Show your support

[BloodOmen]

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.

Fair? you want to talk about fair? nothing fair about it really the sharp end of the stick is he's being thrown out at his age which is simply unacceptable despite the whole 3 bedroom house shortage in barnet if this country is coming to the point where kicking old people out of places they've called home for xx years then theres something very wrong.

In the north we actually respect our elders and what they've done for us in the past. If they remove him from that property now he'll be dead within a month I guarantee it.

 

[Ch3tan]

Blah blah blah, the house was rented in his sisters name. It's not his house, he has lived there a long time but it belongs to the council.

So if he moves out you are going to kill him? Because that is the only way you can fulfil your guarantee.

I now understand why the daily mail still exists, there are people like you who react exactly as they hope.

 

[BloodOmen]

Blah blah blah, the house was rented in his sisters name. It's not his house, he has lived there a long time but it belongs to the council.

So if he moves out you are going to kill him? Because that is the only way you can fulfil your guarantee.

I now understand why the daily mail still exists, there are people like you who react exactly as they hope.

People like me? I guess you mean someone with the decency to let an old man live the rest of his life out in a place he's called home for 74 years? because the way your harping on all you seem to care about is money money money and thus clearly don't understand why so many people are defending him. The whole defending him thing isnt based around what he's entitled to its more a case of morals and in this case he trumps the family that decided it was fine to have children despite not having space for them.

 

[cHodAX]

Don't agrue with the Tory supporters on here fella, you won't get anywhere. Thier idea of a fair society is a actually a free for all, survival of the fittest. Of course they deny it but use the search function and read some other threads, you will see trends there that cannot be denied.

 

[Raven]

Council houses cause cancer and feral children. Its them Jews fault.

 

[BloodOmen]

Council houses cause cancer and feral children. Its them Jews fault.

Oh? is that where Cornokz was created then? in a lab in some council house ? such beastly cornokz ;<

 

[megadave]

Rejigging all the social housing seems like the logical step after forcing so many people into unemployment.

 

[old.Tohtori]

3 pages for the issue to go into morals and namecalling, without my contribution(besides my opinion).

Seems it's not just my posts causing friction

Anyway, for the "it's not fair" side;

If you worked 10 years to get yourself a home, you bought it, made it nice and all that. All the bells and whitles you wanted.

Then a fire burns down some poor families home and the government decides that you should give your home to them and move out.

Wouldn't that be fair towards the poor family who was now homeless? Or would you possibly have a problem with that?

And to answer the answer;

If your answer is "Yes i'd gladly move to a council hole to give these folks my home", then congrats, you're a saint.

If your answer is; "No, i earned that home." then you have to accept that this man DIDN'T earn his home and as such, has no right to special treatment.

 

[megadave]

If the Tories are so desperate to make cuts and free up some more money why can't they go and sort out the fucking banks that take billions of tax money from the government and give it to their useless employees who fucked us all over in the first place?

Surely trying to free up money from the poor and needy is the last place they should be looking?

 

[cHodAX]

If the Tories are so desperate to make cuts and free up some more money why can't they go and sort out the fucking banks that take billions of tax money from the government and give it to their useless employees who fucked us all over in the first place?

Surely trying to free up money from the poor and needy is the last place they should be looking?

Look at the quarterly profits the big banks just posted, yet they owe the country hundreds of billions. How much did they pay back? Not enough and so we will now cut frontline jobs instead while the bankers keep paying themselves big bonuses.

 

[megadave]

Should have fined them a few billion for going a few quid overdrawn imo!

 

[ford prefect]

This is a complicated issue and I think there are some strong misconceptions here.

First of all, many working class people traditionally took up council housing not because they were "Sponging" but because they couldn't afford to buy. My Grandparents for example lived in council accommodation all their lives, they were Irish catholic, had six kids and both worked for over 40 years. Council accommodation offered a cheaper solution for those who couldn't afford to save because of other commitments and it served a much needed purpose. Without benefits the typical rent of a two bed housing association house in 2009 was £380 per calendar month.

The purpose of a house for life was to provide these people a stable home where they could raise their families without the added pressure that a landlord may come along at any moment and ask them to leave.

Immigration, a growing (and ageing population) and the fact that many properties bought under the "Right to buy scheme" which weren't replaced lead to a shortage of council housing. On top of this you had some appalling budgetary management (and theft) within local councils which meant many had to sell most if not all of their stock to housing associations which are typically run by non profit organizations. This lead to low government funding and the disagreements about where maintenance money for these estates should come from. So now you often have poor and run down housing estates belonging to councils and housing associations alike during the 1980's.

