How to get a council house.

Author
Discussion

handbraketurn

1,371 posts

165 months

Sunday 4th August 2013
quotequote all
Jonathan27 said:
If you can't afford to live in London, then don't. Easy enough right!

I can't afford to live in Kensington, so guess what; I don't live there.

This appplies more so for those who dont have a job, fair enough if you asked someone who lives and works in Lonodn to move to Sheffield, but if they don't have a job and want a free (or very cheap) house, then they should go where they are told. Also if you turn down a suitable property, then that should be it.
These people are not all unemployed, they are low income. I don't know the exact levels that give you access to be on the housing list.

To give you an idea, IIRC the average combined income to get on the property ladder is c£80k pa. The average salary is closer to £27k.

That is why very few people can afford to buy in London anymore and there is a generation of young people renting.

Pushing people who cannot afford to live in London to outter London boroughs is sort of passing the buck really. Those boroughs don't want inner London exporting their poor families out and wiping their hands of them.

This also creates wealthy ghettos in central London, Councils want mixed communities. Particularly where there are families who are established and have their support network in an area. Not to mention a balanced work force, not all jobs in society are well paid, including essential services.

Westminster council tried moving their homeless out of London and got lambasted for 'social cleansing':

http://www.insidehousing.co.uk/tenancies/westminst...






Edited by handbraketurn on Sunday 4th August 23:51

egor110

16,817 posts

202 months

Sunday 4th August 2013
quotequote all
Jonathan27 said:
If you can't afford to live in London, then don't. Easy enough right!

I can't afford to live in Kensington, so guess what; I don't live there.

This appplies more so for those who dont have a job, fair enough if you asked someone who lives and works in Lonodn to move to Sheffield, but if they don't have a job and want a free (or very cheap) house, then they should go where they are told. Also if you turn down a suitable property, then that should be it.
Who's going to do all the low paid stty jobs, the binmen, postmen cleaners etc?

If you have to commute in you'd spend most your wage on travel, if your on a good wage then it makes it worth paying to commute but not on min wage, so then your back to square one with a section of the population not working because it doesn't pay.

Funkycoldribena

7,379 posts

153 months

Sunday 4th August 2013
quotequote all
egor110 said:
Jonathan27 said:
If you can't afford to live in London, then don't. Easy enough right!

I can't afford to live in Kensington, so guess what; I don't live there.

This appplies more so for those who dont have a job, fair enough if you asked someone who lives and works in Lonodn to move to Sheffield, but if they don't have a job and want a free (or very cheap) house, then they should go where they are told. Also if you turn down a suitable property, then that should be it.
Who's going to do all the low paid stty jobs, the binmen, postmen cleaners etc?

If you have to commute in you'd spend most your wage on travel, if your on a good wage then it makes it worth paying to commute but not on min wage, so then your back to square one with a section of the population not working because it doesn't pay.
Exactly.Let all the low paid get kicked out of London,I'd love to see it!Watching all the complainers when their post doesnt arrive,the streets are piling up with crap and they cant order Chateau de Ponce in the restaurant because theres no waitress.

egor110

16,817 posts

202 months

Sunday 4th August 2013
quotequote all
Funkycoldribena said:
Exactly.Let all the low paid get kicked out of London,I'd love to see it!Watching all the complainers when their post doesnt arrive,the streets are piling up with crap and they cant order Chateau de Ponce in the restaurant because theres no waitress.
I kind of agree yet on the flipside it would piss me off if i was paying a mortgage and had a neighbour in the same road/house getting money off from the council.

On the flip side if i was on a 0 hour contract and getting paid £7 hour to travel into london for 3 hours cleaning work i doubt i'd do it either.

If i was a postie in inner london would there be public transport to get me into london for a 6.30 start? if not what would i be paying out per week on parking?

Koofler

616 posts

165 months

Monday 5th August 2013
quotequote all
Guvernator said:
they only use it to watch Jeremy Kyle anyway. biggrin
Or the 'news', as they call it.........

Guvernator

13,103 posts

164 months

Monday 5th August 2013
quotequote all
Funkycoldribena said:
Exactly.Let all the low paid get kicked out of London,I'd love to see it!Watching all the complainers when their post doesnt arrive,the streets are piling up with crap and they cant order Chateau de Ponce in the restaurant because theres no waitress.
We aren't talking about kicking the low paid out. I have no problem with people who work for a living. Most of the cleaners, waiters and waitresses etc are European nationals anyway who work very hard and actually pay rent to live in London. I also don't have a problem with basic council housing being provided for those who actually require it, what I don't agree with is a the work shy getting to live in a half a million pound semi for free when there are genuine hard working people who can't afford to do that.

