid the rent and mowed the grass - and has kept it for a fall back. Also from personal experience I have been through the homeless route with the council and once they found out my case was genuine(as they do not fall over themselves when you first walk in the door as homeless) they could have not been more helpful - they cannot give you what they don't have - which when you are honest and genuinely and waiting is tough I was 6 months in refuge and 6 months in temporary and I am extremely grateful I have been housed now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ariel Posted March 23, 2013 Report Share Posted March 23, 2013 The problem with council house sales is they are heavily discounted, and what little money comes in for them doesn't go back to invest in housing. Therefore folk in Council houses not only get cheap rent, they get a massive leg up the property ladder, at the expense of rate/taxpayers. If sales were at market value and receipts ploughed back into housing, it might be fair. There has been nothing but profiteering on council house sales. Hit the Submit button before I had finished.... Council house sales ARE discounted but, they are discounted according to the length of time you have paid rent. The fact that any monies received from these sales is not re-invested in new stock is government policy and is no fault of SIC or any other local authority..People in Council Houses DO NOT get cheap rent.. They pay a realistic rent. It is the deliberate shortage of suitable housing that keeps Private rents so high.As for getting a "massive leg up the property ladder". This is nonsense. If the housing in this country were properly priced in the first place then, most working people who are able to pay council rent would be able to obtain a mortgage of their own. Furthermore, if you equate years of rent to a mortgage, where is the 'discount'?Profiteering? More nonsense. Those who have purchased their Council house after years of paying rent and have then used the proceeds of it's subsequent sale to build or buy a better property can hardly be accused of profiteering in so much as they are unlikely to get much more than the current market value for the little box that they used to live in and which, quite possibly, cost them more than that in total anyway. Additionally, their new home will probably be in a more expensive Council Tax bracket.You are right it is govt policy, and if I had the chance of a cheap house, if I was already lucky enough to have a secure tenancy, I'm sure I'd jump at the chance. I am arguing against this being govt policy and I also understand the SIC could halt sales, as some other authorities have done. Years of rent is not a mortgage, sorry - lots of us pay a lifetime of rent and our landlord is not obliged to hand over the house to us. As I say, you'd be mad not to take the chance if you have it. But it is a mad policy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silvercloud Posted March 23, 2013 Report Share Posted March 23, 2013 Apart from deeper background checks perhaps, how else can we stop the housing system being downright abused any suggestions/ideas ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stug Posted March 23, 2013 Report Share Posted March 23, 2013 It would make a difference, as you will, in due course - I'm sorry to say - pass away, at which time the house should be available for someone else. The problem with council house sales is they are heavily discounted, and what little money comes in for them doesn't go back to invest in housing. Therefore folk in Council houses not only get cheap rent, they get a massive leg up the property ladder, at the expense of rate/taxpayers. If sales were at market value and receipts ploughed back into housing, it might be fair. There has been nothing but profiteering on council house sales. Before you are entitled to a large discount on your council house you have paid rent for years and maintained it in good condition. I agree that the council should be allowed to reinvest the money from the sale of properties into building more but that is the fault of the original legislation. By the time you have paid the council rent for 30 years you have contributed towards the initial cost of your property and it is reasonable to receive a discount because of that. Would you rather that the property was rented to a number of different tenants over that 30 year period some of whom would not maintain the property with the council having to pick up the costs of repairs before it could reallocated? It is a sad fact that not everyone who applies for a property will get one and, to get back to original point raised, you may have to widen your area choice. I'm sure a lot of people would like to be able to live close to their work but that is an unrealistic expectation - what size would Lerwick have to be to enable everyone who worked there to live there? Even people who are buying a property have to look at areas within their price range, and for many that means commuting to work. One of the most useful lessons my parents taught me is that you can't have everything you want. It might be time to have more realistic obtainable expectations. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.