But you don't get the deed to your house until it's fully paid for. The bank keep that nice and safe for you.
Housing associations
- Thread starter robfosters
- Start date
But you don't get the deed to your house until it's fully paid for. The bank keep that nice and safe for you.
I'm a signalling design engineer sat in an office designing railway electrical interlockings that control train detection, points and signals. Not a track worker!
I would imagine if you can't afford to live in a better area, self segregation doesn't really come into it.
Owned.
Damn, we have some real engineers left in this country - who knew?!
Back on topic, HA/Council properties are just as much a lottery as private.
Any house can be bought and then rented out to crack dealers.
factually though you're incorrect
I mean I can say some thing like 'It always makes me laugh when salaried employees think they're not slaves' - then when questioned on it state that it is my opinion that workers are slaves
it is a bit silly really, what you mean to point out is that they've got to make payments on their mortgage lest they face a court battle for repossession... which is something that I'm sure they're aware of, it doesn't negate the fact that they own the house
Think it has to be 30% in new builds. Some developments will put 100% of their social housing into one block with all the others being private. Problem with that is you do tend to get a concentration of the anti-social behaviour there (common hallways getting trashed, urine in lifts etc). Not that all private owned are perfect either, especially where they've been let.
Most are absolutely fine and hate getting tarnished with the actions of the few - something that happens for almost every group of people! Problem is the really bad ones are very difficult for the HA to get rid of, also where do you put them?
Also kids will be kids but lots of kid being kids at all hours wouldn't be too much fun to be next to. There's a few private owners in that block and being surrounded by HA has affected their property value.
Some developers can be quite cheeky in the deals they do. Have a very fancy new development near me in London about half a mile away and they've managed to get all the river front blocks 100% private and are building a HA block next to us. London property market is a rat race where you need to protect your property value so that hasn't gone down too well at all.
You do have to wonder who's palm was greased to get something like that through.
Most are absolutely fine and hate getting tarnished with the actions of the few - something that happens for almost every group of people! Problem is the really bad ones are very difficult for the HA to get rid of, also where do you put them?
Also kids will be kids but lots of kid being kids at all hours wouldn't be too much fun to be next to. There's a few private owners in that block and being surrounded by HA has affected their property value.
Some developers can be quite cheeky in the deals they do. Have a very fancy new development near me in London about half a mile away and they've managed to get all the river front blocks 100% private and are building a HA block next to us. London property market is a rat race where you need to protect your property value so that hasn't gone down too well at all.
You do have to wonder who's palm was greased to get something like that through.
nah they're more of a lottery, for fairly obvious reasons
Until Maggie I only knew 2 people who's dad was unemployed and most of my friends and I wanted similar jobs and similar lives.
By 1982 loads of my friends had unemployed dads, were active thieves and the truly aspirant wanted to be pimps the rest were happy at shoplifting or drug dealing or working i hand.
We are now the dads or grandads hence the chavs.
Soldato
- Joined
- 28 Nov 2004
- Posts
- 16,024
- Location
- 9th Inner Circle
love it!
Better to remain silent and let the world think you're a fool than open your mouth and remove all doubt. Or so the saying goes.love it!
What I don't get is why he thought his baseless presumption was gona be right in the first place, so much dumb snobbery exhibited in the thread as a whole, not uncommon on ocuk.
Last edited:
- Joined
- 1 Dec 2010
- Posts
- 53,766
- Location
- Welling, London
A lot of HA properties are shared ownership as well now. The people in those have to have a job to get a mortage on their whatever percent. I see no difference between them and private owners.
Years ago, they would have been private owners, but obviously the price of property has so outstripped the increase in wages that it's virtually impossible for a large percentage of people in and around London to be mortgagable for the full amount without a mahoosive deposit. This clever way allows them to build up their share over time until eventually they may be able to own it 100%.
Would you poor haters feel the same about HA people in shared ownerships?
Years ago, they would have been private owners, but obviously the price of property has so outstripped the increase in wages that it's virtually impossible for a large percentage of people in and around London to be mortgagable for the full amount without a mahoosive deposit. This clever way allows them to build up their share over time until eventually they may be able to own it 100%.
Would you poor haters feel the same about HA people in shared ownerships?
yes
I think people are getting a bit lost here.
No-one is saying that HA or council renters are lower class citizens or that they are all bone-idle reprobates (well, maybe Dowie)
The contention is basically that the majority of "problem" neighbours are more likely to be in such accommodation than in the privately owned homes (this is probably true - certainly appears so from my experience). People would like to be able to spend what is an absurd amount of money (thanks to years of government refusals to plan housing stock adequately) on a house and not live with the possibility of a difficult family being placed next door.
What's the answer? We need social housing if we are going to continue to price lower earners out of the market by building in above-inflation price rises to the market. big council estates weren't a success.
If people are that bothered about avoiding HA neighbours, then simply don't buy on developments that have them.
No-one is saying that HA or council renters are lower class citizens or that they are all bone-idle reprobates (well, maybe Dowie)
The contention is basically that the majority of "problem" neighbours are more likely to be in such accommodation than in the privately owned homes (this is probably true - certainly appears so from my experience). People would like to be able to spend what is an absurd amount of money (thanks to years of government refusals to plan housing stock adequately) on a house and not live with the possibility of a difficult family being placed next door.
What's the answer? We need social housing if we are going to continue to price lower earners out of the market by building in above-inflation price rises to the market. big council estates weren't a success.
If people are that bothered about avoiding HA neighbours, then simply don't buy on developments that have them.
perhaps you're getting a bit lost too then - maybe quote me and point out where I've said that?
not necessarily a problem - where I live the two social housing blocks aren't part of the management company, they're separately managed by a housing association and so the damage done by chavs there doesn't have to affect the funds paid by everyone else' management fee - it is up to the housing association to sort out themselves
however in the 2/5 private blocks with some social housing, shared ownership etc.. they do have issues - and frankly I can see why they're getting annoyed with it - things like the smoke vent being opened costs a few hundred £s for a contractor to come out and reset... the one guy with three pitbulls that deficated and urinated in the corridors caused a whole bunch of damage to carpets, walls etc.. yet the people who cause the damage won't feel any impact from it, a private owner damaging his own communal areas will be paying for it in part through his management fee.
To be honest, I was entirely thinking of your contention that most HA tenants are unemployed. I've not read many of your other posts.
- Joined
- 1 Dec 2010
- Posts
- 53,766
- Location
- Welling, London
Believe it or not, some of those shared ownership applicants could well be financially better off than you, such is the sheer ferocity of the London housing market nowadays.
that makes no difference to my opinion
it is just about risk with students and housing association/council housing probably being the riskier neighbours
lots of rented accommodation poses some more risk than lots of owner occupied... and part ownership poses some additional risk - there is a history in some developments of some of these properties being given out quite liberally and a lot of repossessions happening as a result (new mortgage regs might have changed this somewhat)
it is just about risk with students and housing association/council housing probably being the riskier neighbours
lots of rented accommodation poses some more risk than lots of owner occupied... and part ownership poses some additional risk - there is a history in some developments of some of these properties being given out quite liberally and a lot of repossessions happening as a result (new mortgage regs might have changed this somewhat)
Last edited: