Show your support

[BloodOmen]

This has to be one of the most ridiculous things i've read in my entire life, turfing an old man out of a house he's lived in for 74 years just to make way for a family that should have considered space before having children.

Original story:

Pensioner, 83, facing eviction from his home to make room for families needing council housing | Mail Online

Facebook support page:

Save 83yr old Edward Meakins from being forced out of his home of 74 years | Facebook

 

[Zenith.UK]

One person living in a 3 bedroom house?
Housing is in short supply if you're a family with children, whether it is private or council maintained. It's selfish people like this guy who are making the problem worse by holding onto housing stock that is blatantly more than he needs. Get him out and into a flat.

The welfare of one person who has lived their life versus the welfare of 2,3,4 children who are starting out their lives is no contest IMO. Kids in, OAP out.

 

[ST^]

One person living in a 3 bedroom house?
Housing is in short supply if you're a family with children, whether it is private or council maintained. It's selfish people like this guy who are making the problem worse by holding onto housing stock that is blatantly more than he needs. Get him out and into a flat.

The welfare of one person who has lived their life versus the welfare of 2,3,4 children who are starting out their lives is no contest IMO. Kids in, OAP out.

Glad it only took one reply to bring some common sense into this thread.

 

[Thorwyn]

So... common sense is the new euphemism for narrow-minded ignorance?

 

[ford prefect]

My better half works in social housing, so we know a bit about this kind of thing. If Cameron gets his way this will become common practice. As things stand if you are in a council house (and for the most part a housing association house) you have the right to live their for life unless you break the tenancy agreement. Cameron is looking at removing this legislation and putting all these people on shorter term leases whereby if your home is considered under occupied, you will be relocated to the first available smaller property.

 

[soze]

You could say narrow-minded ignorance is assuming he should get to keep the place because he has been there so long. Need over Greed here I am afraid.

 

[Aoami]

why should you have the right to a house for life?

 

[ford prefect]

why should you have the right to a house for life?

I'm not saying you should, I'm jjust saying that is the way things are at present for most councils / housing associations, but not for much longer.

 

[ford prefect]

I think you will find a lot of councils especially putting forward test cases like this over the next year or so while the legislation is being debated.

 

[ford prefect]

Here is a recent article in the guardian about it:

David Cameron announces plan to end lifetime council tenancies | Society | The Guardian

 

[Ctuchik]

One person living in a 3 bedroom house?
Housing is in short supply if you're a family with children, whether it is private or council maintained.

a quick look at a few of the UK property market websites says you're wrong.

its only a matter of wanting to live there or not.

and if they don't, to bad for them.

 

[Turamber]

Forcing an elderly chap out of his house like that could well kill him. He has rights too, but of course its not "cool" to post sensible comments on an internet forum. Flaming and childishness is the way to go.

 

[Raven]

Surely there are enough houses around? They seem to be constantly building nasty rabbit warren estates all over the bloody place.

 

[ford prefect]

Council Housing is in a hugely short supply. Maggie introduced "The Right to Buy" in the mid 80's and many people did. Unfortunately that housing stock was never really replaced.

 

[old.Tohtori]

Is the "house" his?

If it is, people trying to get him out can fek off, he earned it.

If it's not his and he's renting(not sure how these brit things work), tough cookies.

Some rights you're born with, some are given, some you earn.

Living somewhere until your family line is dead and the irradiated underwear monsters rule the land is something you earn buy buying shit.

 

[soze]

Is the "house" his?

It is not his is it owned by the local Council and he gets to live there at reduced cost.

As has also been said he had the right to buy where he could have bought the house for a very cheap sum but they chose not to. Which for me says he did not care enough about it to get a mortgage and own it himself.

 

[Access Denied]

As things stand, the bill to remove the right to stay hasn't gone through yet. Now it's a Mail article so I doubt we're getting the full story but assuming he's up to date on his rent and council tax, causes no trouble in the area or anything else, there's nothing legal about the council trying to kick him out.

Council houses are indeed in short supply but what Ford said above is only part of the problem. The biggest reason for this shortfall is the massive immigration over the last 15 years. Most of those coming into this country during that time have been given a council house, usually, and this is something the Government don't advertise, ahead of people who were born here. True story, my uncle works for a council housing dept and eh told me that they've been told to give priority to immigrants over natives.

 

[Everz]

Makes perfect and common sense to me, the bloke should live within his means, a 3bedroom house is far more then he needs.

 

[TdC]

sure, and if they move him, he'll prolly be dead within a month and they won't have to pay his pension either. everybody wins! some teenager with six kids can claim the house and never have to work again! awesomeness!

