Estate agent let slip that house next door will be social

Backofbeyond2

Myself and my partner are looking at properties in a new development in Dublin. While talking to the agent the other day, he mentioned that one of the 10 percent social houses would be next to the one we have our eye on.

We'd share a wall, ours being the end of a terrace of 3 houses. One social house in between two privately owned.

The builder seems to be taking the pepper approach. A couple of social houses here and there throughout rather than one road or section.

It was also mentioned that the houses will be managed by a body (cluais or tuath I think) not the council. The implication was that these bodies take better care of social properties?

No worries about there being more than 10 percent social here, the houses are in big demand and most have sold. Including the one on the other side of the social house.

It's thrown my head in a spin. The house is basically exactly what we want and in budget and if it wasn't for this we'd be happy to proceed.

New account because I dont want to tie this to my other account which can be easily traced to my name. I'd rather people didn't know all about our housing plans.

Any thoughts? In a lot of cases you wouldn't know this in advance, and in most cases it works out totally fine. But just worried about rolling the dice.

Any advice or personal experience would be appreciated. We're first time buyers so it's all new.

cubatahavana

Backofbeyond2 wrote: »

Myself and my wife are looking at properties in a new development in Dublin. While talking to the agent the other day, he mentioned that one of the 10 percent social houses would be next to the one we have our eye on.

We'd share a wall, ours being the end of a terrace of 3 houses. One social house in between two privately owned.

The builder seems to be taking the pepper approach. A couple of social houses here and there throughout rather than one road or section.

It was also mentioned that the houses will be managed by a body (cluais or tuath I think) not the council. The implication was that these bodies take better care of social properties?

No worries about there being more than 10 percent social here, the houses are in big demand and most have sold. Including the one on the other side of the social house.

It's thrown my head in a spin. The house is basically exactly what we want and in budget and if it wasn't for this we'd be happy to proceed.

New account because I dont want to tie this to my other account which can be easily traced to my name. I'd rather people didn't know all about our housing plans.

Any thoughts? In a lot of cases you wouldn't know this in advance, and in most cases it works out totally fine. But just worried about rolling the dice.

Any advice or personal experience would be appreciated. We're first time buyers so it's all new.

It’s a tough decision. I would personally choose another end of terrace if available. Call me obnoxious if you wish, but I’d rather not share a wall with social housing if possible. Having said that, you don’t know who your neighbor will be. There are good and bad apples both in social housing and non social housing. If there are no other end of terrace houses that suit you available and you like everything else in the house and development, I’d say go for it. At the end of the day, you could buy in an established neighborhood and then your neighbor could rent to the council too. You never know. It’s not something that would put me 100% off. Don’t know if this answer is helpful at all.

There was a poster around here saying a couple of weeks ago that anyone buying in a new development must be an idiot. I think new developments offer incredible value as the houses are usually better built (at least to a better standard), they are warmer, they have some sort of ecological energy generation (a little bit towards saving the planet) and the layout is usually better.

Where is the development?

StupidLikeAFox

Backofbeyond2 wrote: »

Any thoughts? In a lot of cases you wouldn't know this in advance, and in most cases it works out totally fine. But just worried about rolling the dice.

You hit the nail on the head here. I would say it's slightly more likely to be fine - most people on the social housing list are fine and just want a place to live and build a life. I think the housing agency potentially acts as a second filter as well, but at the end of the day who knows?

The "pepper" approach is the correct one and hopefully leads to a well balanced estate. But again, there's no guarantees one way or the other and the there will always be an element of rolling the dice when buying in any new estate

ted1

If it was me I’d start looking elsewhere.

Backofbeyond2

Appreciate the answers. There's only one of the type we want left. Though there might be one other one falling through and coming available. I'm crossing my fingers and toes that that happens as it would put my mind at ease.

We just keep coming back to new builds. The help to buy is a great boost, and everything is new, energy efficient and finished to your taste from day 1. No skeletons or leaks hiding in the closet.

Hopefully this'll all be moot and another one comes available. We'll see how the next few days go!

Yellow_Fern

StupidLikeAFox wrote: »

You hit the nail on the head here. I would say it's slightly more likely to be fine - most people on the social housing list are fine and just want a place to live and build a life. I think the housing agency potentially acts as a second filter as well, but at the end of the day who knows?

The "pepper" approach is the correct one and hopefully leads to a well balanced estate. But again, there's no guarantees one way or the other and the there will always be an element of rolling the dice when buying in any new estate

You will be surprised to learn there isn't really much academic evidence that a pepper approach is superior. I can think of reasons why it might be inferior for the development of working class kids, although there is no data available on it.

twowheelsonly

IMO don't be worried about it and drive on.

The vast majority of people are just people who want to get on with their lives and try to better themselves. I'm sure that as a buyer yourself you can appreciate the hoops you have to jump through and the difficulties in getting a mortgage in the first place. A huge amount of people in social housing are people that just can't afford a mortgage. They might just be young (as a lot of housing association tenants seem to be) or be in lower paid jobs.

