Homeless in 2 weeks - advice please

salamanca22

The_Conductor wrote: »

All of this- is down the road though- currently- the only real option for the OP- aside from chasing the father of the children for accommodation (which she is entitled to do)- is to move back in with her parents.

She is entitled to chase the father for accommodation for herself as well as the kids?

The_Conductor

salamanca22 wrote: »

She is entitled to chase the father for accommodation for herself as well as the kids?

You are deliberately trying to derail the thread- we are all well aware that a father's obligations are to provide maintenance for his children- its been done to death in the media of late. If you actually want to debate this particular subject- and how it applies to the guardian of the children- take it to State Benefits and/or the Mens forum- they have a few lively threads over there.

salamanca22

The_Conductor wrote: »

You are deliberately trying to derail the thread- we are all well aware that a father's obligations are to provide maintenance for his children- its been done to death in the media of late. If you actually want to debate this particular subject- and how it applies to the guardian of the children- take it to State Benefits and/or the Mens forum- they have a few lively threads over there.

Re read my post there again would you please.

I was looking for clarification on something you posted as it was ambiguous.

Thanks.

EDIT// Just to clarify, I do not know whether or not it is the father's responsibility to house the mother. Hence my question in my post before this one.

Sleepy

I've actually done some analysis work on the Fingal Co Co housing database and, without getting into too much detail, the waiting lists are terrifying. Even medical priority or homeless applicants can be on the waiting list for years as they simply don't have the housing stock to meet demand and, as usual, it's the worst elements of society that are best at gaming the system.

The housing officers know when they're being played, but there's nothing they can do about it. Not a job I'd fancy trying to do. Never mind dealing with all the chancers and those that feel they're "entitled" to be provided with a 4 bed house in Malahide at taxpayers expense, the genuine cases these people deal with on an hourly basis would break your heart and yet, it's your job to tell them that there's nothing you can do for them.

LordNorbury

Sleepy wrote: »

I've actually done some analysis work on the Fingal Co Co housing database and, without getting into too much detail, the waiting lists are terrifying. Even medical priority or homeless applicants can be on the waiting list for years as they simply don't have the housing stock to meet demand and, as usual, it's the worst elements of society that are best at gaming the system.

The housing officers know when they're being played, but there's nothing they can do about it. Not a job I'd fancy trying to do. Never mind dealing with all the chancers and those that feel they're "entitled" to be provided with a 4 bed house in Malahide at taxpayers expense, the genuine cases these people deal with on an hourly basis would break your heart and yet, it's your job to tell them that there's nothing you can do for them.

Funny that we've no money to build houses for those on the waiting list, nor have we the money to renovate homes that people could be moved into, but somehow we have the 50-60K a year for the salaries of those in the local authorities who are answering the phones day in day out telling people that in order to get onto the housing list, they have to be actually homeless.

This is a consequence of us having taken a downright stupid and greedy approach to state expenditure when our economy collapsed back in 2008. All capital spending was practically frozen, and the blanket protection of what were and are still excessive salaries in our public sector, was completely prioritised above all other considerations and all other expenditure.

So we have a local authority now that surprise surprise, hasn't a red cent to renovate properties or build new properties, but I bet you any money you like, that when the staff in the local authority go to check if their wages went into the bank this Friday, that they won't be listening to:"sorry, there is a waiting list"...

This is where union led government policy on annual tax expenditure, has taken us, straight to a housing crisis.

iwillhtfu

LordNorbury wrote: »

Funny that we've no money to build houses for those on the waiting list, nor have we the money to renovate homes that people could be moved into, but somehow we have the 50-60K a year for the salaries of those in the local authorities who are answering the phones day in day out telling people that in order to get onto the housing list, they have to be actually homeless.

This is a consequence of us having taken a downright stupid and greedy approach to state expenditure when our economy collapsed back in 2008. All capital spending was practically frozen, and the blanket protection of what were and are still excessive salaries in our public sector, was completely prioritised above all other considerations and all other expenditure.

