Thread: Council house life tenancies to end

Originally Posted by Bangyai

New council house tenants are to be offered contracts lasting as little as two years, under plans to be announced by the Coalition to end the practice of lifelong tenure.


My 70 yr old brother lives alone in a Dorset 3 bedroomed council house, he refuses to move to a single person house so they cannot make him move on for a family. The spare rooms are full of junk. This should not be allowed, he should either move to a 1 b/room home or be evicted, its not fair on waiting families with young children.
People who are given council houses are currently awarded an indefinite 'secure tenancy' after a 12-month trial tenancy Photo: GETTY

Despite protests, David Cameron is to push ahead with a wider-than-expected shake-up of social housing.

Lifetime tenancies for new tenants will end. The Government instead will give councils and housing associations the freedom to grant fixed terms.
Tenancies will be reviewed after two years and tenants can be evicted if councils find their financial circumstances have improved. Tenants will be given six months’ notice to leave if it is decided they no longer qualify for the taxpayer-funded house.
People who are given council houses are currently awarded an indefinite “secure tenancy” after a 12-month trial tenancy. They can only be evicted through the courts if they fail to pay rent, cause serious problems for neighbours or in other exceptional circumstances. If they die, the tenancy can be passed to a partner or child.
The Government will claim that the changes could create up to 1.35 million extra lettings over the next 30 years
Ministers will also announce next week that those who lose their own homes will no longer be able to rely on councils to find them a house for life.
When tenancies come to an end, some will have to stay in social housing, but others will be expected move on to low-cost home ownership or privately rented housing, freeing council housing stock for more needy people.
Grant Shapps, the Housing Minister, is expected to say: “The current system of social housing is ripe for reform. With so many people in need of decent housing, it’s bonkers that an asset that has had billions of public money invested in it is not used to its full potential.”.
The moves will cause anger among Liberal Democrat MPs, while Labour’s opposition to the plans will intensify.
The Coalition has countered criticism by pointing to the five million people waiting for a home.

Council house life tenancies to end - Telegraph

My 70 yr old brother lives alone in a 3 bed roomed Dorset council house. He refuses to move because he knows that they cannot make him. The spare rooms are filled with junk, this is not fair on the young couples with families who are waiting for housing. They should be able to make him move to the offered 1 b/r home or be evicted.

You lot make me 'sick'
Have a bit of consideration for all those pennyless migrants and asylum seekers who arrive on Britains shores, often with several wives and many beautiful hopeful young half starved children, without a roof over their heads.
God (or Allah , bless them)

Originally Posted by Happy Dave

My 70 yr old brother lives alone in a 3 bed roomed Dorset council house. He refuses to move because he knows that they cannot make him. The spare rooms are filled with junk, this is not fair on the young couples with families who are waiting for housing. They should be able to make him move to the offered 1 b/r home or be evicted.

Apart from being ridiculous to force people out of family homes they have lived in for decades, using this model of yours would see thousands of people forcibly evicted and large immigrant families take their place, mostly muslims I'd imagine as their families are so much larger than most in the UK.

Originally Posted by Bangyai

New council house tenants are to be offered contracts lasting as little as two years,

Lifetime tenancies for new tenants will end.

Worth noting that this will not effect people already in council property so no one is to be evicted except those who agree to it when they sign the tennancy agreement.

I'm not privy to their financial arrangements and neither are you

as a worker in the health service i was privy to the financial state of many council house tenants, and a fair proportion of them were doing very nicely, some even owning private houses that they rented out. there was no shortage of expensive cars, clothing and holidays.

council housing should be for those for whom there is no other option, when they can afford to move out they should.

Originally Posted by taxexile

I'm not privy to their financial arrangements and neither are you

as a worker in the health service i was privy to the financial state of many council house tenants, and a fair proportion of them were doing very nicely, some even owning private houses that they rented out.

In those case's they were in breach of their tenancy agreement and should be evicted

there was no shortage of expensive cars, clothing and holidays.

Yes that can happen but a short drive around any council estate and you'll soon see that it's very much in the minority, like I've already said, mostly old bangers and transit vans.
You'll be thinking of all of the thousands of people that have bought their council houses under the right to buy scheme.

council housing should be for those for whom there is no other option, when they can afford to move out they should.

Yes I understand that's your opinion but its too simplistic and unrealistic, social housing is good for the country, to think otherwise is shortsighted.

Originally Posted by Sdigit

Apart from being ridiculous to force people out of family homes they have lived in for decades

Don't agree- it is not their home, it is a government benefit, or subsidy if you prefer. Once the kids move out, they should be moved to smaller accomodation in line with their needs. If they have a problem with that, great. Go and work, and buy a bloody house where you've got right of tenure.

If a private landlord wants to kick you out, he gives you notice. Why can't the government? They'll even move you into another place too, which is more than a landlord will do.