Some councils and housing associations have a four or five year waiting list at the moment unless you get specific priority. Obviously young families are going to get priority, as do those registered homeless. Oddly people with disabilities do not get much in the way of priority, but that is another post.

I think given these shortages it isn't unreasonable to expect an older person inhabiting a three bedroom house (which to be honest is going to be difficult to look after at that age) to be relocated to more suitable accommodation. In all honesty, it is usually a choice that most people make for themselves as they get older.

 

[Turamber]

Don't agrue with the Tory supporters on here fella, you won't get anywhere. Thier idea of a fair society is a actually a free for all, survival of the fittest. Of course they deny it but use the search function and read some other threads, you will see trends there that cannot be denied.

Seems to be more of a north/south divide issue. There would be outrage if that happened in Birmingham, but in the south where the £ is King it is seen as being perfectly reasonable.

 

[Ch3tan]

It's got nothing to do with decency, money or political alignment. It's common sense.

I also find it hilarious that some of you think that the rehoming of an old fella to house a family is a typical tory action. LULZ!

 

[ford prefect]

Seems to be more of a north/south divide issue. There would be outrage if that happened in Birmingham, but in the south where the £ is King it is seen as being perfectly reasonable.

Three things.

I'm northern orignally, and I think it is perfectly reasonable to rehome the old fella.

It is common knowledge in the North that tories are all b******s. Anyone who lived in the north or in South Wales for that matter during Maggies reighn of terror wouldn't deny that.

Articles from the Daily Mail shouldn't be taken at face value. The paper was started by a Nazi, and I feel it is still run by them.

****I shall now step off my broken soap box.****

 

[cHodAX]

It's got nothing to do with decency, money or political alignment. It's common sense.

I also find it hilarious that some of you think that the rehoming of an old fella to house a family is a typical tory action. LULZ!

Forced rehoming, the old guy doesn't want to go. Didn't happen under Labour did it?

 

[BloodOmen]

Forced rehoming, the old guy doesn't want to go. Didn't happen under Labour did it?

Correct, I doubt tories won't be in power long due to things like this next election Labour will be back.. you'll see. I expected changes from tories and by all means we were hoping for them given how naff labour were but after seeing the tories in action I can firmly say they're almost no better if not worse towards the community.

 

[Ch3tan]

He doesn't want to go - but why is that a reason for him not to? Legally, the house isn't in his name. Labour were very big on families. Remember it was one of their key elections themes.

 

[ST^]

Personally I would feel like a right kunt if I had a 3-bedroom house all to myself, and I was obviously not going to be starting a family, and there were families who actually needed a property of that size. Unless, y'know, I'd bought the place.

 

[cHodAX]

He doesn't want to go - but why is that a reason for him not to? Legally, the house isn't in his name. Labour were very big on families. Remember it was one of their key elections themes.

Throwing penisoners who have rights as sitting tenants out on the streets wasn't one of them.

This is why they are changing the law, removal of long standing tenancy rights because they won't invest in much needed public housing. Force people out of homes they have lived in for decades so we can squeeze more immigrant families in.

 

[ford prefect]

Correct, I doubt tories won't be in power long due to things like this next election Labour will be back.. you'll see. I expected changes from tories and by all means we were hoping for them given how naff labour were but after seeing the tories in action I can firmly say they're almost no better if not worse towards the community.

I think if the events of the past six months in UK Politics have shown us anything, it is that one party is pretty much the same as another. Look at how quickly Clegg through away his liberal ideals and how quickly Cameron embraced many left wing ideals. Look at the financial fantasy land Brown was living in and the right wing pandering to major corporations and banks.

It doesn't really matter who is in office, we are in a recession, tough changes will be made and in five years time when we are re-electing we will be used to the new status quo and although some of these changes will be repealled, most won't. Vat will stay at 20% just like changes to council tennancies will stay the same.

Labour were well aware of the problems of low council housing and didn't bother to revoke the right to buy until last year and then only in some areas.

What it boils down to is that UK politics are a joke and have been for the past 40 years and will be for the forseeable future.

 

[ford prefect]

Throwing penisoners who have rights as sitting tenants out on the streets wasn't one of them.

This is why they are changing the law, removal of long standing tenancy rights because they won't invest in much needed public housing. Force people out of homes they have lived in for decades so we can squeeze more immigrant families in.

