www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-16499636
Better start building jails fast....
|
|
Hmmm! - by building Gaols, and filling them with the council house scammers, makes me think that the Government is also jumping on the "bandwagon" . We pay the government through our taxes to keep them in there, so all thats actually happening is that the "Rent" is being transferred from "private" enterprise toi H.M`s coffers!
|
|
About time. It should also be a criminal offence to have a council tenancy when you own another home or if you earn shed loads of money (Bob Crowe take note)
|
Could transform the council house into a jail, two a room plus slopping out.
That might make a difference.. pot thrown through the windows?
|
|
I think they use council houses to grow pot in, not throw it through the windows.
Last edited by: Zero on Wed 11 Jan 12 at 14:54
|
This is great news, the fact it is that private rented property is often over priced and substandard. We need more social housing for the genuine WORKING classes. We cannot all earn £40k a year and those that earn the minimum wage are as often as hard working as those that earn a lot more.
I am sure such schemes could run on a not for profit basis without actually having to rely too much on the tax payer too.
|
I came across a few examples of sub-letting when doing the Census, people were up front about it and could see nothing wrong with it.
For the first time ever (maybe) I believe the Labour lot have a point in blaming this Government for not building enough social housing, however they were in power since 1997 and could have sorted this nonsense out before now, they could for instance have stopped people buying their social housing a long, long time ago.
Rattle is absolutely right with his comment.
|
The trouble is : as money is not infinite, when you have a choice of investing in social housing or paying more in benefits... a politician is likely to take the easy course.
The fact that many politicians were grateful for, as the property market rose and they bought houses with their allowances and rented them out - and made large gains..
I am sure the latter did not directly influence policy but a well funded social housing program would have relieved the pressure on house availability..
A war with Iraq was far more important...
|
There are thousands of empty houses. Those not fit to work should be moved somewhere cheaper and where there are plenty of empty properties!
If you want to improve the rental sector then you change the rules so that landlords can only let via a proper ARLA letting agent. The standard of rental properties is generally much higher through agents as they carry the can a lot more. Slack letting agents also need chasing.
I also think landlords that meet decent standards should get tax breaks and those that rent out hovels should get a reduce allowance if they don't bring them up to standard ie safe and dry with a reasonable standard of decorative maintenance. There also needs to be a code of conduct and what things are fixed and within what timescales and also where the tenant will have to contribute if they have caused damage or contributed to a failure eg incorrect operation of a boiler or whatever.
I also think there are a lot of poor landlords around as they get poor tenants that skip off and play the system. The more you stamp this out the less excuse there is for being a bad landlord.
|
I agree Teabelly. I sister is paying £450 a month to rent a 1 bed flat, she has had no end of problems although to be fair most issues have been fixed, but they are silly things which should have been fixed before it was let out.
Things like arcing light switches, a faulty boiler, broken washers, illegal light fittings etc.
My grand parents lived in a council house, but they could treat at their own and looked altered it, my granddad had a decent job as a purchasing officer, and my grandmother in her later working life managed a rest home. They ended up scraping enough money to get a deposit to buy it under the right to buy. 50 years later my grandmother still live in that house.
So I am not against the right to buy, but I can see it has contributed to the problems we have now with the social housing shortage. On the other hand it may have cost councils too much to keep older housing stock, and well built modern buildings may be a better solution.
One major problem is the lack of 1 bedroom flats in social housing, and on the private market they are far too expensive.
|
|
Trouble is that due to the law of unintended consequences LA houses in decent areas were snapped up and became cosy little streets of privately owned houses and as the councils ran out of "problem" tenants started to be located in pockets of decent housing, these pockets grew like parasites and eventually took over whole streets as the decent tenants left....
|
>>"problem" tenants started to be located in pockets of decent housing
Happening to me. Neighbours house was sold to a housing association that specialised in difficult cases. Boundary fence has been down since September, the housing association accept it's theirs but refuse to do it because of the amount of dog excrement (three bull terriers) causing a health risk. They seem to think it's acceptable for me to have the health risk as the dogs foul my garden.
Two doors away was sold before Christmas. Nobody's moved in yet. Rumour has it...........
|
|
Oh noo......Jeremy Clarkson ?
|
>>I also think landlords that meet decent standards should get tax breaks
But therein lies the problem, housing is a huge money spinner so this will only encourage them to buy more properties, drive prices up and we end up with even less houses.
From another thread
>>we had a council flat at Bankside next to The Tate Mod. in London, bought it for about £56k and sold it after just 6 months for about £96k
It all goes back to supply and demand - there is just simply not enough social housing and priorities should be placed here. But not at the profit of private individuals.
|
Step-son bought an ex-council house about 6 or 7 years ago (he currently rents it out). I can't remember the figures but the seller had bought it for probably 4 times less than they sold it for. A tidy profit.
A lot of the other houses are still (decent quality and size) council houses. And when I briefly stayed there (in between selling/buying) the council put in new windows, doors, and all sorts in the other houses. Must have been costing a fortune. And the old windows and doors looked fine to me.
|
|
Funny you should mention that, the house we lived in before moving here was was a beer can throw away from a small LA estate (20 or so houses) most had been bought and had sprouted conservatories and extensions at one extreme, to decent paint jobs and new front doors at the other end. One house stood out - it was a bought house, largely unloved it had escaped renovation by the owners and by the council - the coup de grace was last winter when the guttering collapsed under the weight of snow - they were in the same condition when we left in April.....sad really.
|
|
Anybody who sub lets lock them up.To many people in need of social housing.
|
Not sure about this one.
Obvious that we need to stop people 'stealing' social housing but does it need Criminal Law? Looks to me a bit like the 'law for every occasion' grandstanding for which the last government were rightly criticised.
Tenancy agreements surely contain a covenant against sub-letting. Wouldn't it be better to ensure such covenants were rigorously enforced with fast track re-possession perhaps including an 'claim for profits' when the Council enforces.
|
1. Can't sue someone with no assets.
2. Scumbags only worry about being jailed - any other 'social' alternative let's them think they got away with it.
|
Here in Leeds a rough area called Holbeck which is run down and mainly council houses have been compulsary bought by the council and many are boarded up, which would be better if they bull dozed the lot and build smaller 2x bed houses, 3/4 bed but keep them small no huge gardens and fill the plots with homes to rent.
|
Sub-letting council houses - devonite
