Right or wrong? Social housing on new builds
Discussion
I need to declare an interest here: I grew up on a particularly nasty council estate till I was 14 and then, 8 years ago, post divorce, found myself in a housing association scheme starting all over again...so, you could say I have form.....
Have recently moved into a city town house on an 8 year old development which has, either end of it, housing association social houses/flats no different in style to the ones bought by the rest of us.
What gets me is the world of difference between those who are clearly buying their house through the HA and those who rent through it. The development has a thoughtful small children's park in the middle which becomes the night time magnet for the teen children to congregate and well, leave tins, smashed glass, etc etc. Uncut lawns? Yep, rented houses. Crap outside their house? Yep rented houses. Chav-esque drama between two alchies? Yep outside the rented houses.
The problems I've witnessed aren't really affecting me but I do massively feel for the people/ young couples making a go of it with their first staged house purchase alongside someone who doesn't give a f
k as its all paid for by benefits. It seems really unfair a person can be handed a subsidised way of life to then admonish responsibility for taking care of the property, its surroundings or how their children behave in the community.
Is/was the expectation a person will change their behaviour if surrounded by people holding down a career, paying a mortgage? So, my question is, does the social housing - must - be - included - in - every - new - housing - development actually work? Stair casing to buy homes for couples/families is wholly appropriate but the rented inclusion is leaving me cold! Having lived in Hackney for a decade, I obviously fully accept unsociable behaviour will be far higher in a city due to the confluence of so many people.
It must also be an utter pain for house builders as well. One Taylor Wimpey house on a new site I seriously considered earlier this year got the big thumbs down from me when the sales agent sheepishly admitted HA was mixed cheek to cheek with private buyers' houses...and yes Id have a HA 4 bed rented house next door to me......suffice to say I walked away. She did also admit in excess of 40% of the new builds on the development was SH. This seemed a massive figure.
So, your views would be interesting. What have your experiences been? Do you think the 'watering down' of what old money would call council estates is the way forward in reducing social problems? Or does it merely spread the problems over wider areas and ultimately affect your house value when you come to sell?
Have recently moved into a city town house on an 8 year old development which has, either end of it, housing association social houses/flats no different in style to the ones bought by the rest of us.
What gets me is the world of difference between those who are clearly buying their house through the HA and those who rent through it. The development has a thoughtful small children's park in the middle which becomes the night time magnet for the teen children to congregate and well, leave tins, smashed glass, etc etc. Uncut lawns? Yep, rented houses. Crap outside their house? Yep rented houses. Chav-esque drama between two alchies? Yep outside the rented houses.
The problems I've witnessed aren't really affecting me but I do massively feel for the people/ young couples making a go of it with their first staged house purchase alongside someone who doesn't give a f
k as its all paid for by benefits. It seems really unfair a person can be handed a subsidised way of life to then admonish responsibility for taking care of the property, its surroundings or how their children behave in the community. Is/was the expectation a person will change their behaviour if surrounded by people holding down a career, paying a mortgage? So, my question is, does the social housing - must - be - included - in - every - new - housing - development actually work? Stair casing to buy homes for couples/families is wholly appropriate but the rented inclusion is leaving me cold! Having lived in Hackney for a decade, I obviously fully accept unsociable behaviour will be far higher in a city due to the confluence of so many people.
It must also be an utter pain for house builders as well. One Taylor Wimpey house on a new site I seriously considered earlier this year got the big thumbs down from me when the sales agent sheepishly admitted HA was mixed cheek to cheek with private buyers' houses...and yes Id have a HA 4 bed rented house next door to me......suffice to say I walked away. She did also admit in excess of 40% of the new builds on the development was SH. This seemed a massive figure.
So, your views would be interesting. What have your experiences been? Do you think the 'watering down' of what old money would call council estates is the way forward in reducing social problems? Or does it merely spread the problems over wider areas and ultimately affect your house value when you come to sell?
why would anyone want to live with council/social housing people. if they cannot work etc. they need to live in basic housing away from people who are working hard . Homes should be built for those that can afford them . If the government want to house people , let them build places . good people need clean quiet places to live
brianashley said:
why would anyone want to live with council/social housing people. if they cannot work etc. they need to live in basic housing away from people who are working hard . Homes should be built for those that can afford them . If the government want to house people , let them build places . good people need clean quiet places to live
I grew up in a council house. My parents still live in it, having bought it from the council years ago.People have to live somewhere, so you really are asking the question:
(A) Do you want "council" to be on private estates, or
(B) Do you want "council" to live in a ghetto.
