Jump to content

IDS-free council house if tenants work for a year


Recommended Posts

All we can comment on is the info out there at the moment....from that it appears that working for a year after being unemployed will gift you your council house which is then yours to do with as you please..stay there for over 3 years and you keep all the proceeds from it.. I've seen nothing published yet which contradicts this..

 

Basically that is the way it appears, apart from they have to pay back 35% if they sell in three years and then a reduced % thereafter depending on how long they stay in the house.

 

Bearing in mind that currently these houses are owned by the local authority and the pay back is described as a tax who gets it?

 

If it's the government it seems a nice way of receiving cash from someone elses asset, but I'm sure they wouldn't do that, would they?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dreadful idea. If they have a job they should have to leave the council house and buy/rent their own home like everyone else, leaving the council house free for someone who actually needs it.

 

The majority of council houses are occupied by the employed :huh:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I find it hard to support any policies that it make it beneficial to be out of work compared to full time minimum wage in the long run. I can support a short-term enhanced package to encourage, kick and cajole certain people into work or through a bad patch, but work should ALWAYS give you a larger and more secure income than being out of work.

 

I still feel that giving these house away like this will reward those out of work to the point where it makes it more attractive to stay out of work long enough to get the freebies.

 

Also, why would a lot of these people want the house anyway? If they are on unemployment benefits the chances are the house is free to them anyway through housing benefits and all maintenance is done for them. If they are given the house they are no better off financially, but now they are responsible for the upkeep which might actually leave them worse off.

 

Secondly, are they banned from selling the house for a period of time? If they aren't, what's stopping them selling it and then claiming vulnerable person status and getting another free house but with £100k+ in the bank? Or if savings are checked then blowing the money on cars and the like? If they are banned from selling the house then what happens if they get a job somewhere else in the country and want to move? Are they allowed to rent it? So many holes in this policy as it stands.

 

---------- Post added 13-02-2015 at 11:50 ----------

 

The majority of council houses are occupied by the employed :huh:

 

Indeed, but thanks to the minimum wage level being below the living wage large swathes of full time working families cannot afford to rent even the most basic house without relying on a council property. Enforce a living wage and remove tax credits and then reassess.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Secondly, are they banned from selling the house for a period of time? If they aren't, what's stopping them selling it and then claiming vulnerable person status and getting another free house but with £100k+ in the bank? Or if savings are checked then blowing the money on cars and the like? If they are banned from selling the house then what happens if they get a job somewhere else in the country and want to move? Are they allowed to rent it? So many holes in this policy as it stands.

 

The only stipulation I've seen is that if they sell within 3 years then 35% of the proceeds must be given back...

 

---------- Post added 13-02-2015 at 11:52 ----------

 

Indeed, but thanks to the minimum wage level being below the living wage large swathes of full time working families cannot afford to rent even the most basic house without relying on a council property. Enforce a living wage and remove tax credits and then reassess.

 

What about Housing Benefit? People in private rents are still able to claim that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only stipulation I've seen is that if they sell within 3 years then 35% of the proceeds must be given back...

 

---------- Post added 13-02-2015 at 11:52 ----------

 

 

What about Housing Benefit? People in private rents are still able to claim that.

 

But the money ends up in private landlords (like Penistone999's for example) pockets for HB.

Although I do wonder which costs the tax payer more? A council house or HB...obviously we'd have to take averages and make some assumptions...<googles>

 

Googling failed...does anyone know? I could submit an FOI but that only be to 1 council and I'm sure the data is out there.

Edited by sgtkate
Link to comment
Share on other sites

But the money ends up in private landlords (like Penistone999's for example) pockets for HB.

.

 

That's a bit like saying JSA only ends up being spent at the local corner shop...still ends up in private hands..the fact is that HB is available to private tenants so they don't have to rely on council houses being available..

Edited by truman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Most people I know stay in the house they bought from the council.

The "gifted" house story appears to be sensational reporting if you read the posts from MJW47 which includes an article from The Times and my summary.

It is an offence to dispose of funds instead of using them to fund care and any proceeds from the sale of an home for this purpose can be claimed by the council.

 

I doubt that the the council can claim if the equity on the house has been released to a company such as this and then spent before any care is required?

 

http://www.brsequity.co.uk/equity-release

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I live in social housing & work for a living. I don't want anything from that Duncan Smith dolt. He thinks people can be easily bought off after spending the last 4 years maligning the unemployed and in many cases, some of those unemployed have died of their own despair - which he is stony faced about.

The man is a disgrace & scum bag. My only wish is that he is booted out at the next election and forced to sign on. I hope he suffers the humiliations that many of the unemployed have endured

Well said,I couldn't have put it better myself

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I live in social housing & work for a living. I don't want anything from that Duncan Smith dolt. He thinks people can be easily bought off after spending the last 4 years maligning the unemployed and in many cases, some of those unemployed have died of their own despair - which he is stony faced about.

The man is a disgrace & scum bag. My only wish is that he is booted out at the next election and forced to sign on. I hope he suffers the humiliations that many of the unemployed have endured

 

Agree entirely. Devastating the genuinely needy seems to be a Tory habit that they can't get out of. Cameron probably sees this as collateral damage.

 

http://blacktrianglecampaign.org/2014/10/21/uk-welfare-reform-deaths-updated-list-october-21st-2014/ I used to know someone on this list - very happy bloke until his disability allowance was taken away.

 

Another one shows his true colors:- http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/oct/15/welfare-reform-minister-disabled-not-worth-minimum-wage

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.