Imagine rejecting a 600k house

Eric Cartman

Heart Break Kid wrote: »

Because North Dublin is incredibly under developed in terms of housing

you can blame the Georgian preservation society for a lot of that tbh.

Idbatterim

Next up is ten percent social housing in donnybrook on the rte site, dublin 4! Affordable housing there fine... social ? Landing out 700k on a two bed apartment to have a neighbour living next door for nothing... their " rent " (optional) wouldnt even cover the management fee ffs...

Eric Cartman

Kamu wrote: »

If I'm not mistaken, you can reject up to two times with no penalty (besides waiting for a second option) but if you reject a third time without a valid reason, you go back to the end of the list.

We're all aware of the stupid reasons some people have given, but most rejections are genuine as far as I've experience.

Focus Ireland has seen that the most common reason a property is turned down is because the specific neighbourhood has problems with drugs or antisocial behaviour and families do not want to move there for this reason,” Mac Namara said.

Two applicants with another local authority reported that they were feuding with families in the area, while 22 applicants on the same waiting list turned down accommodation because they felt unsafe in the area when they viewed the home they were offered.

not valid, I mean who is it causing these problems ? private owners ?

‘Garden not big enough’
However, councils also reported numerous cases where individuals turned down an offer of housing for more questionable reasons.
“There may be some cases where people are refusing for reasons that don’t really stand up, but in our experience these would be the minority,” Mac Namara said.
Among the most common reasons for refusal of this nature was the size of a house’s garden, with several councils reporting such responses.
Other offers were refused for more specific reasons.
One applicant with Meath County Council turned a house because they could not carry out a business from it, while another with Wexford County Council refused their offer because the ceilings in the house were too low.
Several applicants with Sligo County Council turned down accommodation for even stranger reasons, with reasons for refusal there including:
“Tiny shower space”
“Want a house – have accumulated a lot of fishing gear, gardening equipment”
“Needs a bigger back yard to develop bee-keeping prospects”
“My son wouldn’t be happy there, no one to play with as it’s an old person”
“Does not want an apartment with electrical heating”
“Household needs a second toilet”
Other applicants sought more car parking space, with one individual on Meath County Council’s waiting list seeking a driveway for two cars.
And others still found the surroundings, rather than the accommodation itself, problematic.
One applicant in Galway was unhappy at being offered a house in a forest, while another in Monaghan told the council that the house was too close to an electricity pole.

https://www.thejournal.ie/social-housing-refusals-ireland-4607803-May2019/

Kamu

Eric Cartman wrote: »

not valid, I mean who is it causing these problems ? private owners ?



https://www.thejournal.ie/social-housing-refusals-ireland-4607803-May2019/

Within your quote, it even states that 'reasons that don't add up, are in the minority.'

Don't get me wrong, there are chancers, but it would be the chancers who the media would report on mostly, compared to the people who do accept.

Eric Cartman

Kamu wrote: »

Within your quote, it even states that 'reasons that don't add up, are in the minority.'

Don't get me wrong, there are chancers, but it would be the chancers who the media would report on mostly, compared to the people who do accept.

Focus Ireland has seen that the most common reason a property is turned down is because the specific neighbourhood has problems with drugs or antisocial behaviour and families do not want to move there for this reason,” Mac Namara said.

the most common reason... its social tenants make those areas have those problems, if we keep allowing other social tenants who object to those things reject housing there then we create a ghetto where its only drug addicts or criminals and you end up not being able to come back from that. Sadly some social tenants are going to have to move to these places. Otherwise we're just building 10 houses to give 1 bad family the run of the place etc..

blanch152

Eric Cartman wrote: »

the most common reason... its social tenants make those areas have those problems, if we keep allowing other social tenants who object to those things reject housing there then we create a ghetto where its only drug addicts or criminals and you end up not being able to come back from that. Sadly some social tenants are going to have to move to these places. Otherwise we're just building 10 houses to give 1 bad family the run of the place etc..

There are small streets in housing estates that have become no-go areas because of one family and they way that they terrorise others on the street. Neither the council nor the Gardai can do anything about it.

RCSATELLITES

Kamu wrote: »

If I'm not mistaken, you can reject up to two times with no penalty (besides waiting for a second option) but if you reject a third time without a valid reason, you go back to the end of the list.

We're all aware of the stupid reasons some people have given, but most rejections are genuine as far as I've experienced.