A is a crap choice, but since it's better than B, I choose A.
brianashley said:
why would anyone want to live with council/social housing people. if they cannot work etc. they need to live in basic housing away from people who are working hard . Homes should be built for those that can afford them . If the government want to house people , let them build places . good people need clean quiet places to live
Where should people who don't work hard live? Sadly if you work you do not get many benefits and certainly no help to get social housing as only the 'vulnerable' get that.
By vulnerable I mean supposed drink,drug,mental health,just released from prison,problems etc.
All the scuzzies have to do is pretend they have one or more 'problems' and hey presto a place to live is provided for them to wreck.I do not believe all unemployed people are like that though.
We all have seen them hanging around loudly discussing their 'issues',usually late at night or in the early hours of the day.
Meanwhile the truly vulnerable are treated like st and those that live in a home provided by toil not only have to tolerate the rubbish but pay for their upkeep as well.
My grandparents lived in a council house and I remember it as safe,clean and tidy so there is no excuse.
Social housing on new builds is a good idea,BUT should only be for those that can pay for it through working,this sadly rarely happens.
The above is my view on this,nothing more.
By vulnerable I mean supposed drink,drug,mental health,just released from prison,problems etc.
All the scuzzies have to do is pretend they have one or more 'problems' and hey presto a place to live is provided for them to wreck.I do not believe all unemployed people are like that though.
We all have seen them hanging around loudly discussing their 'issues',usually late at night or in the early hours of the day.
Meanwhile the truly vulnerable are treated like s
t and those that live in a home provided by toil not only have to tolerate the rubbish but pay for their upkeep as well.My grandparents lived in a council house and I remember it as safe,clean and tidy so there is no excuse.
Social housing on new builds is a good idea,BUT should only be for those that can pay for it through working,this sadly rarely happens.
The above is my view on this,nothing more.
Edited by jjohnson23 on Monday 1st May 04:12
Edited by jjohnson23 on Monday 1st May 04:13
I too grew up on a rough council estate, Fortunately both my parents worked and i followed suit as soon as i left school. I purchased my first house on that estate with my wife and we had twins, just after they were born we decided to move as the area was starting to lose its community spirit and with the influx of immigrants being housed there looking rather shabby.
We moved to a newish development with a small area of social housing, the area was nice and green with everything kept in order.
Roll on 10 years and 2 new extensions to the area have been built with a high percentage of social housing mixed with purchased housing. You could the see the change straight away and the once new houses/flats started to look dirty and unkempt. There are a couple of exceptions, one of which is a house that faces the main road and has an afro carribean family in it. The guy leaves for work around 5.30-6am and down get back until 6ish, the house externally is immaculate.
My problem with social housing is that not enough is done to make sure the houses and area are kept as they were before they were built.
Another gripe of mine is the new developments are being brought up my private landlords that rent back to the councils thus inflating rents and ultimately our council taxes.
We moved to a newish development with a small area of social housing, the area was nice and green with everything kept in order.
Roll on 10 years and 2 new extensions to the area have been built with a high percentage of social housing mixed with purchased housing. You could the see the change straight away and the once new houses/flats started to look dirty and unkempt. There are a couple of exceptions, one of which is a house that faces the main road and has an afro carribean family in it. The guy leaves for work around 5.30-6am and down get back until 6ish, the house externally is immaculate.
My problem with social housing is that not enough is done to make sure the houses and area are kept as they were before they were built.
Another gripe of mine is the new developments are being brought up my private landlords that rent back to the councils thus inflating rents and ultimately our council taxes.
We've a similar issue which is why I'm trying hard to move. There are 3 social houses behind us and each house has 4 or so children and they are just left to run riot. They've recently taken to sitting on a wall meaning they look directly into my not overlooked garden.
You can tell which ones are rented as they just don't give a st. Gardens are full of crap, fences and gates get broken and they don't care because some nice man comes from the council to fix it, Mid winter and windows are left wide open as clearly they don't need to pay. Etc etc.
The kids have recently taking to racing up and down the road in trolleys from the local tesco, as they'd rather push their shopping home rather than carry it like a normal person.
They really are scum. They have no responsibility or respect for where they live, and that is the issue. They don't pay for it, so why should they care.
Cannot wait to move, my only issue is finding a buyer, our Saturday viewing was put off by the little sts.
You can tell which ones are rented as they just don't give a s
t. Gardens are full of crap, fences and gates get broken and they don't care because some nice man comes from the council to fix it, Mid winter and windows are left wide open as clearly they don't need to pay. Etc etc.The kids have recently taking to racing up and down the road in trolleys from the local tesco, as they'd rather push their shopping home rather than carry it like a normal person.
They really are scum. They have no responsibility or respect for where they live, and that is the issue. They don't pay for it, so why should they care.
Cannot wait to move, my only issue is finding a buyer, our Saturday viewing was put off by the little s
ts.It is (rightly or wrongly) the harsh reality of life's pecking order.
