Soldato
- Joined
- 13 Aug 2004
- Posts
- 8,396
- Location
- England
CF93 said:
True, the boiler we just had replaced at the end of last year was only worth the scrap metal!
How to find out if a property is ex-council?
- Thread starter Noxis
- Start date
True, the boiler we just had replaced at the end of last year was only worth the scrap metal!
I think some people should stop a minute and cosider that there is a difference between people who use and abuse systems!
Not being picky, but I don't you lot think there is a place for social housing these days? What about the elderly or infirm?
How about a bit of common sense to stop the abuse. Keep the system as it is, just never build houses with more than 3 bedrooms? If you have ever had kids, I think you will appreciate how that might put people off after a while!
Not being picky, but I don't you lot think there is a place for social housing these days? What about the elderly or infirm?
How about a bit of common sense to stop the abuse. Keep the system as it is, just never build houses with more than 3 bedrooms? If you have ever had kids, I think you will appreciate how that might put people off after a while!
*** rant on! ***
There are leechers about, but I don't see the reasoning behind tarring the rest of council house tennants with the same brush.
I was brought up in a big private house in a nice estate, until my parents divorced when I was 12 and moved into private, but rented house in a pretty **** area with my mother, almost fully council owned. She worked her ass off for 7 years as a nurse trying to bring up 2 kids, with the bare minimum of everything, I can't explain the stress and depression she was under at the time due to the hours she was working, debt she was in. She eventually moved into a council house to allieviate the financial problems. Its the best decision shes ever made and I know many people from where we lived who had to make the same decision. I find it very offensive for people to label people like above "leechers" because they had no other choice.
And why shouldn't a couple, with low income, not many qualifications, and without the money to progress their education, start a family in a council flat/house until they get jobs, move up the ladder at the place they work, and eventually look to buy a property or their own house off the council. They pay taxes, they work just as hard as the more well off people, the only difference is that they took advantage of a good opportunity for a better life for themselves, loved ones and family. If people have a problem with it, find other constructive ways of changing the system for the better, rather than playing the keyboard/armchair warrior and labeling us all leeches, when its only the minority that actually *are* screwing the system.
In my opinion a lot of it is about social divisions making progression up the "rich" ladder very hard, to be able to afford a private house and provide for a family. I've had countless "suits" look down their nose at me at work, or at job interviews, meetings and the like, simply because they recognise the name of the area I live in, or the way I talk, or the way I dress (no, not burburry/kappa
). While on the flipside i've seen the opposite.
As said before, "Hate the game not the player", either that or jump ship to another country and exchange these problems for a whole new set! That always works! 
*** rant off! ***
There are leechers about, but I don't see the reasoning behind tarring the rest of council house tennants with the same brush.
I was brought up in a big private house in a nice estate, until my parents divorced when I was 12 and moved into private, but rented house in a pretty **** area with my mother, almost fully council owned. She worked her ass off for 7 years as a nurse trying to bring up 2 kids, with the bare minimum of everything, I can't explain the stress and depression she was under at the time due to the hours she was working, debt she was in. She eventually moved into a council house to allieviate the financial problems. Its the best decision shes ever made and I know many people from where we lived who had to make the same decision. I find it very offensive for people to label people like above "leechers" because they had no other choice.
And why shouldn't a couple, with low income, not many qualifications, and without the money to progress their education, start a family in a council flat/house until they get jobs, move up the ladder at the place they work, and eventually look to buy a property or their own house off the council. They pay taxes, they work just as hard as the more well off people, the only difference is that they took advantage of a good opportunity for a better life for themselves, loved ones and family. If people have a problem with it, find other constructive ways of changing the system for the better, rather than playing the keyboard/armchair warrior and labeling us all leeches, when its only the minority that actually *are* screwing the system.
In my opinion a lot of it is about social divisions making progression up the "rich" ladder very hard, to be able to afford a private house and provide for a family. I've had countless "suits" look down their nose at me at work, or at job interviews, meetings and the like, simply because they recognise the name of the area I live in, or the way I talk, or the way I dress (no, not burburry/kappa
). While on the flipside i've seen the opposite.As said before, "Hate the game not the player", either that or jump ship to another country and exchange these problems for a whole new set! That always works!
*** rant off! ***
Last edited:
I can see where Jez is coming from and do share his views.
People shouldnt start families or have children if they cannot afford them. People ideally, wouldnt be rewarded for being irresponsible (think of those teenage females who get pregnant on purpose, just so they can be housed - their baby is their meal ticket).
