Snagger Posted February 19, 2007 Share Posted February 19, 2007 ahhh....i pay £200 pcm for a 1 bed, sucure tenancy and garden. they also fix me boiler....now thats not CHEAP or below the market rate !!! ...its normal. you all just have been convinced its a good idea to pay triple that for your rents. why ? i dont know why you do it. agreed, council rants arn't cheap, for those that pay at least, it's private rents that are expensive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DabHand Posted February 19, 2007 Share Posted February 19, 2007 I'd just like to say that Will hutton is a swivel eyed NuLab TwatLad. Thanks for listening. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
right_freds_dead Posted February 19, 2007 Share Posted February 19, 2007 agreed, council rants arn't cheap, for those that pay at least, it's private rents that are expensive. agreed to. why is it someone has lost all proportion of reasoning regarding rents and now thinks that £200 is below the maket rate, when it has followed the governments rate of inflation since 2001. in 2000 £200 was normal for a 1 bed flat in chorley. chorley wages have not risen sice 2001. so why should rents. all private rents have followed daft inflation. hype inflation and speculation. and now they turn on me.......for being sensible and not stupid. the only thing thats above market value is the current level of 'muppetery' Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevie1969 Posted February 19, 2007 Share Posted February 19, 2007 I'd just like to say that Will hutton is a swivel eyed NuLab TwatLad.Thanks for listening. agreed The sooner we can kick out this bunch of morons the better - my money is on a Tory/Lib dem/green coalition to introduce PR and then we can lose this Nu Labour bunch forever Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fancypants Posted February 19, 2007 Share Posted February 19, 2007 though if he has any sense he'll buy it cheaply and then just rent it out, to avoid such a 'crime' as sub-letting. sadly RFD, the big RTB discounts are of the past in most local authorities Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Bart of Darkness Posted February 19, 2007 Share Posted February 19, 2007 More will be done, including offering cash bonuses, to move people out so that those in dire need can get a home. If people are in "dire need", build more fecking council houses! OK, you might have to specify that no right to buy will exist on these homes until say 25 years have passed, otherwise it would probably be viewed as a waste of time. by local authorities But that wouldn't be an insurmountable problem IMO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
right_freds_dead Posted February 19, 2007 Share Posted February 19, 2007 NO - because how can people then profiteer from the BTL market if LAs create social housing... oh - no !! we'd be ruined and the government would need to create some real wealth to our economy.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DoctorJ Posted February 19, 2007 Share Posted February 19, 2007 I have to agree with Cletus et al on this. passing this housing down the generations is wrong. This kind of thing really gets my goat. I agree that social housing is required but I have a friend who lives in a council flat with her partner because her family had a council house that wasn't big enough for the whole family. This is fair enough. but then my friend gets RTB and only have to live in it for 2 years before they can let it out. I love the girl - but this makes me sick. My morality strings are being pulled all over the place with this. elp! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Bart of Darkness Posted February 19, 2007 Share Posted February 19, 2007 NO - because how can people then profiteer from the BTL market if LAs create social housing...oh - no !! we'd be ruined and the government would need to create some real wealth to our economy.... Damn your eyes! You've spotted the one tiny flaw in my otherwise perfect plan. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
right_freds_dead Posted February 19, 2007 Share Posted February 19, 2007 hmmph...id better confir with tessa jowell. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fudge Posted February 19, 2007 Share Posted February 19, 2007 The income that councils get from renting out council houses is significant. Those houses have paid for themselves many times over. If these houses get sold off, councils will be out of pocket and will have to cut back services or put council taxes up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orbital Posted February 19, 2007 Share Posted February 19, 2007 I think most of us are pro social housing for those that really need it, but like some of the posters above, I dont think social housing should be thought of in the long term for everyone. Sure those who are unable to look after themselves need to be helped by society, but those who just dont put the effort in can go live in the streets, some people take the piss. We all know someone like this, I know an old school friend who gets a council house in the centre of town and enough £s to buy booze. Now if he knew that was going to run out eventually maybe he'd get off his ****, the reality is he is quite content and will never do a thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamnumerate Posted February 19, 2007 Share Posted February 19, 2007 Only 4% of council houses in Scotland were built after 1982 so yes it is not just them being sold off, they stopped building too. Add up the rent of the average council tenant over a period of 25 years and they have more than paid off the cost of the house. True for private tenants as well - should they have the right to buy ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaggaDagga Posted February 19, 2007 Share Posted February 19, 2007 The income that councils get from renting out council houses is significant.Those houses have paid for themselves many times over. If these houses get sold off, councils will be out of pocket and will have to cut back services or put council taxes up. They are currently paying housing benefit for people in genuine need to pay the rent for someone's BTL at market rent. Meanwhile, well-off sons of council house tenants park their BMWs outside their council house. The plan is for those in need to go into the council houses (perhaps with a time limit), while those who can support themselves pay to rent or buy like the rest of us. If rents are generally too high then that is a separate issue. Why should some get special treatment just because their parents were once in need many, many years ago? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bomberbrown Posted February 19, 2007 Author Share Posted February 19, 2007 I think most of us are pro social housing for those that really need it, but like some of the posters above, I dont think social housing should be thought of in the long term for everyone. Sure those who are unable to look after themselves need to be helped by society, but those who just dont put the effort in can go live in the streets, some people take the piss. We all know someone like this, I know an old school friend who gets a council house in the centre of town and enough £s to buy booze. Now if he knew that was going to run out eventually maybe he'd get off his ****, the reality is he is quite content and will never do a thing. I've said this before earlier on. This is a symptom of the ridiculous benefit system and is not exclusive to social/council housed tenants. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
