SOCIAL HOUSING SUBSIDIES

There seems to be a very large proportion of 'social housing', with rents totally out of line with private sector. There is anecdotal indications that some occupants are earning sufficient to pay more.

Price social housing property at commercial rates and rebate down to lower levels deserving cases only. Every occupant will then appreciate what they're paying and the genuine hardship cases will be rebated to existing levels.

Establish a pricing tariff say £400 p.m for 1 b/r flats, 600 p.m for 2 b/r houses £800 p.m. for 3 b/r houses £1000 p.m for 4 b/r detached etc Rebate, based on Tax declarations to subsidised levels currently where stats allow , thus 'cleansing the entire system' of dubious occupancies
and combining 2 depts co-operation to produce results

Idea submitted via –e-mail – Moderator

Why the contribution is important

1500 properties saving £300 p.m.= £5.4m.

by GavinIOMGov on April 24, 2017 at 03:03PM

Current Rating

5.0
Average score : 5.0
Based on : 1 vote

Comments

  • Posted by SuzyB April 25, 2017 at 18:28

    This is not a bad idea - I would go further and add that each tenant should have their circumstances checked every two years to as to make the best of the housing stock. i.e. a once large family who's children have left home could move from say a four or three bedroomed house to a two bedroomed house.

    Also if one or both people in social housing have an income or joint income of over a certain amount say £60,000 then maybe they should have to buy a property like the rest of us.

    A small point, I think Government Central or local should have in their leases that gardens have to be looked after and kept neat all year round as some of the social housing gardens that I drive by each day look appalling and you cant help think if the outside looks like that what does the inside look like !!
  • Posted by FionaSmith April 26, 2017 at 11:15

    I would agree with Suzy B.
    I work with staff who have incomes of much lower tan £60,000 and own their own properties is this not what the current system of first time buyers scheme is for. I may be wrong but I believe this scheme does not have to solely be for a newly built property.
    Maybe rename the first time buyers and widen it to include those who have moved here could afford a mortgage but can not save for a deposit due to rental costs.
    This would generate government investment and free up the rental sector as well as stimulating the lower end of the property ladder?
  • Posted by ninjadispenser May 06, 2017 at 18:15

    Agree with both comments.I was a trained nurse and earned nowhere near £60,000!Yet would not have qualified as had no kids so paid private rent and then a mortgage. Means testing is the only way and threshold should be less too.Who earns 60 grand? Not that many I am certain.Also it should be in the initial contract that if required to move to smaller house when children leave home,they HAVE to do it.The house doesn't belong to the person,it belongs to the Tax payer who subsidises it and the whole point is that it is for those in need of it,not the 'we've lived here for 30 years therefore we own it by default' person.If you want to own something,BUY it like the rest of us have to.
    Private sector tenants don't have security of tenure and it could be proposed that they are discriminated against because they don't qualify for a council house.
  • Posted by bluffy May 10, 2017 at 15:32

    There's quite clearly not enough social housing to deal with the problems that we have of hidden homelessness.
    How about exploring different tenures, such as shared equity, mid market rent and golden share and regulating the private sector rented market more strictly to ensure these homes reach a decent quality standard.
    Means testing that frequently sounds expensive and counter-productive - and not conducive to stable communities.
Log in or register to add comments and rate ideas