The average rent in my constituency for a studio flat is £750 pcm. So that's £25 per DAY. And that's without the bills, food, clothing, medical supplies, maintenance, Dentist bills, white goods/furniture, etc. I'd never dream of taking a holiday. Food banks are a Godsend :( And this seems like another world to me. There _are_ no properties. Only self righteous private landlords who charge over £1000 pounds per month for a 1 bedroom flat. I spent 7 years in my Studio Flat, & spent a great deal of time, effort & money to make it look 10 times better than when I moved in. But the Greedy Landlords pay a visit every 6 months to inspect your progress in buttering their bread. And then... BOOM. Section 21. Two months to vacate the premises; your home. And what's worse is that to get your clean reference, you must have the agencies send someone round to photograph the place with ALL your belongings, put it online for all to envy, & you are expected to *HOST* your beloved home whilst desperately trying to find another. At the end of it, someone gets to benefit from the fruits of your hard labour & take it as their own. This cruel process has left many homeless as the wealthy buy up all the properties - to let to the wealthy. One could say it was designed to fleece out the poor so to toss them onto the street. It is immoral & heart rending.
Why would be expected to show other tenants a property? If you're paying rent on time and not creating a nuisance most landlords would prefer to extend a tenancy than risk a void. Come to Bradford. We pay £450 pcm for a 4 bed terrace. In about 20 private rentals I've never used an agency. It makes sense that if a place is more desirable that it will be let to somebody prepared to pay a premium for that. Never invest your own money improving a landlords property. Spend your money only on stuff you can take with you.
Renting has to be sufficiently attractive to landlords for people to enter the business in the first place. That means being able to charge a fair market rent and obtain vacant possession of their properties if they so choose. Otherwise the private rental sector will simply dry up, making the housing crisis even worse. You wouldn't want that now, would you? I am amazed that someone living in a country that offers people abortion on demand, no questions asked, should be shocked at a landlord's use of Section 21. If it's possible to terminate a marriage and a pregnancy, why shouldn't a landlord have a right to terminate a lease?
Surely the government realises it costs the taxpayer more to give housing benefit claimants money to rent from private landlords, than it would to build a house for them to live in, and pay to live in! In fact council houses are a net gain. And then that person has more money to spend in the real economy, which would mean more economic growth, and more jobs! But of course our parliament is full of landlords, and the government even more so.
Don't empty shops tend to bring councils more business rates than they would in council tax? Why would they want to grant a change of use planning permission and lose revenue?
With so many homeowners now struggling to pay their mortgages why not give homeowners the "Right to sell" your home to the council for the outstanding amount? That way you can carry on living in your family home in a posh street and the kids don't need to change schools etc. The council recoups it's investment from your rent which will be lower than private sector. One way we can slowly start rebuilding social housing stocks without adding more families to the waiting list.
This all seems like a strange arrangement. In the United States there are coops (not nearly enough, and no longer being built), the major point is when someone wishes to own their coop they buy it, but can’t sell it to just anyone. They can only sell it back to the coop association and the coop then either leases it or sells it to the next. I think that would solve this problem of who ultimately is in control of the council stock. If they want to do it with a non-profit housing association or owned by the council, it doesn’t matter much.
In the U.K. they should institute RENT CONTROL, We did it here in the U.S. and it worked GREAT! That would benefiit the most people without draining the government funds and they should also GREATLY slow down or even reverse immigration. These things in combination would go a very long way towards solving Great Britain's problems!
Olive Poultins baby boy is the image of her...how lovely for her to be able to look back the the news reel. Many a great family brought up in a council house. Hard working, decent and honest people.
yes you are so right ,,,, i have known very intelligence amazing kind beautiful poor people , only i find they see quality dna as a threat ' so they keep us down with rules , if every one had money they would be nothing .
How about 300.000 people extra coming into the country every year, one house needs building every 7 mins to catch up. Don't ignore the real problem, your supposed to be well educated👎
onlygazza's fastrac farming exactly they sell more council houses then they build and then on top of that they give out more council houses to people whove been in this country a week and the people of this country whos familys have been here for years and paid taxes are the ones suffering because of migration
joe p yep spot on, its facts that cannot be disputed unless your a complete moron who can't count. nearly 70 million people in the uk now compared to 50 million then, it's not rocket science!
So now you're using a density of 4 immigrants per house whereas above you were suggesting a house each. 60 minutes X 24 hours X 365 days / 7 minutes per house = 75000 houses.
The average rent in my constituency for a studio flat is £750 pcm. So that's £25 per DAY. And that's without the bills, food, clothing, medical supplies, maintenance, Dentist bills, white goods/furniture, etc. I'd never dream of taking a holiday. Food banks are a Godsend :(
And this seems like another world to me. There _are_ no properties. Only self righteous private landlords who charge over £1000 pounds per month for a 1 bedroom flat.
I spent 7 years in my Studio Flat, & spent a great deal of time, effort & money to make it look 10 times better than when I moved in. But the Greedy Landlords pay a visit every 6 months to inspect your progress in buttering their bread. And then... BOOM. Section 21. Two months to vacate the premises; your home.
And what's worse is that to get your clean reference, you must have the agencies send someone round to photograph the place with ALL your belongings, put it online for all to envy, & you are expected to *HOST* your beloved home whilst desperately trying to find another. At the end of it, someone gets to benefit from the fruits of your hard labour & take it as their own.
This cruel process has left many homeless as the wealthy buy up all the properties - to let to the wealthy. One could say it was designed to fleece out the poor so to toss them onto the street. It is immoral & heart rending.
Caldera Records being a landlord isn't much fun either hence the lack of housing
Why would be expected to show other tenants a property? If you're paying rent on time and not creating a nuisance most landlords would prefer to extend a tenancy than risk a void.
Come to Bradford. We pay £450 pcm for a 4 bed terrace.
In about 20 private rentals I've never used an agency.
It makes sense that if a place is more desirable that it will be let to somebody prepared to pay a premium for that. Never invest your own money improving a landlords property. Spend your money only on stuff you can take with you.
+ Caldera Records
If the poor and the young don't care then the rich are going to get richer and richer.
they dont know about food banks , they eat in the Winchester eating £200 plates of food , while the rest of us eat a 30p tin of beans .
Renting has to be sufficiently attractive to landlords for people to enter the business in the first place. That means being able to charge a fair market rent and obtain vacant possession of their properties if they so choose. Otherwise the private rental sector will simply dry up, making the housing crisis even worse. You wouldn't want that now, would you? I am amazed that someone living in a country that offers people abortion on demand, no questions asked, should be shocked at a landlord's use of Section 21. If it's possible to terminate a marriage and a pregnancy, why shouldn't a landlord have a right to terminate a lease?
Surely the government realises it costs the taxpayer more to give housing benefit claimants money to rent from private landlords, than it would to build a house for them to live in, and pay to live in! In fact council houses are a net gain. And then that person has more money to spend in the real economy, which would mean more economic growth, and more jobs! But of course our parliament is full of landlords, and the government even more so.
Clean windows every week? They obviously no longer have those rules. Bring them back!!!
Instead of empty shops with "To Let" "To Let" etc knock them down and build flats for young people
Don't empty shops tend to bring councils more business rates than they would in council tax? Why would they want to grant a change of use planning permission and lose revenue?
or even lower rates and give corner shop to own people who have generations going back hundreds of years .
Local communities depend on small businesses to support the economy.
With so many homeowners now struggling to pay their mortgages why not give homeowners the "Right to sell" your home to the council for the outstanding amount? That way you can carry on living in your family home in a posh street and the kids don't need to change schools etc. The council recoups it's investment from your rent which will be lower than private sector. One way we can slowly start rebuilding social housing stocks without adding more families to the waiting list.
Nobody in their right mind would sell their house to the government
Social housing ?? What social housing ?
You've never had it so good the favourite phrase of those who've always had it better!
This all seems like a strange arrangement. In the United States there are coops (not nearly enough, and no longer being built), the major point is when someone wishes to own their coop they buy it, but can’t sell it to just anyone. They can only sell it back to the coop association and the coop then either leases it or sells it to the next. I think that would solve this problem of who ultimately is in control of the council stock. If they want to do it with a non-profit housing association or owned by the council, it doesn’t matter much.
Short sighted planning where each person comes in and makes decisions then F**is off!
In the U.K. they should institute RENT CONTROL, We did it here in the U.S. and it worked GREAT! That would benefiit the most people without draining the government funds and they should also GREATLY slow down or even reverse immigration. These things in combination would go a very long way towards solving Great Britain's problems!
For the government and the builders there is no profit in real affordable housing:-(
There is profit for builders, the problem is government won't let them build.
@@izdatsumcp you obviously have no knowledge on this matter.
@@justinwalpole8956 You too.
Olive Poultins baby boy is the image of her...how lovely for her to be able to look back the the news reel. Many a great family brought up in a council house. Hard working, decent and honest people.
yes you are so right ,,,, i have known very intelligence amazing kind beautiful poor people , only i find they see quality dna as a threat ' so they keep us down with rules , if every one had money they would be nothing .
British couple wait years for a home family come over from Somalia get a house in Dagenham the next day that's what's wrong with social housing
Social housing being cancer is what's wrong with social housing.
Makes you wonder then does'nt it whose pulling the Home Office purse strings? Councils made a mistake with RePrObates 😮
Just say it how it is, a share to the land, Houses are built for 20-25k.
I live in social housing that identifies as social housing curious about being social housing.
Right to buy is good but you have to build more for the new generations
How about 300.000 people extra coming into the country every year, one house needs building every 7 mins to catch up. Don't ignore the real problem, your supposed to be well educated👎
onlygazza's fastrac farming exactly they sell more council houses then they build and then on top of that they give out more council houses to people whove been in this country a week and the people of this country whos familys have been here for years and paid taxes are the ones suffering because of migration
joe p yep spot on, its facts that cannot be disputed unless your a complete moron who can't count. nearly 70 million people in the uk now compared to 50 million then, it's not rocket science!
So now you're using a density of 4 immigrants per house whereas above you were suggesting a house each.
60 minutes X 24 hours X 365 days / 7 minutes per house = 75000 houses.
The government have not built houses and pocketed the right to buy money