Happy82

15,077 posts

168 months

Monday 5th August 2013
quotequote all
Guvernator said:
We aren't talking about kicking the low paid out. I have no problem with people who work for a living. Most of the cleaners, waiters and waitresses etc are European nationals anyway who work very hard and actually pay rent to live in London. I also don't have a problem with basic council housing being provided for those who actually require it, what I don't agree with is a the work shy getting to live in a half a million pound semi for free when there are genuine hard working people who can't afford to do that.
yes

But sadly the system will never change

Funkycoldribena

7,379 posts

153 months

Monday 5th August 2013
quotequote all
Guvernator said:
We aren't talking about kicking the low paid out. I have no problem with people who work for a living. Most of the cleaners, waiters and waitresses etc are European nationals anyway who work very hard and actually pay rent to live in London. I also don't have a problem with basic council housing being provided for those who actually require it, what I don't agree with is a the work shy getting to live in a half a million pound semi for free when there are genuine hard working people who can't afford to do that.
What about those that work say,10 hours a week,20,5? Where do you want to draw the line? What about the hardworking waitress who gets made redundant?Do you want her kicked out her house as soon as she loses her job? What about those on zero hour contracts?

monthefish

20,439 posts

230 months

Monday 5th August 2013
quotequote all
the bloke from the council said:
You could wait a minimum of up to 5 years
Genius.

Guvernator

13,103 posts

164 months

Monday 5th August 2013
quotequote all
Funkycoldribena said:
Guvernator said:
We aren't talking about kicking the low paid out. I have no problem with people who work for a living. Most of the cleaners, waiters and waitresses etc are European nationals anyway who work very hard and actually pay rent to live in London. [b}I also don't have a problem with basic council housing being provided for those who actually require it[/b), what I don't agree with is a the work shy getting to live in a half a million pound semi for free when there are genuine hard working people who can't afford to do that.
What about those that work say,10 hours a week,20,5? Where do you want to draw the line? What about the hardworking waitress who gets made redundant?Do you want her kicked out her house as soon as she loses her job? What about those on zero hour contracts?
Did you read the bit in my post in bold above? I don't have any problem with providing BASIC housing to those who are in need, what I don't agree with is people on benefits living in a better house than 90% of the population can afford for free. Social housing benefit should be just that, emergency housing providinng a reasonable standard of accomodation until you can get back on your feet. If it's actually more beneficial for people to stay unemployed or on benefits then to go to work, something is seriously wrong with that system.

Funkycoldribena

7,379 posts

153 months

Monday 5th August 2013
quotequote all
Guvernator said:
Funkycoldribena said:
Guvernator said:
We aren't talking about kicking the low paid out. I have no problem with people who work for a living. Most of the cleaners, waiters and waitresses etc are European nationals anyway who work very hard and actually pay rent to live in London. [b}I also don't have a problem with basic council housing being provided for those who actually require it[/b), what I don't agree with is a the work shy getting to live in a half a million pound semi for free when there are genuine hard working people who can't afford to do that.
What about those that work say,10 hours a week,20,5? Where do you want to draw the line? What about the hardworking waitress who gets made redundant?Do you want her kicked out her house as soon as she loses her job? What about those on zero hour contracts?
Did you read the bit in my post in bold above? I don't have any problem with providing BASIC housing to those who are in need, what I don't agree with is people on benefits living in a better house than 90% of the population can afford for free. Social housing benefit should be just that, emergency housing providinng a reasonable standard of accomodation until you can get back on your feet. If it's actually more beneficial for people to stay unemployed or on benefits then to go to work, something is seriously wrong with that system.
I dont disagree,the flat featured on the program was ridiculous for social housing (the fact they at first refused it made the whole thing twice as unpalatable).
However while benefits levels are a problem for some I'd say the problem more lies with the lousy wages a lot of employers in this country think they can get away with paying.

egor110

16,817 posts

202 months

Monday 5th August 2013
quotequote all
Funkycoldribena said:
I dont disagree,the flat featured on the program was ridiculous for social housing (the fact they at first refused it made the whole thing twice as unpalatable).
However while benefits levels are a problem for some I'd say the problem more lies with the lousy wages a lot of employers in this country think they can get away with paying.
Not think, do get away with paying.

Wtf is the point of 0 hour contracts? The employer gets cheap labour but tax payers still end up paying because how does somebody on a 0 hour contract save, or get on the housing ladder when they have no idea how many hours they'll be working.

So we still end up paying for the council houses, there reduced council tax etc.

Birdster

2,529 posts

142 months

Tuesday 6th August 2013
quotequote all
Mixed emotions watching this. People milking the system and refusing acceptable housing. Yet an elderly lady can't be placed in a ground floor flat. I don't think that is too much to ask.

