A word of warning on buying council houses

[Grandad.Malky]

I agree, and its particularly pertinent to this discussion as the Right to Buy is not available to people who have been unable to get a council tenancy.

 

I haven’t heard it put like that before but you have a valid point ………. Perhaps everyone should have the “right” to buy a house with 75% off …… why are those renting from the council any different from those renting privately or those with a mortgage.

[Shogun]

I bought my council house and it was the best thing I ever did it is a corner house with loads of land and and in a decent part of the area, I have looked around for a better property but what I have know would cost a lot more if I was to buy privately, the price of resale of the house would not cover anywhere near what I have,the only issue I have had is the work and money I have had to do to the house to bring it up to standard as the council did nothing but running repairs and bodging when it was a council house.

[fake]

why are those renting from the council any different from those renting privately or those with a mortgage.

 

Probably because the RTB was bought in for social landlords and not private ones. People in housing associations also have the RTB and so they should as a lot of housing association properties were once council owned.

 

Those with a mortgage have already bought their property so don't count.

[MrSmith]

Probably because the RTB was bought in for social landlords and not private ones. People in housing associations also have the RTB and so they should as a lot of housing association properties were once council owned.

 

Those with a mortgage have already bought their property so don't count.

 

I don't think they have a right to a discount, if you buying a housing association house under right to buy you would usually pay full market price.

[fake]

Sorry I was wrong.

 

I knew there was a discount for housing associations but had to look it up and it is in fact a "Right To Acquire" and not a "Right To Buy".

 

RTA gives a discount of between £9,000 and £16,000 depending on property and location.

[Benedictine]

I haven’t heard it put like that before but you have a valid point ………. Perhaps everyone should have the “right” to buy a house with 75% off …… why are those renting from the council any different from those renting privately or those with a mortgage.

 

75%? Our discount is nothing like that, it is more like 45% and that is including the latest extra discount just recently brought in.

 

Sorry I was wrong.

 

I knew there was a discount for housing associations but had to look it up and it is in fact a "Right To Acquire" and not a "Right To Buy".

 

RTA gives a discount of between £9,000 and £16,000 depending on property and location.

 

Are you sure. I was told from a couple who have lived in a housing association property that they was not allowed to buy the property, despite investing in doing the property up. They have since moved into a private property to buy.

[Plain Talker]

there may be covenants placed on Housing Association properties that they may not be part of Right to buy/ acquire, As I understand my own tenancy agreement, there is (was?) such a covenant on my property.

 

I understand there have been some changes to RTB legislation, and that some of my Housing Association's properties have had the no-sale covenant removed. I don't know if that is the case with my own, but it does not really affect me as I have no plans to buy this property, even if the covenants have gone.

[Benedictine]

there may be covenants placed on Housing Association properties that they may not be part of Right to buy/ acquire, As I understand my own tenancy agreement, there is (was?) such a covenant on my property.

 

I understand there have been some changes to RTB legislation, and that some of my Housing Association's properties have had the no-sale covenant removed. I don't know if that is the case with my own, but it does not really affect me as I have no plans to buy this property, even if the covenants have gone.

 

OK, thanks for that. I wondered if that was the case. That does seem unfair on the ones that can't buy though, some can, some can't.

 

I personally know a few people who have been led to believe they can buy (and have spent money on improvements) and then been told they can't. I have to say I think this is unfair on them. It does explain the confusion though.

 

How come you don't want to buy? Won't it be cheaper to buy than rent, I'm sure it would be?

[Cyclone]

And who are these people who would turn down the opportunity to buy their own house at a discount (having paid rent for years and years)? Not me. Not you, as you have already admitted you would do the same, not anybody of any sense, maybe a wannabe Mother Teresa or the insane?

I didn't say that I expect them to do it, I said they should do.

 

 

A tenfold profit is a tenfold profit, it is not a bad investment, particularly when making a profit was not the main objective.

It's a terrible investment if you should have made a twentyfold return.

 

 

No it isn't. The council's main objective is not to try to follow Lord Sugar but to provide a service. With the money gained in rental and sales they are free to build more properties. As I said before it is a potential win/win.

Have they been free to build new properties? I don't think they have.

[Cyclone]

You originally stated;

"social housing is not a right"

 

And I replied:

"Yes it is as anybody, given a few exceptions, has the right to apply for one."

 

Then you agreed;

"Applying for social housing is a right (at the moment), having such a house is not or everybody who applied would get one."

 

Then I said;

"Glad you agree"

 

Then you replied;

"I'm not sure you understood my point. Applying doesn't guarantee that you will get it. So the right to apply can exist forever, but hopefully the right to actually be granted social housing will be restricted to those that actually need it."

 

The I replied;

"But I do understand your point, the fact is though it is still a right that everyone can exercise and just because there is no guarantee that you would get one doesn't detract from the fact that it is right. One that is also regulated by law."

 

Then you said;

"Nobody has ever disputed that though. Social housing is not a right."

 

Then I pointed out this:

"Yes it is as anybody, given a few exceptions, has the right to apply for one."

 

And then you said;

"There's a massive difference between the right to apply and the right to have. Having social housing is not a right."

 

 

What was being discussed was the right to apply and not the right to have as you well know, so stop trying to twist the words to suit your agenda and stick to answering what was originally written.

 

I think the comment twisted logic was spot on.

No it wasn't. When I made my first comment

 

"social housing is not a right"

 

I was referring to the fact that having social housing is not a right. The clues were in the words that I used, they were correct, they are still correct.

You argued and then attempted to make it about the right to apply for social housing. I hadn't commented on the right to apply, as a right to apply is pretty much meaningless.

 

So what I stated was exactly what I meant, and it was correct when I stated it, correct all through your argument against it and is still correct now.

 

Social housing is not a right, if it were there wouldn't be an application process whereby you could fail to be given the social housing.