Originally Posted by nigelandjan

are you including the many , many thousands of people who work in our care ? homes like my wife does on £5.90p per hour , same rate sat. sun ,, work it out,, if you work 60 hours per week like most do at least that. Take home £300 if your lucky £1200 per month Cut that in half for a meagre life on £600 a month leaving you another 600 for a mortgage , with average house prices at £150k ,,,,,,, believe you me no matter how hard the poor buggers budget their money it wont add up.

take a look at how most people in the world manage, especially asia, and you wont find much in the way of council housing or generous benefit cultures. if you are on a low wage then you have to live in a cheap rented house. if you are on 1200 a month there is no way that you can afford a 150k mortgage without putting yourself in debt for the rest of your life. so yes, if you live in a country where the government will provide subsidised housing for the low paid then you should be entitled to one..... until you can afford one of your own........and thank the lord that there are enough people around earning money and paying taxes to subsidise the benefit system.

in western countries we have been living above our means for 2 or 3 generations now, it has become the norm, we expect the benefits, we expect to be able to have it all, we expect good pay and long holidays and if we dont get it we complain, demand and go on strike.

even those who arent working expect it, but given the increasing populations, the increasing cost of looking after them and the poor state of the finances of western countries these days, i dont see how it can go on. those who were born during and lived through the second half of the twentieth century can consider themselves spoilt rotten, but i do believe its all coming to an end, and people will just have to get used to lower standards of living, especially those on low wages or no wages.

how do people manage in countries with no benefits? they scrimp and save and do without any luxuries, family units become stronger, they make do with last years gadgets and last years clothes, they change their diets, often to the benefit of their health, you forget about your pride and take any job going.

its called survival, a skill that has been around for a million years , its a skill evident in any developing country and all over asia, but a its skill thats largely disappeared from western countries over the past century as we have come to believe in our sense of entitlement to things that most of the world can only dream about.

well nothing lasts forever, and people will just have to adapt. as just as anywhere else, the poorer will have to adapt a lot more than the rich. thats how it is, thats how it has always been, and thats how it always will be.

thats life, its not fair, its downright cruel at times, especially so when the money starts to run out in a society that has gotten too used to a different way.

Originally Posted by sabang

Originally Posted by Sdigit

Apart from being ridiculous to force people out of family homes they have lived in for decades

Don't agree- it is not their home, it is a government benefit, or subsidy if you prefer. Once the kids move out, they should be moved to smaller accomodation in line with their needs. If they have a problem with that, great. Go and work, and buy a bloody house where you've got right of tenure.

If a private landlord wants to kick you out, he gives you notice. Why can't the government? They'll even move you into another place too, which is more than a landlord will do.

Yes it is their home it's just not their house, it's not a benefit or a subsidy it's social housing and it's something that is of enormous value to the community as a whole.

Many older people already do move out to a smaller place and nearer to the kids but to forcibly move people from their homes that they've lived in because their circumstances have changed is wrong, people should have the right to feel secure in the homes they have lived and in the communities they have built lives in, not bullied around like so many cattle.

Buying isn't an option for many people who just don't earn the money to afford a mortgage.
The very concept of social housing is rooted in giving people who can't otherwise afford to buy their own home and is based on providing secure homes and communities in which people can live, taking this away will create far more problems than it
will solve.

Originally Posted by Sdigit

many millions of people are unable earn enough to pay the inflated mortgages and private rentals

the worldwide bubble cannot be sustained by the paperwork shufflers for much longer

Originally Posted by baldrick

Originally Posted by Sdigit

many millions of people are unable earn enough to pay the inflated mortgages and private rentals

the worldwide bubble cannot be sustained by the paperwork shufflers for much longer

Very true we also need grafters, let's hope they got somewhere to sleep at night.

Originally Posted by baldrick

Originally Posted by Sdigit

many millions of people are unable earn enough to pay the inflated mortgages and private rentals

the worldwide bubble cannot be sustained by the paperwork shufflers for much longer

true worldwide , and for britain in the long term .
but they seem able to keep the house price infalted ,by mass immigration and planning reatrictions .

Originally Posted by blue

Originally Posted by baldrick

Originally Posted by Sdigit

many millions of people are unable earn enough to pay the inflated mortgages and private rentals

the worldwide bubble cannot be sustained by the paperwork shufflers for much longer

true worldwide , and for britain in the long term .
but they seem able to keep the house price infalted ,by mass immigration and planning reatrictions .

Nothing to do with immigrants, they usually don't have a pot to piss in, just a badly managed country by successive incompentant governments.

Originally Posted by Sdigit

Originally Posted by blue

Originally Posted by baldrick

Originally Posted by Sdigit

many millions of people are unable earn enough to pay the inflated mortgages and private rentals

the worldwide bubble cannot be sustained by the paperwork shufflers for much longer

true worldwide , and for britain in the long term .
but they seem able to keep the house price infalted ,by mass immigration and planning reatrictions .