svag Posted February 19, 2007 Share Posted February 19, 2007 True for private tenants as well - should they have the right to buy ? There should be no right to buy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skhudy Posted February 19, 2007 Share Posted February 19, 2007 http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/topstories/tm...-name_page.htmlYou could not even begin to imagine the amount of contempt I hold for this Nu Liebour shower of sh1t! I really hope this backfires on them big time! Don't see the problem with this. People will be means tested, so why should the people who struggle worry? I know about, and have heard about people living in council houses maying minimal rent who are very well off and are happy paying a low rent for somewhere in Central London, and I think i'm right in thing. What would be worrying is the level which they determine people are entitled to live in Council Housing, and that people who genuinely deserve council housing at low rent get it. The government needs to free up some of this housing for the illegals it's let into the country on benifits anyway, as housing them in bnb's and hotels is costing a fortune Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigben Posted February 19, 2007 Share Posted February 19, 2007 Don't see the problem with this. People will be means tested, so why should the people who struggle worry?I know about, and have heard about people living in council houses maying minimal rent who are very well off and are happy paying a low rent for somewhere in Central London, and I think i'm right in thing. What would be worrying is the level which they determine people are entitled to live in Council Housing, and that people who genuinely deserve council housing at low rent get it. The government needs to free up some of this housing for the illegals it's let into the country on benifits anyway, as housing them in bnb's and hotels is costing a fortune Because as usual it will be the people who work but dont have high levels of earnings that will end up struggling the rest will have their rent paid for them as they do now if they rent privately. There will be a whole group of people who will struggle to keep their heads above water perhaps they would then be better off working less hours and keeping their home. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skhudy Posted February 19, 2007 Share Posted February 19, 2007 Because as usual it will be the people who work but dont have high levels of earnings that will end up struggling the rest will have their rent paid for them as they do now if they rent privately. There will be a whole group of people who will struggle to keep their heads above water perhaps they would then be better off working less hours and keeping their home. Hence why I said what is worrying is how they determine the threshold. Government can't win ever can it, not that I like Labour at all, but policies like this will always be controversial. One thing which is appalling is i read somewhere and can believe that this government more than any other has made a greater % of people dependent on benefits and handouts, such that people are becoming reliant on it. Suppose In an ideal world everyone would have a house, a car, not worry about bills, be paid a decent wage, be equal... hang on sounds a bit like communism! which is the better of the 2 evils I wonder Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chichi Posted February 19, 2007 Share Posted February 19, 2007 The answer of course is to make more low cost affordable renting property. Or give security of tenancy and the right to buy to ALL tenants. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigben Posted February 19, 2007 Share Posted February 19, 2007 The answer of course is to make more low cost affordable renting property.Or give security of tenancy and the right to buy to ALL tenants. This seems a far more sensible approach than Miss Kellys http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/angela...ng_tenants.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenclarkesshoes Posted February 19, 2007 Share Posted February 19, 2007 (edited) Only 4% of council houses in Scotland were built after 1982 so yes it is not just them being sold off, they stopped building too. Add up the rent of the average council tenant over a period of 25 years and they have more than paid off the cost of the house. good point. my mother bought her council house after paying the rent for 35 years. i think she had more than paid for it by then, but what is really gallling is the suggestion that all council housing estates are ghettoes. some are but most are not, labour are really going hell for leather for the middle class (read propertied class ) vote with these tacky americanised policies trusting that the working class will keep voting them in because they dont know any better. at the end of the day it is just another step in the inevitable turning of the uk into a clone of america YOU EITHER BUY , RENT FROM A RACKMAN OR LIVE IN A TRAILER PARK. There will be no other options, edit: of course there will be a fourth option : PRISON. i reckon UK prison population will eventually reach 200,000 as they lock more and more of the poor up, Edited February 19, 2007 by kenclarkesshoes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chichi Posted February 19, 2007 Share Posted February 19, 2007 Of course lots of affordable council propertys would help avoid the boom and bust of property in the UK. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenclarkesshoes Posted February 19, 2007 Share Posted February 19, 2007 I don't understand why someone that lives in a council house should still receive below market rent and what is a fair market rent ? perhaps private rents should be brought down to the level of social rents which are fair. private rents are absurdly high because house prices are absurdly high and so the whole circle keeps turning. Accommodation and profiteering from it is the biggest issue in the UK at present and Labour are pandering to selfish VIs. nothing less. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrashedOutAndBurned Posted February 19, 2007 Share Posted February 19, 2007 (edited) A working-class 10'-wide terraced home costs £800PCM+ a month. That's frankly way too much for two working parents on 12k-13k a year. The best way to lower rents is to build all the social housing that's needed and some more besides. I'd have much preferred a council flat instead of paying 40% of my tiny pay-check for a room in a slum when I was trying to find my feet as a young graduate. Private rents would have to fall as people would have an alternative to brutal rents or suicidal mortgages. I'd say building council housing's better use of money than tax credits, starting wars, a national ID card and big-brother CCTV networks. Edited February 20, 2007 by CrashedOutAndBurned 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.