However, I have to say that you cannot blame people for playing the system. If I could get a council house with £200pm rent, in London, then I would do so, within reason. I wouldnt however, have children just to get housed - thats taking it too far.
Its a bad system that is there to be played. If you have managed to acquire cheap housing, then lucky you. I, however, am not so lucky and must continue paying an extremely high mortgage premium due to the fact that house prices are ridiculously high compared to wages.
EDit: on the subject of leeching: I dont think that people who are working but living in council accommodation are leeching - they are trying their best and putting something back into the system. The real leechers are those who have no intention of working, get pregnant & have kids on purpose just so they can be housed and fed for free. These people are drain on society and truely need looking at.
People shouldnt start families or have children if they cannot afford them. People ideally, wouldnt be rewarded for being irresponsible (think of those teenage females who get pregnant on purpose, just so they can be housed - their baby is their meal ticket).
However, I have to say that you cannot blame people for playing the system. If I could get a council house with £200pm rent, in London, then I would do so, within reason. I wouldnt however, have children just to get housed - thats taking it too far.
Its a bad system that is there to be played. If you have managed to acquire cheap housing, then lucky you. I, however, am not so lucky and must continue paying an extremely high mortgage premium due to the fact that house prices are ridiculously high compared to wages.
EDit: on the subject of leeching: I dont think that people who are working but living in council accommodation are leeching - they are trying their best and putting something back into the system. The real leechers are those who have no intention of working, get pregnant & have kids on purpose just so they can be housed and fed for free. These people are drain on society and truely need looking at.
Last edited:
Unfortuntely it looks like I might have to go without this house. Its really nice, very large rooms good garden well kept and upgraded (double glazing, outhouse extension etc etc...). The area is excellent, the road only has about 4 - 6 houses that were built by council in it and the rest are all far more expensive homes.
The wife loved it! But now she found it its ex-council and is dead against it
Cant seem to break her snobbery.
The wife loved it! But now she found it its ex-council and is dead against it
Cant seem to break her snobbery.
Morba said:
Who would you rather have it though?
Two people who have worked for the past 20 years and their children or 19 year old Britney and her 4 kids from 3 blokes who thinks work is collecting her benefits.
They're the sort that get empty council houses these days, not the ones who really need them.
loopstah said:
neither. i would prefer the poster who mentioned that he and his partner get next to no benefit or help from the government for his wife being disabled and unable to work.
2 people working for 20+ years and living in council housing should have plenty of saved money or some decent assets.
i dont understand why people would actively want to live in council housing instead for 20 years instead of saving for a nice house of THEIR OWN.
loopstah said:
I would rather let the 2 people who have worked hard and put something back into the system. Britney is just a strain on the entire system. If I had my way, there would be mass cullings of these leeches who have no will or intention of ever working - but I know this would be cruel.
I want to make clear that I donot think people who have worked, but have lost their jobs and fallen on hard times through no fault of their own are not leeches.
I bought an ex-local authority house just over a year ago, and it's a lot nicer than the current local authority places in the estate 300 yards up the road, so on that basis, I wouldn't dismiss a house purely on it's history.
I agree with a lot of the points made by Jez and Pez. Rather than have a council house, I chose to get somewhere a little nicer, and rent out the rooms.
The fact that a minority of council tenants have paid enough in rent over the years to buy the house is as irrelevant as the point made that they're fully owned by the council.
Why do people see having a family as something they're entitled to?
One thought though, (aimed at Jez, myself and others in a similar situation) aren't we being subsidised by the 40% club?
I agree with a lot of the points made by Jez and Pez. Rather than have a council house, I chose to get somewhere a little nicer, and rent out the rooms.
The fact that a minority of council tenants have paid enough in rent over the years to buy the house is as irrelevant as the point made that they're fully owned by the council.
Why do people see having a family as something they're entitled to?
One thought though, (aimed at Jez, myself and others in a similar situation) aren't we being subsidised by the 40% club?
Kingy said:
If u r referring to the income tax bracket, then I'm already in there.
However, the way I see it is that people who are working hard must be aspiring to earn more. This being the case eventually, they will be in the higher rate tax bracket.
Ive said this right throughout, as long as people are trying and working hard then I have no problem with them being subsidised with cheap housing etc. The problem I have is when you have people who have no intention of working or even looking for work.
It is slightly nauseating how people fortunate enough to be reasonably well paid actually begrudge others the opportunity to have affordable housing. You can really spot Thatcher's children.
Thankfully we still live in a welfare state where the taxes that we pay are used to support those with less, long may it continue.
I do, however, have reservations about council tenants being allowed to purchase their properties, as it reduces the overall stock available for others.
On the topic of 'is it an ex-council house or not' - you'd have to be remarkably shallow to dismiss a property just on that basis. By all means choose not to live there if you dislike the way it looks, or the area, but simply because it used to be owned by the council?
Oh and there is no 'e' in ridiculous. /pedant
Thankfully we still live in a welfare state where the taxes that we pay are used to support those with less, long may it continue.
I do, however, have reservations about council tenants being allowed to purchase their properties, as it reduces the overall stock available for others.
On the topic of 'is it an ex-council house or not' - you'd have to be remarkably shallow to dismiss a property just on that basis. By all means choose not to live there if you dislike the way it looks, or the area, but simply because it used to be owned by the council?
Oh and there is no 'e' in ridiculous. /pedant
Soldato
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 4,898
I'm no socialist by a long stretch, but I accept there is a need for social housing.
If it is well managed, the housing service generates considerable revenue for the authority and in fact lowers council tax for everyone else.
There are very few proper council houses around these days - many councils cut investment in the 90's to the bare minimum of maintenance to keep council tax down and this left them requiring sustantial investment to bring their housing stock up to required standard. As such, many sold their stock off to housing associations, used the capital receipts to reduce tax and let the HA's spend the money to do the upgrades - then the HA increases the rent. Areas with a shortage of council or HA housing are now renting houses for those on benefits from private landlords at market rates, which is many times higher than the cost of maintaining a council property.
Fact is, not everyone can earn £20k+ a year for a variety of reasons. So those who don't have a lot of money can either access social housing maintained to a reasonable standard, or go to a private landlord who will cram in as many people as they can and do minimal maintenence. This eventually leaves areas looking run down and then what happens - someone shouts "Regneneration" and central Government throw millions of taxpayers money at the problem.
The only reason Council rents are compartively low is because property prices in this country have risen so sharply, in part because private landlords are buying up property. 20-30 years ago there simply wasn't enough supply of private lettings to house people, which is why the council built them.
Living in a council property is not sponging off the state if you are working and paying the rent. I actually think the provision of social housing is beneficial to society as a whole.
If it is well managed, the housing service generates considerable revenue for the authority and in fact lowers council tax for everyone else.
There are very few proper council houses around these days - many councils cut investment in the 90's to the bare minimum of maintenance to keep council tax down and this left them requiring sustantial investment to bring their housing stock up to required standard. As such, many sold their stock off to housing associations, used the capital receipts to reduce tax and let the HA's spend the money to do the upgrades - then the HA increases the rent. Areas with a shortage of council or HA housing are now renting houses for those on benefits from private landlords at market rates, which is many times higher than the cost of maintaining a council property.
Fact is, not everyone can earn £20k+ a year for a variety of reasons. So those who don't have a lot of money can either access social housing maintained to a reasonable standard, or go to a private landlord who will cram in as many people as they can and do minimal maintenence. This eventually leaves areas looking run down and then what happens - someone shouts "Regneneration" and central Government throw millions of taxpayers money at the problem.
The only reason Council rents are compartively low is because property prices in this country have risen so sharply, in part because private landlords are buying up property. 20-30 years ago there simply wasn't enough supply of private lettings to house people, which is why the council built them.
Living in a council property is not sponging off the state if you are working and paying the rent. I actually think the provision of social housing is beneficial to society as a whole.
Kingy said:
Why is the point they're fully owned by the council irrrelevant?
The point I was making is that it's the fact they're fully owned that make's them extremely cheap. If the council was still paying for them then I'd bet they'd charge more for them, and we wouldn't have this thread.....
Plus the fact that people were commenting on maintenance being included. But the rent ( as I said) covers the maintenance because there's no "capital" element to cover. People seemed to forget that.
On this subject, the above is the only thing I feel strongly about. I am happy to have council houses rented at very affordable rates to people who need it for whatever reason. I very much object to letting the tenants buy the properties off the council though, especially at the prices they are offered for.Von Luck said:
I have a friend in Portsmouth whose mother lives in a council house, she is eligable to buy the propery for roughly 1/4 to 1/5 of the price it would get on the normal market, where that to happen the council lose a property and hand someone a huge asset, for no good reason.
Man, you could just feel the charity flowing from this thread
I love it, people would seriously consider forcing women to have abortions just so they can have a few extra £££s in their pocket to blow on trivialities. Nice, real nice.
I love it, people would seriously consider forcing women to have abortions just so they can have a few extra £££s in their pocket to blow on trivialities. Nice, real nice.