So we have a local authority now that surprise surprise, hasn't a red cent to renovate properties or build new properties, but I bet you any money you like, that when the staff in the local authority go to check if their wages went into the bank this Friday, that they won't be listening to:"sorry, there is a waiting list"...

This is where union led government policy has taken us, straight to a housing crisis.

So by your thinking should the staff work for free?

Do you honestly think that they just spend the day telling people that they've not houses available? :rolleyes:

Like most companies there is a process to everything and it's no different in the council albeit there is a lot of red tape involved. Perhaps they should be more thorough and root out the wasters who have no intention of ever contributing and always expectant.

I think we need to get rid of the idea that people are entitled to housing, they are not!! The idea of council housing is to assist those that are in need of housing, those who can't for genuine reason provide a home for themselves or families. It is most definitely not for those who want to swindle every cent out of the welfare as if they are owed something and then have the audacity to refuse a house that doesn't fall within their "requirements". the same people who have the best smart phones and could never miss their annual sun holidays.

The answer isn't more housing in Dublin. The answer is moving people further out of Dublin and providing more jobs in these areas. Although more jobs may not be the answer if they aren't going to bother trying to get a job.

If I was in such desperate need with a family. I'd happily take a house and job in another county if it mean't being able to provide a stable home environment for my kids. As it stands now I regularly have to travel abroad for work in order to provide this stability for my family.

The_Conductor

salamanca22 wrote: »

Re read my post there again would you please.

I was looking for clarification on something you posted as it was ambiguous.

Thanks.

EDIT// Just to clarify, I do not know whether or not it is the father's responsibility to house the mother. Hence my question in my post before this one.

It is the father's responsibility, to provide accommodation and maintenance for his children- subject to specific guidelines- including age limits and whether or not they are in education. There is an assumption that the mother is the guardian of the children (not always applicable).

If you want to discuss or question this further- take it elsewhere.

NipNip

Sleepy wrote: »

I've actually done some analysis work on the Fingal Co Co housing database and, without getting into too much detail, the waiting lists are terrifying. Even medical priority or homeless applicants can be on the waiting list for years as they simply don't have the housing stock to meet demand and, as usual, it's the worst elements of society that are best at gaming the system.

The housing officers know when they're being played, but there's nothing they can do about it. Not a job I'd fancy trying to do. Never mind dealing with all the chancers and those that feel they're "entitled" to be provided with a 4 bed house in Malahide at taxpayers expense, the genuine cases these people deal with on an hourly basis would break your heart and yet, it's your job to tell them that there's nothing you can do for them.

Slightly off topic here, but it is in response to the issue with Fingal County Council. I used to live in a small town with low rents. There was absolute outcry when it was 'discovered' by the locals of this small town, that development land had been bought by the council to house 'people from Finglas'. I will not go into detail as to the adjectives used to describe these prospective 'people from Finglas', but it suffices to say, it was not complimentary. Demands for meetings with councillors and en masse protests were being made by the lovely residents of this small town with low rents. One very clever local provided a link to the very planning permission for this seemingly obscene relocation of undesirables to their beautiful oasis of calm. Upon reading same, the numpties had misinterpreted Fingal County Council as referring to Finglas County Council. I kid you not.
Believe me, you probably do NOT wish to relocate outside Dublin if you're a Dub - let alone if you be from Finglas! Or the Fingal County Council Area....

adocholiday

OP made the right decision here and moved in with her folks. In the media of late I have seen so many people in the same boat as OP choosing the 'go homeless' route in the hopes of getting a house via the Council/SW or whoever. OP I would urge you to take a firm stand with your eldest and move away from Dublin where rents are cheaper and property is in less demand. A child should not dictate where you live because it is an inconvenience to them. I am sure that he would rather a safe secure place to live outside of Dublin than emergency accommodation in any case.