How do you get on this free for all list. And reject a free house because its not close to the local shop?

Kamu

RCSATELLITES wrote: »

How do you get on this free for all list. And reject a free house because its not close to the local shop?

No idea, I've never been on the housing list.
But if the local shop doesn't sell Brennan's, sure is it even a shop? Can't be living somewhere with no shop like...

Idbatterim

Unless you are a woman who is prepared to use kids as a weapon and bargaining chip. You needed to have a crystal ball ten years ago mininum , to have no asperations in life and try getting your head around those purporting to reward their working voters , that they would be senas nothing but walking euro symbols to empoverish, in a disgusting redistribution of wealth to a mainly older population , that goes houses for nothing. Through buying , off the state or inheritance...

new2tri19

There needs to be a cap on the amount of assistance one person or family can take from the state. The stories i'm hearing lately especially around autism and DCA payments for kids that are very mild seems to be the next thing.
There is the genuine cases wth everythng but theres vast amount of people hoping on the bandwagon and we are becoming a welfare state the state that the middle class end up paying for. There needs to be more incentive to work and better yourself. As a low income worker myself and my wife have never claimed a penny, the irony is my wife could not afford to go away with her friend to New York last xmas. Her friend is a single mother works part time is getting HAP , DCA and god knows what else. She openly flaunts how much she gets off the state to the annoyance of my wife. I try not think about it but it is annoying.

ChelseaRentBoy

Sweet.Science wrote: »

Currently having a nightmare trying to sell and buy a house at the moment.

While in my Aunts on Sunday she told me the council offered her daughter a new build in Portmarnock . She followed it up saying she rejected it and has been offered one in Baldoyle instead.

100% a true story. Where is the fairness in all this?

Ireland 2020

I heard people in social housing are really reptiles and all drive 2020 cars.

collywobble7

MFPM wrote:

from their house of course it can be considered but not forced.

It's not their house though...that's the point

collywobble7

Bobtheman wrote:

The sexual revolution has its downsides. Its easier for guys to leave and women are hooking up with some bad apples. However even in the middle classes you will get **** who don't pay child support.

But but BLM...

Biafranlivemat

Kamu wrote: »

I live in a council house, and I pay more than 40 euro per week. I pay 15% of my weekly wage, and my family pay 20euro each.

Is that 15% of net pay or gross.

ThunbergsAreGo

Idbatterim wrote: »

Unless you are a woman who is prepared to use kids as a weapon and bargaining chip. You needed to have a crystal ball ten years ago mininum , to have no asperations in life and try getting your head around those purporting to reward their working voters , that they would be senas nothing but walking euro symbols to empoverish, in a disgusting redistribution of wealth to a mainly older population , that goes houses for nothing. Through buying , off the state or inheritance...

Thats very unfair. Social housing is a necessity in places like Dublin where the cost of living is very high

It should primarily be for low wage workers, which looking at stats earlier it is not. Its a tricky balancing act, if your wages progress too far you are ineligible. There must be some advantages to working

This passing of houses between generations needs to stop. It stops any stock being released and as i said before people should be down sized where possible. Its ridiculous someone in social housing has alot more advantages than someone payinh thousands in rent.

And before people accuse me of XYZ, this is a systemic problem. There has to be more incentive to work

Dude89

new2tri19 wrote: »

There needs to be a cap on the amount of assistance one person or family can take from the state. The stories i'm hearing lately especially around autism and DCA payments for kids that are very mild seems to be the next thing.
There is the genuine cases wth everythng but theres vast amount of people hoping on the bandwagon and we are becoming a welfare state the state that the middle class end up paying for. There needs to be more incentive to work and better yourself. As a low income worker myself and my wife have never claimed a penny, the irony is my wife could not afford to go away with her friend to New York last xmas. Her friend is a single mother works part time is getting HAP , DCA and god knows what else. She openly flaunts how much she gets off the state to the annoyance of my wife. I try not think about it but it is annoying.

You don't get domiciliary allowance for being "mildly autistic" it's a SPECTRUM, that allowance has a very high rejection rate, you need considerable proof and multiple assessments from a clinical physiologist and can be fully retested again after a year of diagnosis if a child is young , the absolute tripe some of you talk on here is a joke.

smelly sock

I know a family living in a council house near Cork St. They are paying 900 per month. Obviously not market rates when it comes to renting but thats the point of social housing isn't it? Make it more affordable.