 

[Ch3tan]

If you want a house for life, buy it. If you are reliant on the state, then you live where the state lets you.

It's simple. More bullshit from the Daily Fail.

 

[Ch3tan]

As things stand, the bill to remove the right to stay hasn't gone through yet. Now it's a Mail article so I doubt we're getting the full story but assuming he's up to date on his rent and council tax, causes no trouble in the area or anything else, there's nothing legal about the council trying to kick him out.

Council houses are indeed in short supply but what Ford said above is only part of the problem. The biggest reason for this shortfall is the massive immigration over the last 15 years. Most of those coming into this country during that time have been given a council house, usually, and this is something the Government don't advertise, ahead of people who were born here. True story, my uncle works for a council housing dept and eh told me that they've been told to give priority to immigrants over natives.

Faceplam is not enough.

 

[Everz]

If you want a house for life, buy it. If you are reliant on the state, then you live where the state lets you.

It's simple. More bullshit from the Daily Fail.

This.

 

[Turamber]

As has also been said he had the right to buy where he could have bought the house for a very cheap sum but they chose not to. Which for me says he did not care enough about it to get a mortgage and own it himself.

It doesn't mean anything of the sort. It could mean they couldn't afford to buy it; they could be Socialists who don't believe in personal ownership of council assets; or, particularly at his age, the concept of owning a house could have been completely alien to him.

Why don't the mythical young couple with all of their children get jobs and buy a house?

 

[BloodOmen]

The part that gets on my tits is that they're wanting to kick him out to house a family with kids... could this family not sort out proper space before they decided to start having kids? probably not because it'll be a young chav mother thats only had kids claim benefits and get a free home. The blokes lived there 74 years and they choose now to kick him out with the excuse of "Oh, its got 3 bedrooms you shouldnt be here" funny how they never said it when he was working and paying full rent.

 

[soze]

It doesn't mean anything of the sort. It could mean they couldn't afford to buy it; they could be Socialists who don't believe in personal ownership of council assets; or, particularly at his age, the concept of owning a house could have been completely alien to him.

I was born into a council flat and as soon as they could my parents used right to buy and purchased the house so they were not sponging. If you really believe over 74 years he and his family have never been in a position to buy then fair enough but i believe they were happy sponging.

Why don't the mythical young couple with all of their children get jobs and buy a house?

Why should they when they can just sponge for 74 years and have people defend them when the stuff they are given for free is not exactly what they want?

 

[BloodOmen]

It doesn't mean anything of the sort. It could mean they couldn't afford to buy it; they could be Socialists who don't believe in personal ownership of council assets; or, particularly at his age, the concept of owning a house could have been completely alien to him.

Why don't the mythical young couple with all of their children get jobs and buy a house?

better question why didn't they do that before deciding to have kids? why should an old bloke be pushed out of a place he's called home for 74 years just to suit some family that clearly expects the world to carry them because they were to stupid to plan out their life before having kids.

 

[BloodOmen]

I was born into a council flat and as soon as they could my parents used right to buy and purchased the house so they were not sponging. If you really believe over 74 years he and his family have never been in a position to buy then fair enough but i believe they were happy sponging.



Why should they when they can just sponge for 74 years and have people defend them when the stuff they are given for free is not exactly what they want?

How did he sponge for 74 years? he worked full time meaning he'd have been paying full rent/bill rates, i'm not quite sure how thats classified as sponging tbh you'll have to explain that to me.

 

[soze]

The blokes lived there 74 years and they choose now to kick him out with the excuse of "Oh, its got 3 bedrooms you shouldnt be here" funny how they never said it when he was working and paying full rent.

The Article said he lived there with his sister now she is dead he is there on his own. This has not been his council house for 74 years it was his parents then his sisters by the sounds of it.

How did he sponge for 74 years? he worked full time meaning he'd have been paying full rent/bill rates, i'm not quite sure how thats classified as sponging tbh you'll have to explain that to me.

Working full time and paying bills yet instead of using right to buy he stayed happy in a council house where you do not pay full rent. If he had wanted to like as been said he could have tried to buy the place rather than just stay sponging benefits.

 

[Ch3tan]

Bloodomen stop making massive assumptions based on daily mail articles. You do realise that councils do also re home families because they are living in poor conditions or living spaces which are too small for the number of people? Just because the daily mail is doing it's usual spiel does not mean that is the case.

An old man living in a 3 bed house, which is subsidised by the state is not fair use of taxpayers money. It is not fair to expect families to live in 1 or 2 bed flats or houses if they need 3 beds.

The sooner the proposed bill goes through to abolish the right to have a council house for life the better.

 

[Calaen]

You can still rent a council house and pay full rent without getting any benefits.