He will end up in a sheltered flat or bungalow where a warden will be oncall 24/7 in case he falls or needs and help. I daresay it will also be a lot more managable for him too.

 

[cHodAX]

What it boils down to is that UK politics are a joke and have been for the past 40 years and will be for the forseeable future.

Totally agree, unfortunately we keep getting the polititians the general public deserves because they bury thier heads in the sand and are ignorant of the issues. 90% the British population haven't got a fucking clue, regardless of political affiliation if any. It saddens me to see so many people don't actually care about what is going on as long as they can have a week in the sun every year and a new iphone.

 

[cHodAX]

He will end up in a sheltered flat or bungalow where a warden will be oncall 24/7 in case he falls or needs and help. I daresay it will also be a lot more managable for him too.

His rights are enshrined in law though, so now we change the law to suit the circumstances. It is an assbackwards way to govern.

 

[BloodOmen]

I think if the events of the past six months in UK Politics have shown us anything, it is that one party is pretty much the same as another. Look at how quickly Clegg through away his liberal ideals and how quickly Cameron embraced many left wing ideals. Look at the financial fantasy land Brown was living in and the right wing pandering to major corporations and banks.

It doesn't really matter who is in office, we are in a recession, tough changes will be made and in five years time when we are re-electing we will be used to the new status quo and although some of these changes will be repealled, most won't. Vat will stay at 20% just like changes to council tennancies will stay the same.

Labour were well aware of the problems of low council housing and didn't bother to revoke the right to buy until last year and then only in some areas.

What it boils down to is that UK politics are a joke and have been for the past 40 years and will be for the forseeable future.

true true they're all lying sacks of shit in effect but they do still have minor differences which seem to make up a huge difference as confusing as that sounds.

 

[BloodOmen]

Throwing penisoners who have rights as sitting tenants out on the streets wasn't one of them.

This is why they are changing the law, removal of long standing tenancy rights because they won't invest in much needed public housing. Force people out of homes they have lived in for decades so we can squeeze more immigrant families in.

aye and eventually it'll blow up in their faces big time because they're going about it all wrong.


example number 1: single parent family living in a 3 bedroom house - few years down the line kids grow up and move out the single parent is then booted out because she is no longer in need of that 3 bedroom property, how is that fair in any sort of way? thats just like saying "Ok you're here to breed and raise for the country once your jobs done you can fuck off"

 

[ford prefect]

His rights are enshrined in law though, so now we change the law to suit the circumstances. It is an assbackwards way to govern.

I agree, and if labour were still in power they would do something which would be equally a-moral in the eyes of many. Given the housing situation however, it is the right descision. In an ideal world there would be plenty of afforadble housing for all, but we live in the UK and we have a long standing tradition of our politicians putting us and themselves in a position where we have to make unpopular descisions, so they can justify the money they make.

Believe it or not it was the Chartists that demanded politicians should be paid, in order that working class people would be able to afford to stand as an MP. I imagine them spinning in their graves.

 

[soze]

His rights are enshrined in law though, so now we change the law to suit the circumstances. It is an assbackwards way to govern.

I am not sure that is true. The way I read it was the house was his sisters and she she died he was given a temporary lease as he was living with her. The article references 6 months. And now rather than assigning him that property as his own council house they want to put him some where more sensible. I may be reading between the lines but i do not get the sense this is his council home and has been for years.

example number 1: single parent family living in a 3 bedroom house - few years down the line kids grow up and move out the single parent is then booted out because she is no longer in need of that 3 bedroom property, how is that fair in any sort of way? thats just like saying "Ok you're here to breed and raise for the country once your jobs done you can fuck off"

When your kids grow up and leave home you lose Child Benefits, losing the home you were given to make raising them easier is no different. Its not like you are kicked out on your arse you are moved to a smaller property.

 

[cHodAX]

I am not sure that is true. The way I read it was the house was his sisters and she she died he was given a temporary lease as he was living with her. The article references 6 months. And now rather than assigning him that property as his own council house they want to put him some where more sensible. I may be reading between the lines but i do not get the sense this is his council home and has been for years.

Look up tenancy rights, he is a sitting tenant and with his history of living at the property the law offers him protected status. Why do you think they are trying to bully him out and change the law? If he had no rights wouldn't they just evict and rehouse him?

 

[soze]

Look up tenancy rights, he is a sitting tenant and with his history of living at the property the law offers him protected status. Why do you think they are trying to bully him out and change the law? If he had no rights wouldn't they just evict and rehouse him?

I though that's what they were doing by telling him his lease runs out in 6 months.