Prince Philip does not want to live next to the oiks who can only afford a £5m small townhouse in Kensington...
The Kensington dweller does not want to live next to the oiks who can only afford a £500k detached on a cringey newbuild estate...
The cringey newbuilders do not want to live next to the oiks who can only afford a £50k council house...
The council housers do not want to live next to the oiks who can only afford a £50 homeless tent under the bridge...
Prince Philip does not want to live next to the oiks who can only afford a £5m small townhouse in Kensington...
The Kensington dweller does not want to live next to the oiks who can only afford a £500k detached on a cringey newbuild estate...
The cringey newbuilders do not want to live next to the oiks who can only afford a £50k council house...
The council housers do not want to live next to the oiks who can only afford a £50 homeless tent under the bridge...
Underlying theme here is HA's are at fault for not keeping their 'manors' in order. I do strongly agree with this. I'd be gutted if I was a a private home owner affected by some of the crap I've seen going on. The totalitarian side of me would come down like a tonne of bricks on anyone who failed to follow the ground rules and kick them out.
Reading some of the comments here also confirms the marked difference between a person who buys and one who rents a HA house/flat. Im even more relieved I passed on the Taylor Wimpey house.
Reading some of the comments here also confirms the marked difference between a person who buys and one who rents a HA house/flat. Im even more relieved I passed on the Taylor Wimpey house.
kurt535 said:
Underlying theme here is HA's are at fault for not keeping their 'manors' in order. I do strongly agree with this. I'd be gutted if I was a a private home owner affected by some of the crap I've seen going on. The totalitarian side of me would come down like a tonne of bricks on anyone who failed to follow the ground rules and kick them out.
Reading some of the comments here also confirms the marked difference between a person who buys and one who rents a HA house/flat. Im even more relieved I passed on the Taylor Wimpey house.
Some have separate entrance for the social housing people . About 3/4 mile from us we have these charity type homes for ex young offenders .The mess and state of the places is terrible. Police there all the time .Little "crews" all waiting around to settle scores etc . WHY are they housed with decent people and families. Imagine you are paying £1500 mortgage on a 2 bed flat in a medium quality area etc. Going to work etc .And some of your neighbours are getting it all for free and spending all day making the place look untidy etc .Society needs to be about rewards .You work hard you get something. You dont work , you get SFA and moved to Wales /bradford or something.Reading some of the comments here also confirms the marked difference between a person who buys and one who rents a HA house/flat. Im even more relieved I passed on the Taylor Wimpey house.
About ten years ago I was eyeing a new development. A two bed flat was £160k and the development was a mix of private and HA. Needless to say I walked away - not least because I didn't much fancy the thought of my car in its "allocated parking space" overnight surrounded by these dossers. The private stuff struggled to sell and eventually the two bed I'd looked at, at £160k, was listed at £85k. Not nice for anyone who'd actually bought one!
Everyone needs somewhere to live but any element of subsidised housing in a private development should be exclusively for people who are buying, and work hard, but simply can't afford the full price. People who don't want to work for the things that they get to make use of in life shouldn't be mixed in with those who do.
Everyone needs somewhere to live but any element of subsidised housing in a private development should be exclusively for people who are buying, and work hard, but simply can't afford the full price. People who don't want to work for the things that they get to make use of in life shouldn't be mixed in with those who do.
MitchT said:
About ten years ago I was eyeing a new development. A two bed flat was £160k and the development was a mix of private and HA. Needless to say I walked away - not least because I didn't much fancy the thought of my car in its "allocated parking space" overnight surrounded by these dossers. The private stuff struggled to sell and eventually the two bed I'd looked at, at £160k, was listed at £85k. Not nice for anyone who'd actually bought one!
Everyone needs somewhere to live but any element of subsidised housing in a private development should be exclusively for people who are buying, and work hard, but simply can't afford the full price. People who don't want to work for the things that they get to make use of in life shouldn't be mixed in with those who do.
Jaysus - what part of the world was this?Everyone needs somewhere to live but any element of subsidised housing in a private development should be exclusively for people who are buying, and work hard, but simply can't afford the full price. People who don't want to work for the things that they get to make use of in life shouldn't be mixed in with those who do.
Edited by kurt535 on Monday 1st May 09:23
kurt535 said:
EVERY new build development over 3 or is it 7 units, even in a nice 'area', has to build social housing (up to 40%) as part of the planning application approval.
Exactly that. If you are looking at new developments, you basically have to get a look at the site drawings asap and buy off plan in the better part of the site, i.e the other side of the HA builds.It's rediculous; new redrow estate near me with some lovely expensive houses we would like but can't afford, but the same standard of houses is given away. Pisses me off
Gassing Station | Homes, Gardens and DIY | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff