Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
SarahBell

F*ck The Overcrowded Families, People Need To Stay Where They Are

Recommended Posts

So rather than build 2 bedroom houses to meet this demand, they are destroying existing 3 bedroom house capacity instead.

Ah as I read on its all about their profits! what a surprise.

"Managing director, Alan Rogers, told the ECHO they were struggling as people couldn’t afford houses or didn’t qualify, as children under 10 were expected to share rooms."

Alan could always reduce the price, or the rules could be changed where there is a clear abundance of the "wrong" property surely? Something stinks about this article...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does appear to be a political agenda as opposed to making best use of social housing stock.

That and keeping a bloated LHA in un-gainful employment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does seem like an '**** about face' approach to solve a problem to me. :unsure:

Never mind. At least the smaller families will get large 2 bedroomed houses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since these ex 3 bed places will now be commanding 2 bed LHA rates/rents (the purpose of the excercise), why not just charge 2 bed rent prices?

Propaganda stunt! They've actually wasted more money by knocking the walls down in the first place.

Tw@ts!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess as soon as the families move into the 2 bedroom properties (now officially 2 bedrooms) lots of them will see the opportunity to convert them back to 3 bedrooms (unofficially 3 bedrooms).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There might actually be a problem for a large scale landlord here.

If they simply rented out the 3 bedders at 2 bed lha housing rates, then that might force the average rents down and make the lha rates drop as a result. It is indeed the window tax revisited, but the housing association's actions may actually make sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess as soon as the families move into the 2 bedroom properties (now officially 2 bedrooms) lots of them will see the opportunity to convert them back to 3 bedrooms (unofficially 3 bedrooms).

Yes. Just put a thin dividing wall in and say nothing to anyone important.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems to go right against the original intent of the bedroom tax to free up more housing/bedrooms (that is apart from raising money/cutting down expenditure and so on - and generally making life more difficult for those affected) and making sure that those on the benefit only consume their allocated amount of space/number of bedrooms. It's working in the opposite direction - just knock a partition down.

On the other hand it also exposes the supply/demand pricing argument a bit because there seems to be no demand for the 3 bedroom places. Also if the rental value helps to determine the value of the house it must reflect on asset values.

Edited by billybong

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since these ex 3 bed places will now be commanding 2 bed LHA rates/rents (the purpose of the excercise), why not just charge 2 bed rent prices?

Propaganda stunt! They've actually wasted more money by knocking the walls down in the first place.

Tw@ts!

I see you've never met any LHA management before ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From the photo it looks as if the houses are being completely renovated. So if right to buy applies they get a completely renovated house as well - to ultimately cost the taxpayer more. Maybe that's part of the motivation.

All win - bar tax payers (again) and FtBers etc (again)

Edited by billybong

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems to go right against the original intent of the bedroom tax to free up more housing/bedrooms (that is apart from raising money/cutting down expenditure and so on - and generally making life more difficult for those affected) and making sure that those on the benefit only consume their allocated amount of space/number of bedrooms. It's working in the opposite direction - just knock a partition down.

On the other hand it also exposes the supply/demand pricing argument a bit because there seems to be no demand for the 3 bedroom places. Also if the rental value helps to determine the value of the house it must reflect on asset values.

It says to me there's poor management of waiting lists.

Do we need someone to do a FOI request to every local authority about number of people on waiting lists and the number of bedrooms they want/need?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pretty funny story though -'UK government responsible for improving housing for the poor shocker'. Also seem to remember we have the smallest housing in the developed world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Living space should be in square metres......I have seen two bed places that a far larger than three and even four bed places.......guarantee you get a big two bed place a BTL landlord (in London anyway) will make it into a four bed place with a cheap stud plasterboard walls. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A perverse response to a perverse policy- there never were the two bedroom properties available for most people to downsize into- a fact that was well known to the Tories when they initiated the policy.

The bedroom tax was a cheap political stunt carried out by cheap political c*nts- and achieved nothing but misery for those it targeted while leading to even more under utilization of scarce housing resources by pricing people out of the three bedroom properties thus adding to the housing crisis and indirectly feeding the BTL beast.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   101 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.