On 30 Jan 2018 at 10:39pm Mark Longbridge wrote:
How do you get housed in Lewes if you can not afford private rent? The council have a massive waiting list, with some bidding set up where you bid on a property via a pin numbered link. I can now understand why people live on the streets, I do not understand the system, how do people from other countries get housed, if people born here find the whole system a confused mess?
On 31 Jan 2018 at 5:31am Madame x wrote:
Oh man , a them and us thread, will anyone take the bait??
On 31 Jan 2018 at 6:30am Flanman wrote:
I'm no fan of Corbyn at all and haven't voted Labour for many years but his housing policy makes economic sense though the Tories will claim it doesn't. In Salt Lake City, Utah there are no homeless because everyone homeless there was given accommodation. Functional places to live, but nowhere people would choose so it's not an attractive option, just a better one than being on the street. This is not only saving the state money, but making them money as these people now contribute to the economy either through getting work, or doing work for the local government. Meanwhile these previously homeless pay for their accommodation out of their earnings some of which are held in trust towards them being able to rent or buy privately. While living in the state accommodation they get help for any alcohol or drug problems, and the offer of training to increase their employability. Some Scandinavian countries have similar models. Proper, unbroken countries recognise that you have to have a mix of capitalism and the state to make things work. Capitalism is for individual benefit, the state ensures society operates for everyone. For some reason Britain can't seem to grasp that.
On 31 Jan 2018 at 6:58am Mark wrote:
I don't think that this is a "them and us" thread. My guess is that this is a genuine thread from someone who naively believes that what he reads in Daily Mail has some basis in fact.
On 31 Jan 2018 at 7:41am Notlong Now wrote:
When Jeremy gets into power (it won't be long now) he is going to provide 8000 homes for the homeless so there will no longer be any rough sleepers in the UK. I reckon he will do this within the first 2 months. That is his first priority of course, but then he will tackle Social Housing in general and ensure that every council has an adequate stock of property to rent, if necessary, buying property from private sector Landlords for this purpose.
On 31 Jan 2018 at 8:34am Nutter alert wrote:
On 31 Jan 2018 at 9:33am The Greek wrote:
That old myth.. if you work in housing you will realise that people from abroad don't "just get housed". Everyone goes through the same system, based on need and priority and also whether they have recourse to public funds, which many immigrants don't. Most councils now impose a "local connection" rule of sometimes up to 5 years.. so no, you can't just "come from abroad" and get a house. It's false so stop spreading it. The case of refugees is slightly different, but they are a special case.
On 31 Jan 2018 at 10:37am Mark Longbridge wrote:
@The Greek, re read my post, that is not what I am saying at all, if you work in housing, instead of waving that old myth 'the racist' flag, you could of answered my question.
On 31 Jan 2018 at 10:49am The Greek wrote:
@Mark apologies, I misread the meaning. I agree though. The problem is is that we see housing as a speculative commodity in this country rather than a basic human right. There are 707 empty homes in Lambeth alone. If we ban property speculation and properly regulate the market there would be no need for all these excess new builds.
On 31 Jan 2018 at 11:24am @theGreek wrote:
Very obvious you've never worked in housing given your level of ignorance
On 31 Jan 2018 at 11:34am @@the greek wrote:
Who built the Parthenon then ?
On 31 Jan 2018 at 11:55am Irish hussar wrote:
Tha Atheniens built the Parthenon. That's nothing to do with the inadequate lack of affordable social housing in this country.
There has been no local housing development by our local authority since Malling.
No wonder we suffer from a lack of key workers.
On 31 Jan 2018 at 11:59am The Greek wrote:
Thanks for the unfounded statement there. I may not, but know those who do.
On 31 Jan 2018 at 12:10pm Deja Vu wrote:
It's a complex situation but the problem is nothing to do with property speculation, the shortfall is affordable housing, not the properties that speculators buy.
The big housing companies only want to build 3, 4 and 5 bedroom luxury houses (maximum profit), they're not interested in council housing or affordable housing.
New build sites are so rarely approved that plots are expensive and only the big companies can afford to take them on.