The whole attitude of some people to the rent situation is absurd. There are so many in this country who feel entitled to live wherever they fancy and have the taxpayer foot their bill and cry the poor mouth when faced with the reality that this may not be possible. My fiance and I, both working professionals, are renting a room in an apartment shared with 2 other people (the room is a lot less than 850 btw and we are in a lovely part of South Dublin). We would love our own place in the same area but we can't afford it at the moment. If we had to leave for whatever reason tomorrow then we would probably have to move farther out of Dublin to get a place. We wouldn't complain about it or demand someone get us a place, we would just get on with it and do it. You can't have everything you want in life, nor should you expect to have. If the rental market dictates than an area is too expensive for SW to allow you to live there then you must accept the fact and move out. It's not about the elite having a monopoly on a particular area, or people being 'forced out' of an area. The basic rules of economics are supply and demand. If the demand in an area is high, and the supply is low, then those who are willing to pay the most win the battle. It is as simple as that.

adocholiday

iwillhtfu wrote: »

Perhaps they should be more thorough and root out the wasters who have no intention of ever contributing and always expectant.

I think we need to get rid of the idea that people are entitled to housing, they are not!! The idea of council housing is to assist those that are in need of housing, those who can't for genuine reason provide a home for themselves or families. It is most definitely not for those who want to swindle every cent out of the welfare as if they are owed something and then have the audacity to refuse a house that doesn't fall within their "requirements". the same people who have the best smart phones and could never miss their annual sun holidays.

The answer isn't more housing in Dublin. The answer is moving people further out of Dublin and providing more jobs in these areas. Although more jobs may not be the answer if they aren't going to bother trying to get a job.

If I was in such desperate need with a family. I'd happily take a house and job in another county if it mean't being able to provide a stable home environment for my kids. As it stands now I regularly have to travel abroad for work in order to provide this stability for my family.

Could not have said this better myself. You hit the nail on the head with that post. Everything that is wrong with the system is addressed there

Kaizersoze81

alex03 wrote: »

Blanchardstown (Dublin 15) would be traditionally a cheaper place where people could afford to rent. The rent caps applicable are the Fingal County Council rates, which are the lowest of any of the Dublin Council rates. The rent cap for a family with two children is €850 pm / 900 pm for three children.

I've done a search today for a 2 bed in Dublin 15 on Daft.ie with max. rent €850 and there were absolutely no properties.

daft.ie/dublin-city/houses-to-rent/dublin-15/?s%

So let them pay the difference between the 850 rent allowance provides, and the amount the landlord is looking for. Why should someone get every cent of their rent paid for them because they chose to have 3 children.
Honest working people are struggling to get by and pay rent, bills etc and here we are people crying about having to make up the difference between a very generous rent allowance and a market rate of rent
As a PAYE worker who is constantly getting hit with extra levies/taxes etc and who is struggling to get by, this attitude of entitlement really boils my blood.

Sleepy

LordNorbury wrote: »

Funny that we've no money to build houses for those on the waiting list, nor have we the money to renovate homes that people could be moved into, but somehow we have the 50-60K a year for the salaries of those in the local authorities who are answering the phones day in day out telling people that in order to get onto the housing list, they have to be actually homeless.

This is a consequence of us having taken a downright stupid and greedy approach to state expenditure when our economy collapsed back in 2008. All capital spending was practically frozen, and the blanket protection of what were and are still excessive salaries in our public sector, was completely prioritised above all other considerations and all other expenditure.

So we have a local authority now that surprise surprise, hasn't a red cent to renovate properties or build new properties, but I bet you any money you like, that when the staff in the local authority go to check if their wages went into the bank this Friday, that they won't be listening to:"sorry, there is a waiting list"...

This is where union led government policy on annual tax expenditure, has taken us, straight to a housing crisis.

