I1L2T3 Posted June 14, 2015 Share Posted June 14, 2015 Plenty of people live in council accomodation who are not on benefits. And plenty of people claim benefits but do not live in council accomodation. If councils had wanted to build housing in the 80s they'd have done so. Since when do Labour councils care what the Tories tell them to do? The truth was, they didn't want anything to do with council housing, not sexy enough for them, and they were happy to have it taken off their hands so they didn't have the expense and workload of administering and maintaining so much of it. So only people in social housing not in receipt of any benefits who should have the RTB? That actually sounds very sensible if thescheme goes ahead but its going to restrict the numbers of potential applicants. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted June 14, 2015 Share Posted June 14, 2015 right to buy should be scrapped. It basically amounts to gifting thousands of pounds from the public purse to a particular section of the community and is therefore discriminatory. Those who work hard will realistically never be awarded a council house and so will not be able to participate in the great cash give away. Councils are selling (typical example) 80k houses for 40k. That's 40k from schools, health, roads etc. they then have to build or buy a replacement at full market value. If they build it will cost c.100k per unit. This will then be sold under RTB 3 years down the line for 67k and so the cycle goes on. Madness! They definitely don't buy or build replacements. ---------- Post added 14-06-2015 at 16:58 ---------- Try to understand that there is no "great cash give away" as this is a discount on properties built several decades ago which maybe only cost £3,000 to build in the first place. The governments and taxpayer have seen a good return of profit in paid rents during that time. However, the government can afford to spend your hard earned taxes on The Help To Buy scheme which has a budget of £2billion and is subsidising new mortgages by 20%. You will also notice that not many new council homes have or are planned to be built over the next decade. It's still a massive cash giveaway, assets aren't valued by what they cost to create, they're valued by what they're worth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I1L2T3 Posted June 14, 2015 Share Posted June 14, 2015 I think the poll needs to be changed. I'm not against RTB as a concept as long as it is used intelligently. For example, say Sheffield has 1,000 social homes for sale on the edge of the city that have established working tenants who want to buy. Let them buy but ruild a 1,000 replacement properties elsewhere that reflect demand and changes in society - a 1,000 one bedroom social properties built in small pockets closer to the centre and close to transport links and economic opportunities for young working singles and couples, maybe older couples too who need to downsize after kids have moved on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted June 14, 2015 Share Posted June 14, 2015 I wouldn't say there is a need to scrap altogether, however changes are needed. The discounts are too high. The penalties for selling them within the set guidlines are not sufficient/ The length of time penalties are applied are too low. When you look at houses for sale, you see many many ex council houses. Who is the winner? It isn't the council or joe public. It is the person with this discount. They sell for a good amount and then purchase a better house in a better area for themselves. Free deposit basically as lenders don't require a deposit on RTB properties. The council houses you see for sale may have been private for 30 years now and be on the 5th owner. ---------- Post added 14-06-2015 at 17:06 ---------- So only people in social housing not in receipt of any benefits who should have the RTB? That actually sounds very sensible if thescheme goes ahead but its going to restrict the numbers of potential applicants. Presumably the ones who are in receipt of benefits have no chance of getting a mortgage and exercising their RTB anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happ Hazzard Posted June 14, 2015 Share Posted June 14, 2015 Labour controlled councils would rather print brochures with pictures of Pandas or African people on them than get involved in anything as mundane as housing. Not to mention squirreling millions of pounds away in Icelandic bank accounts... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Cid Posted June 14, 2015 Share Posted June 14, 2015 The original RTB expressly forbade councils from building replacements. They were just banned from borrowing money, since councils and Governments are always in debt, it amounted to the same thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cassity Posted June 14, 2015 Share Posted June 14, 2015 Labour controlled councils would rather print brochures with pictures of Pandas or African people on them than get involved in anything as mundane as housing. Not to mention squirreling millions of pounds away in Icelandic bank accounts... http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/tory-michael-spencer-made-fortune-349560 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robbie Loving Posted June 14, 2015 Share Posted June 14, 2015 The council houses you see for sale may have been private for 30 years now and be on the 5th owner. You could well be right. The ones I'm referring to have the council commissioned windows/doors/kitchen etc. So safe to assume within the last 10 years or so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loraward Posted June 14, 2015 Share Posted June 14, 2015 right to buy should be scrapped. It basically amounts to gifting thousands of pounds from the public purse to a particular section of the community and is therefore discriminatory. Those who work hard will realistically never be awarded a council house and so will not be able to participate in the great cash give away. Councils are selling (typical example) 80k houses for 40k. That's 40k from schools, health, roads etc. they then have to build or buy a replacement at full market value. If they build it will cost c.100k per unit. This will then be sold under RTB 3 years down the line for 67k and so the cycle goes on. Madness! I wouldn't scrap it but I would change it. 1st rule. Only rent you have actually paid out of earned income should count towards the discount, years living in a council house without paying rent should not qualify you for a discount. 2nd rule. House can only be resold to an owner occupier in need of an affordable house, and not to buy to let landlords. 3rd rule. They should remain below market value of the life of the house. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harvey19 Posted June 14, 2015 Share Posted June 14, 2015 Is it so hard to figure out that councils no longer want the responsibility of managing large housing stocks. Isn't this obvious when the last Labour government didn't have a large building program for council houses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now