They rarely fulfil their contracts with local councils on social housing numbers (they normally wait until halfway through the build before deciding they can't afford to build the social houses, it's a bit late for the council to do anything by then).
The whole system is crooked, the end result is average house prices that are 10-12x the average salary.
Personally I blame the planners, if they approved the plot number they have been given to approve, plots would be 50k not 250k for a basic 3 bed house plot, truly affordable housing.
On 31 Jan 2018 at 12:14pm The people wrote:
Itís about money those that make it want more and manipulate the system to their ends. Our council planning departments bend to the developers. Just look at NSQ where we will see serious failings on both sides...
On 31 Jan 2018 at 12:35pm @ Deja wrote:
I like you, and I like your move to Hailsham - but I'm a little confused as to £50k for a plot -do you mean with the house on it ? You can't build a house for less than £100 even if you own the plot ( as a friend of mine did.)
On 31 Jan 2018 at 12:41pm Irish Navvy(was a huzzar wrote:
Feck I tought de athenerians were Greeks. Another argument like the "Lewes District" one from a Lewes district pedant.
On 31 Jan 2018 at 1:00pm Deja Vu wrote:
50k for a plot with no house on it, plots in this area are 250k+ (it's actually cheaper to buy a house and knock it down than it is to get a plot with planning, especially anywhere out of town).
100k would get you a house (nothing on Grand Designs but a good house), total cost 150k, so half of current prices but more importantly 6x average wage so back into being affordable.
More importantly local building companies could buy a plot or two and thrive again, cheaper house, more local employment, more trainees, more people who can afford to work on lower wages as they have a sensible mortgage, etc.
Apart from the big house builders, I cannot see who loses.
On 31 Jan 2018 at 2:52pm The Greek wrote:
@Deja Vu is that not speculation on the part of the developers? There needs to be new planning law whereby councils can refuse developments if they don't meet the local housing need... although I do believe that is the way it's going with "local plans". The right for councils to commission housing themselves would be the next logical move.
On 31 Jan 2018 at 4:03pm Deja Vu wrote:
@The Greek, in theory yes, but historically what happens is:
1. Council turns a site with planning over to a private house builder
2. House builder has to built the houses, roads, extra infrastructure (maybe a School, maybe a health centre), a pre-agreed number of council houses/social housing and some affordable homes.
3. The builder gets halfway through it (starts with the private houses to make some quick money) and declares they can't afford to build the council/social/affordable aspect of it (or only half the agreed numbers)
4. The council has to lump it or risk the builder walking off
5. Piece of land lost from the council stock
One of the TV channels did an investigation into it recently, the results were quite shocking (I can't remember the full details, but councils were trying to get houses built they just kept getting stuffed by the big builders and central government).
On 31 Jan 2018 at 4:37pm The Greek wrote:
Indeed. Land-banking is another scandal. This is why we can't let housebuidling be purely for private profit.
I attended a public meeting with some housing officers who basically said the new government formula for working out housing need is almost unobtainable and renders all the previous work done on local plans useless.. if a local plan is not created, the secretary of state steps in to dictate what happens.. the new formula is based on previous building record and economic factors.. if an area has built a lot in the past, they get allocated a higher number for the future nonsensically.. essentially causing more houses to be crammed into already densely populated affluent area.
Another interesting point raised was that there is no obligation on a developer to consider local infrastructure AT ALL, unless the impact is deemed to be "severe". So if the impact could be deemed to be "high" there is no need to add extra bus routes, schools, roads etc.
As it stands it appears that councils will continue to get shafted by private developers or useful land will be used to build 5 or 6 bedroom houses that local people cannot afford.
On 31 Jan 2018 at 5:36pm No will, no way wrote:
Those with the tools to fix the problem have no will to do so.
Create a fund for local councils, let them build council houses (the ones we haven't replaced over the last 30 years of selling) and leave the bigger more profitable homes to companies.
On 31 Jan 2018 at 6:10pm Ghost of Maggie wrote:
Just rejoice and be thankful for the right to buy