You'd find very few staff in the housing section on that kind of money and tbh, most of those that I was working with would deserve it. Having worked with most local authorities in the country, I've certainly met a fair few wasters that could (and should) be replaced with a potted plant but they're rarely placed into such difficult roles.

I can't speak about any other councils with any kind of authority, nor indeed can I speak on behalf of FCC, but to correct you on one point: they are carrying out repair work on their "voids" (uninhabited properties). Regulations in this area can really hold things up as, due to our litigious nature as a people, the standards they must adhere to in renovating such properties are higher than most home-owners would ever realistically adhere to. Add in the shocking state that some of these properties are left in (absolute horror stories in some cases) and it's no surprise that it's both expensive and time-consuming to get them re-let.

Kinet1c

Sjoh123 wrote: »

I understand that, and if my eldest would move with me that wouldn't be an issue having to leave Dublin but he's 12 now and wants to be here he's been here his whole life

If you're homeless then it's because you're pandering to a 12 year old, not because of the lack of help available.

NipNip

Kinet1c wrote: »

If you're homeless then it's because you're pandering to a 12 year old, not because of the lack of help available.

Perhaps the OP should move to the soon to be developed housing estate for 'people from Finglas' in my aforementioned Oasis of Calm, 'outside Dublin'.
You do not know the upheaval moving house causes. It is acknowledged as being one of the most stressful life events.
The OP has 3 children. Her family is now fractured with 1 sibling having to live with another parent. She herself has to move in to a room with her parents - can you imagine the indignity of it? The stress? Did you ever read Peig? lol. Living with a parent when you yourself are a parent is far from idyllic!
Btw - the Oasis of calm has one of the highest unemployment rates in the country. Whatever chance one might have of gaining employment in Dublin, believe me, you are sentencing yourself to a life of unemployment, bigotry, ignorance towards you and your children and possibly long term mental health issues by relocating to this town that time forgot! I'm not exaggerating!

ComputerKing

NipNip wrote: »

Perhaps the OP should move to the soon to be developed housing estate for 'people from Finglas' in my aforementioned Oasis of Calm, 'outside Dublin'.
You do not know the upheaval moving house causes. It is acknowledged as being one of the most stressful life events.
The OP has 3 children. Her family is now fractured with 1 sibling having to live with another parent. She herself has to move in to a room with her parents - can you imagine the indignity of it? The stress? Did you ever read Peig? lol. Living with a parent when you yourself are a parent is far from idyllic!
Btw - the Oasis of calm has one of the highest unemployment rates in the country. Whatever chance one might have of gaining employment in Dublin, believe me, you are sentencing yourself to a life of unemployment, bigotry, ignorance towards you and your children and possibly long term mental health issues by relocating to this town that time forgot! I'm not exaggerating!

Can you imagine how all the stress and indignity that could have been solved by moving to an area where the op could afford to pay rent. Or even imagine this working and paying some of your rent yourself rather than our taxes going to pay for the op to live for free so she can complain when they don't cover rent in the area she wants to live in anymore.

Can you also imagine that there are jobs in areas outside of Dublin and that there's a magical thing called commuting where the op can drive in or get public transport into Dublin if she wanted to to go to work.

NipNip

ComputerKing wrote: »

Can you imagine how all the stress and indignity that could have been solved by moving to an area where the op could afford to pay rent. Or even imagine this working and paying some of your rent yourself rather than our taxes going to pay for the op to live for free so she can complain when they don't cover rent in the area she wants to live in anymore.

Can you also imagine that there are jobs in areas outside of Dublin and that there's a magical thing called commuting where the op can drive in or get public transport into Dublin if she wanted to to go to work.

I can imagine those things. But then reality kicks in.

NipNip

ComputerKing wrote: »

Can you imagine how all the stress and indignity that could have been solved by moving to an area where the op could afford to pay rent. Or even imagine this working and paying some of your rent yourself rather than our taxes going to pay for the op to live for free so she can complain when they don't cover rent in the area she wants to live in anymore.