Kamu

Biafranlivemat wrote: »

Is that 15% of net pay or gross.

15% of assessed income, which is net income, but before any pension deductions. I work in the Civil service, so pension deductions at source.

tobefrank321

Where does this madness end?

Council buying a number of million euro houses in the next big development in Malahide to prevent ghettoization somewhere else?

Where is the incentive to improve through getting a job and getting out of the "ghetto"?

Why bother if the council will supply you with a house even wealthy middle class can't afford.

LuasSimon

The UK government moved the dole for life brigade out of council homes in London and moved them to further out towns outside London where housing was cheaper through Bedroom tax legislation . Similar should be done in Dublin to those who havent or wont work.

mariaalice

Sweet.Science wrote: »

Currently having a nightmare trying to sell and buy a house at the moment.

While in my Aunts on Sunday she told me the council offered her daughter a new build in Portmarnock . She followed it up saying she rejected it and has been offered one in Baldoyle instead.

100% a true story. Where is the fairness in all this?

Ireland 2020

Someone else will get the social house in Portmarnock. Where is the unfairness?

No one should have endless choice but two choices seem fair enough.

Eric Cartman

LuasSimon wrote: »

The UK government moved the dole for life brigade out of council homes in London and moved them to further out towns outside London where housing was cheaper through Bedroom tax legislation . Similar should be done in Dublin to those who havent or wont work.

exactly what we should be doing. Could you imagine Talbot/foley/sheriff/gardiner street not being crime ridden hell holes and full of workers who are actually needed in the city.

the people in social housing who actually work need to be looked after, those who are only interested in crime or sitting about getting pissed/high need to be given a firm kick in the hole.

Pkiernan

mariaalice wrote: »

Someone else will get the social house in Portmarnock. Where is the unfairness?

No one should have endless choice but two choices seem fair enough.

The unfairness that she gets to pick and choose a free house when working people struggle.

mariaalice

The op never said if the person has a job full or part-time or if she has a disability or if she has a child with a disability or what the circumstances are.

Is the argument that there should be no social housing in 'aspirational' areas?

Nermal

mariaalice wrote: »

Is the argument that there should be no social housing in 'aspirational' areas?

Yes. It's a waste of resources. Social housing inside the M50 should be sold off, and the revenue used to build/buy in cheaper areas.

ThunbergsAreGo

ThunbergsAreGo wrote: »

Thats very unfair. Social housing is a necessity in places like Dublin where the cost of living is very high

Not really... because for the rest of us, we are expected to buy/rent within our means, and commute to work.

And before people accuse me of XYZ, this is a systemic problem. There has to be more incentive to work

There needs to be less tolerance of Dubliners staying in Dublin if they can't afford to live there. It's the bloody capital. Of course it's expensive. If you can't afford to live there (and I certainly couldn't), then live in Athlone, or somewhere close to the main transportation links.

The systemic problem is this belief that people are "entitled".

ThunbergsAreGo

Deleted User wrote: »

Not really... because for the rest of us, we are expected to buy/rent within our means, and commute to work.



There needs to be less tolerance of Dubliners staying in Dublin if they can't afford to live there. It's the bloody capital. Of course it's expensive. If you can't afford to live there (and I certainly couldn't), then live in Athlone, or somewhere close to the main transportation links.

The systemic problem is this belief that people are "entitled".

The systemic problem is people are more likely to get a house for being homeless/having a child/waiting a long time then getting out and getting work.

mariaalice

Nermal wrote: »

Yes. It's a waste of resources. Social housing inside the M50 should be sold off, and the revenue used to build/buy in cheaper areas.

Completely batty ill though out idea and is never going to happen.

smelly sock

Nermal wrote: »

Yes. It's a waste of resources. Social housing inside the M50 should be sold off, and the revenue used to build/buy in cheaper areas.

So move people living in social housing within the M50 out to other areas? Even if generations of the same family have lived in that area? Seems like the real estate/economic version of ethnic cleansing.

tobefrank321

mariaalice wrote: »

Completely batty ill though out idea and is never going to happen.

But buying 500k one bed apartments and 600k houses for social housing isn't? :rolleyes:

How on earth does it make sense for people with jobs in Dublin city centre commuting long distances whereas those who don't or won't work live there.

Match the accommodation to the jobs, its a simple idea, which prevents misery all around.