Chris Type R

8,018 posts

248 months

Tuesday 6th August 2013
quotequote all
In the interview with the council chappy banging on about lack of money and choice...anyone else spot what looks like a Herman Miller Mirra chair in the background ? £600 a pop. I suppose they are 50% cheaper than the Aeron model.

monthefish

20,439 posts

230 months

Tuesday 6th August 2013
quotequote all
Funkycoldribena said:
eccles said:
The Don of Croy said:
Also, no lack of wide screen flat panels in social housing, is there?
Why do people bang on about wide screen flat tv's whenever people on benefits are mentioned as if it's some kind of wealth/ status symbol. You can't buy any other kind of tv, and they not exactly expensive! rolleyes
No,no, people on benefits must live on bread and water,have only monopoly for entertainment and maybe a small cloud minnow as a pet.
yes

eccles said:
ikarl said:
eccles said:
Markhoskins said:
eccles said:
Why do people bang on about wide screen flat tv's whenever people on benefits are mentioned as if it's some kind of wealth/ status symbol. You can't buy any other kind of tv, and they not exactly expensive! rolleyes
Hundreds of pounds on flat screen TV and dog food is a lot when you are wondering how you are going to purchase your next meal
Hundreds of pounds? Guess you're shopping at the wrong place then. Get yourself down to the local auction house where you can pick up a non branded flat TV for £10-£20.
The point is, most of the people on these programmes haven't been to the local auction house. Unless they sell relatively new 42" HD tv's for £10-£20.....where is this auction house btw?
So if you're on the dole you can't have a TV wherever you buy it? What size /type of TV would be acceptable for those on benefits to have?
And the electricity to power them is free is it?

As per the chaps suggestion above, monopoly is free to play, as are cards. How about a local library membership, and they can start reading for entertainment?

I don't know why people have this baseline assumption that if they can't afford a normal life they should be provided one by the state. The state should be providing the bare minimum to survive and no more.


monthefish

20,439 posts

230 months

Tuesday 6th August 2013
quotequote all
The older chap wanting the ground floor flat due to mobility.
Why is he still needing social housing if he's worked all his life? He said he'd been in that property for (30?) years.

Wonder how much money he (and the rest of them) spends on cigarettes?

AndyWoodall

2,624 posts

258 months

Tuesday 6th August 2013
quotequote all
Chris Type R said:
In the interview with the council chappy banging on about lack of money and choice...anyone else spot what looks like a Herman Miller Mirra chair in the background ? £600 a pop. I suppose they are 50% cheaper than the Aeron model.
Yep, I noticed that. I might be wrong but it looked like the whole office with people working the phones had them.

I work in local gov, my chair, from circa 1985, probably cost 50p. How some authorities get away with spending on that sort of kit I have no idea.

Johnnytheboy

24,498 posts

185 months

Tuesday 6th August 2013
quotequote all
AndyWoodall said:
Yep, I noticed that. I might be wrong but it looked like the whole office with people working the phones had them.

I work in local gov, my chair, from circa 1985, probably cost 50p. How some authorities get away with spending on that sort of kit I have no idea.
I bet you they get bought right at the end of the financial year.

Chris Type R

8,018 posts

248 months

Tuesday 6th August 2013
quotequote all
AndyWoodall said:
I work in local gov, my chair, from circa 1985, probably cost 50p. How some authorities get away with spending on that sort of kit I have no idea.
(To be fair, they are very good chairs - last for absolutely ages and a little cheaper to buy in bulk.)

As a IT Contractor, working in many companies, I can't say I've ever had better than a Viking direct chair.

Jonathan27

688 posts

163 months

Tuesday 6th August 2013
quotequote all
Funkycoldribena said:
egor110 said:
Jonathan27 said:
If you can't afford to live in London, then don't. Easy enough right!

I can't afford to live in Kensington, so guess what; I don't live there.

This appplies more so for those who dont have a job, fair enough if you asked someone who lives and works in Lonodn to move to Sheffield, but if they don't have a job and want a free (or very cheap) house, then they should go where they are told. Also if you turn down a suitable property, then that should be it.
Who's going to do all the low paid stty jobs, the binmen, postmen cleaners etc?

If you have to commute in you'd spend most your wage on travel, if your on a good wage then it makes it worth paying to commute but not on min wage, so then your back to square one with a section of the population not working because it doesn't pay.
Exactly.Let all the low paid get kicked out of London,I'd love to see it!Watching all the complainers when their post doesnt arrive,the streets are piling up with crap and they cant order Chateau de Ponce in the restaurant because theres no waitress.
Market forces would resolve this in the end. Jobs that need doing, but had a short supply of people would attract a better wage, thus allowing people to live. This would work even better if you removed the housing subsidies that distort the market, allowing for lower wages to be paid.




Edited by Jonathan27 on Tuesday 6th August 15:10