Can you also imagine that there are jobs in areas outside of Dublin and that there's a magical thing called commuting where the op can drive in or get public transport into Dublin if she wanted to to go to work.

Did you read my post in relation to the reaction of people living beyond the Pale to the potential of FCC relocating residents to their Oasis of Calm/Hub of unemployment, Ignorance, Bigotry and home-grown crime?

Caliden

ComputerKing wrote: »

Can you imagine how all the stress and indignity that could have been solved by moving to an area where the op could afford to pay rent. Or even imagine this working and paying some of your rent yourself rather than our taxes going to pay for the op to live for free so she can complain when they don't cover rent in the area she wants to live in anymore.

Can you also imagine that there are jobs in areas outside of Dublin and that there's a magical thing called commuting where the op can drive in or get public transport into Dublin if she wanted to to go to work.

While letting them pay some of the rent themselves may sound like a good idea, what happens to those who are paying 100% of the rent themselves when they are priced out of the market by someone on RA who can 'top-up' their RA?

RA is part of the reason for high rents and increasing the amount of RA people can get is a road we shouldn't go down as it would add to the bubble we have now.


The Government are totally dragging their feet on this and looking at someone else to do the work.

Those on emergency housing (living in hotels) are costing way beyond what their RA would cost (which in itself is idiotic) and yet the Government chooses to ignore the cries that we have a housing crisis.

We had a housing crisis 2 years ago but now it's hit critical and people are becoming homeless.

They need to step in and instead of decreasing taxes, spend 0.5B (or whatever we can afford in the next budget) on both residential AND social housing.

Those on RA aren't the only ones affected by the current state of affairs. We have students and lower paid workers having to commute for hours just to get to work.

NipNip

The commutes alone cost the same as the difference in rent (if one is lucky enough to have a job!). That is before you consider the increased childcare costs for having to find someone who can mind children from when you get the 6am commuter train.

ComputerKing

NipNip wrote: »

The commutes alone cost the same as the difference in rent (if one is lucky enough to have a job!). That is before you consider the increased childcare costs for having to find someone who can mind children from when you get the 6am commuter train.

Yes and those who aren't living off hand outs from the government and are paying 50% tax as well have these problems.

drumswan

NipNip wrote: »

The commutes alone cost the same as the difference in rent (if one is lucky enough to have a job!). That is before you consider the increased childcare costs for having to find someone who can mind children from when you get the 6am commuter train.

So what?

I would like to like in St Tropez, but I dont because I cannot afford it. Its not that difficult a concept to understand.

NipNip

ComputerKing wrote: »

Yes and those who aren't living off hand outs from the government and are paying 50% tax as well have these problems.

So you acknowledge that there is a housing issue?

ComputerKing

Caliden wrote: »

While letting them pay some of the rent themselves may sound like a good idea, what happens to those who are paying 100% of the rent themselves when they are priced out of the market by someone on RA who can 'top-up' their RA?

RA is part of the reason for high rents and increasing the amount of RA people can get is a road we shouldn't go down as it would add to the bubble we have now.


The Government are totally dragging their feet on this and looking at someone else to do the work.

Those on emergency housing (living in hotels) are costing way beyond what their RA would cost (which in itself is idiotic) and yet the Government chooses to ignore the cries that we have a housing crisis.

We had a housing crisis 2 years ago but now it's hit critical and people are becoming homeless.

They need to step in and instead of decreasing taxes, spend 0.5B (or whatever we can afford in the next budget) on both residential AND social housing.

Those on RA aren't the only ones affected by the current state of affairs. We have students and lower paid workers having to commute for hours just to get to work.

Now I agree with the first part about not allowing people to topup ra and it will price people put of the market. Then would not be giving rent allowance to people in certain areas such as part of Dublin where they are pushing people who are working in the area out of the market. Should the ra renters not be told basically you ra is going to stop unless you move to another area.