Nothing to do with immigrants, they usually don't have a pot to piss in, just a badly managed country by successive incompentant governments.

true , but only sometimes , EG in the late 1990s the property market started to wobble ,so the government issued 100's of thousands of passoports to rich Hong Kong residents , before the handover to China , knowing they would buy houses here.
Immigrants often are poor , but also live 4 + to a bedroom , like the east europeans , in Britain, making it hard for a 1 or 2 brits to rent the same place at a reasonable rent .
Also many rich students are flooding into britain , renting at inflated prices putting pressure on poorer Brits.

Originally Posted by blue

Originally Posted by Sdigit

Originally Posted by blue

Originally Posted by baldrick

Originally Posted by Sdigit

many millions of people are unable earn enough to pay the inflated mortgages and private rentals

the worldwide bubble cannot be sustained by the paperwork shufflers for much longer

true worldwide , and for britain in the long term .
but they seem able to keep the house price infalted ,by mass immigration and planning reatrictions .

Nothing to do with immigrants, they usually don't have a pot to piss in, just a badly managed country by successive incompetent governments.

true , but only sometimes , EG in the late 1990s the property market started to wobble ,so the government issued 100's of thousands of passports to rich Hong Kong residents , before the handover to China , knowing they would buy houses here.
Immigrants often are poor , but also live 4 + to a bedroom , like the east europeans , in Britain, making it hard for a 1 or 2 brits to rent the same place at a reasonable rent .
Also many rich students are flooding into britain , renting at inflated prices putting pressure on poorer Brits.

Some true, the rich Hong Kongers were always coming no matter what.

Most foreign students also don't have a pot to piss in and live like Polish builders, every room in the flat is a bedroom and five in each one.

New clamp down of 25% reduction on student visas should put a hold on things but we need to get rid of the one that never went home when their visas expired.

The Universities are actually wanting more foreign students. They pay much more in the way of fees.

They don't want UK citizens at their universities any more.

Originally Posted by OhOh

The Universities are actually wanting more foreign students. They pay much more in the way of fees.

Possibly.

They don't want UK citizens at their universities any more.

Untrue, do you really believe that Universities want their halls filled purely with immigrants to the exclusion of all home grown students or are you being a little reactionary

Originally Posted by Sdigit

Many older people already do move out to a smaller place and nearer to the kids but to forcibly move people from their homes that they've lived in because their circumstances have changed is wrong, people should have the right to feel secure in the homes they have lived and in the communities they have built lives in, not bullied around like so many cattle.

What about the private house owners? Many downsize because they can't afford to maintain their family home. If they need to go into care for a period they are forced to sell their homes, if they lose their job and need to relocate they have to sell up. People on benefits should not be able to stake a claim on a house forever.

I know someone who moved to Thailand a couple of years ago and sold up in the UK, an ex-council house they bought at a massive subsidy. They have now returned to the UK because they need major surgery and have been given a new council house. They intend to stay for 5 years to qualify for the right to buy at big discounts and then buy and resell, then move to Thailand again. Why should they get the right to buy?

Whichever way you look at it, they are renting. It is the owners right to give them notice to quit- why should it be any different just because you are being subsidised by the taxpayer, and your landlord is the government?

Originally Posted by BigRed

I know someone who moved to Thailand a couple of years ago and sold up in the UK, an ex-council house they bought at a massive subsidy. They have now returned to the UK because they need major surgery and have been given a new council house. They intend to stay for 5 years to qualify for the right to buy at big discounts and then buy and resell, then move to Thailand again. Why should they get the right to buy?

I believe the law changed a few years back to cap the discounts on council properties, so unless they've since been reverted I think you'll find there are no more massive discounts available.

When councils were throwing money away hand over fist, a friend bought a flat in Westbourne Terrace for 35k after doing the paperwork twostep, and sold it for more than 300k after having his bro live there for 3-4 years, on housing benefits.

But last I heard the max council discount was £16k, and though it has probably changed since because bureauprats like to tweak, I can't see it going back to the megascams of the 80s and 90s.

from the directgov website:

Maximum discount levels for Right to Buy in each region

There is a limit to how much money you can get off the value of your property through Right to Buy. The maximum discounts available by region are:

• £16,000 in Wales
• £16,000 in London (unless your home is in Barking and Dagenham or Havering, where the maximum discount is £38,000)
• £22,000 in the North East of England
• £24,000 in the East Midlands, Yorkshire and the Humber
• £26,000 in the North West of England and the West Midlands
• £30,000 in the South West of England
• £34,000 in the East of England (unless your home is in Watford, where the maximum discount is £16,000)

In the South East of England, the maximum discount is £38,000, unless your home is in one of areas listed below. In these areas the maximum discount is £16,000:

• Chiltern
• Epsom and Ewell
• Hart
• Oxford
• Reading
• Reigate and Banstead
• Tonbridge and Malling
• Vale of the White Horse
• West Berkshire

If you don’t know which limit applies to you, ask your landlord.

How to work out your Right to Buy discount


There are different discount levels for houses and flats.
For houses you get a 35 per cent discount if you’ve been a public sector tenant for five years. This discount increases by 1 per cent for every extra year you’ve been a public sector tenant. No matter how long you’ve been a tenant, the most you can get off your home’s price is 60 per cent.

Thanks, good find