Secondly I don't agree with the money going to houses instead of lowering taxes because most of us pay nearly 50% tax and don't live off government handouts. The majority of people on these lists have never worked a day and aren't even looking for jobs and don't deserved to be supported by the government let alone hardworking tax payers money being spent on supporting them.

ComputerKing

NipNip wrote: »

So you acknowledge that there is a housing issue?

Yes I acknowledge that there is a housing issue however this doesn't mean that taxpayers money should be spent building houses for people who have never worked a day in their life or to pay rent allowence for people like the op who don't work and then complain they are homeless just because they're rent allowance can't afford a place in the area they want to life in.

NipNip

ComputerKing wrote: »

Now I agree with the first part about not allowing people to topup ra and it will price people put of the market. Then would not be giving rent allowance to people in certain areas such as part of Dublin where they are pushing people who are working in the area out of the market. Should the ra renters not be told basically you ra is going to stop unless you move to another area.

Secondly I don't agree with the money going to houses instead of lowering taxes because most of us pay nearly 50% tax and don't live off government handouts. The majority of people on these lists have never worked a day and aren't even looking for jobs and don't deserved to be supported by the government let alone hardworking tax payers money being spent on supporting them.[/QUOTE]

41% tax is the higher rate of tax. 9% lower than your claim. The majority of people on these lists have in fact worked more than a day. :cool:

Caliden

ComputerKing wrote: »

Now I agree with the first part about not allowing people to topup ra and it will price people put of the market. Then would not be giving rent allowance to people in certain areas such as part of Dublin where they are pushing people who are working in the area out of the market. Should the ra renters not be told basically you ra is going to stop unless you move to another area.

Secondly I don't agree with the money going to houses instead of lowering taxes because most of us pay nearly 50% tax and don't live off government handouts. The majority of people on these lists have never worked a day and aren't even looking for jobs and don't deserved to be supported by the government let alone hardworking tax payers money being spent on supporting them.

I'm not saying to never ever reduce taxes but this year is not the time. We'll be flush a few grand more but what good is that when your rent goes up 10%?

ComputerKing

NipNip wrote: »

41% tax is the higher rate of tax. 9% lower than your claim. The majority of people on these lists have in fact worked more than a day. :cool:

Actually yes income tax is 41% but I was talking about the taxes we pay on out income so we pay 41%(income tax) + 4%(PRSI) +4%(USC)=49% the amount of tax payed on our income so I'm sorry if I was off by 1% but even you with have to accept that thats nearly 50%.

ComputerKing

Caliden wrote: »

I'm not saying to never ever reduce taxes but this year is not the time. We'll be flush a few grand more but what good is that when your rent goes up 10%?

Yes but for those of us who don't rent and don't have mortgages that few grand males a big difference its nearly an extra 1 week holiday a year like or a few grand more that I'm likely to spend and put moeny back into the economy.

MouseTail

Caliden wrote: »

I'm not saying to never ever reduce taxes but this year is not the time. We'll be flush a few grand more but what good is that when your rent goes up 10%?

This year is exactly the right time to lower taxes (I have no doubt it will happen).
lowering taxes and tackling the housing crisis are not mutually exclusive.

NipNip

ComputerKing wrote: »

Actually yes income tax is 41% but I was talking about the taxes we pay on out income so we pay 41%(income tax) + 4%(PRSI) +4%(USC)=49% the amount of tax payed on our income so I'm sorry if I was off by 1% but even you with have to accept that thats nearly 50%.

Ok - you've wandered into the area of pedantry..............

You do not pay 41% tax on the whole of your income.
You do not pay 4% PRSI or USC on the whole of your income.
You pay a certain level above a certain percentage.
It falls well short of a net tax rate of 50%.

Whatever amount of tax you pay, does not entitle you to become sort of Attila the Hun in relation to how taxes are spent in this country. That's democracy for ya!