On top of any of that you have the safety net that these type of tenants are easier to manage than your regular corporation or council tenants. It's much easier for you to make a complaint to the housing association and they will act on it. These tenants also tend to be on a contract and it's not a 'house for life' in most cases although some may be offered the opportunity to buy at a later stage. Knowing that you will be thrown out for acting the maggot is usually incentive enough not to act the maggot.

For all you know right now the people buying the third house could be the biggest scumbags you've ever come across. They could be massive drug dealers or just out and out despicable people. Or they could be fantastic. Same applies to your next door neighbour. It's just the chance you take on a new development and in 99% of cases everything will work out fine.

sparkle109

It’s a difficult one to call. Where is the development? Is it a large development? Size dependent you could change house and be in the same situation. Either way, it’s a very important purchase so all pros and potential cons need weighed

StupidLikeAFox wrote: »

You hit the nail on the head here. I would say it's slightly more likely to be fine - most people on the social housing list are fine and just want a place to live and build a life. I think the housing agency potentially acts as a second filter as well, but at the end of the day who knows?

The "pepper" approach is the correct one and hopefully leads to a well balanced estate. But again, there's no guarantees one way or the other and the there will always be an element of rolling the dice when buying in any new estate

Idbatterim

Putting them in a mid terrace, lol ! Few k cheaper to buy for council but wreck both sides head....

They should be in their own area of estate. The free housing is way more than they should he getting for a start...

jetfiremuck

You do know that once the house is social house it stays that way for ever. If and when you decide to move youll run into the same issue you have now. Believe me when I tell you that you have no control over antisocial/ tenant behaviour in all its shapes and forms. My sister was into a new estate, that got build out and finished. Social picked up a few in the estate. Was ok for the first few years, then a crowd moved in next door with an Alsation dog in a back yard the size of a stamp. Dog barked day and night as in day and night.meetings with tenants no difference...she gave up......it broke her...she moved.

Wanderer78

jetfiremuck wrote:

You do know that once the house is social house it stays that way for ever. If and when you decide to move youll run into the same issue you have now. Believe me when I tell you that you have no control over antisocial/ tenant behaviour in all its shapes and forms. My sister was into a new estate, that got build out and finished. Social picked up a few in the estate. Was ok for the first few years, then a crowd moved in next door with an Alsation dog in a back yard the size of a stamp. Dog barked day and night as in day and night.meetings with tenants no difference...she gave up......it broke her...she moved.

This social housing thing is a mess, I'm surrounded by social houses, and you couldn't live next to some of them, it would have detrimental effects to your well being, and when people are putting down that kinna money.....

AlphaDelta1

We live beside a social house and they are great neighbours.

Wanderer78

AlphaDelta1 wrote:

We live beside a social house and they are great neighbours.

Some can be great, but some can truly be a disaster, it's a big risk when purchasing

AlphaDelta1

Wanderer78 wrote: »

Some can be great, but some can truly be a disaster, it's a big risk when purchasing

Yeah but you get that anywhere.

AngryLips

Cluid are very fast at dealing with problem tenants, I don't think you have anything to worry about.

Mickeroo

If it's in an estate you could get arsehole neighbours regardless of their social status tbh, you're rolling the dice either way. Personally if I really wanted the house I wouldn't give it a second thought.

AngryLips

Mickeroo wrote: »

If it's in an estate you could get arsehole neighbours regardless of their social status tbh, you're rolling the dice either way. Personally if I really wanted the house I wouldn't give it a second thought.

And if it's Cluid housing then you can be sure that those nightmare neighbours will be moved on within six months.

_Brian

It’s all risk and how much your willing to take on.

There’s a risk you’ll end up with a total nightmare next door to the extent that it will seriously devalue your property and make your life a nightmare.

If your ok with that risk then work away.

It wouldn’t be for me.

Bannasidhe

AngryLips wrote: »

And if it's Cluid housing then you can be sure that those nightmare neighbours will be moved on within six months.

Yup. Good friend of mine has lived in a Cluid appt block for over 15 years. They have always been strict on tenants keeping to the terms and conditions and troublemakers are quickly dealt with.

Idbatterim

This statement of " you can get good and bad neighbours regardless of social class " true. But the chances are far higher they will be bad if they get social housing. Because to rent or putchase privately, youll usually have your **** together ...

GarIT

If there are any issues there is no hope in hell that cluid will respond to any issues or complaints. You'll be on your own if there are any issues.

I've had nothing but nightmares dealing with cluid and their tenants.

boombang

AlphaDelta1 wrote: »

Yeah but you get that anywhere.

Plenty of unpleasant private owned/rented occupiers of course, but pretty sure the odds are worse with social.

Smouse156

A social scumbag managed to rent the house beside my parents when the owner went off to join the priesthood back in 2011. The priest was a kind although naive person and gave them the place for very little rent. They never paid, pilled up the rubbish inside the house and totally wrecked the place.

The social scumbag was an aggressive moody clown that never said anything nice to anybody. The wife was nice but she was kept quiet by the scumbag. In the end, the priests brother gave them two days notice to quit or he was going to come back with a group and forcefully remove them. They were never going to leave if asked politely.

The sad thing is I know a few people that live in social housing and they are decent genuine people. However, the one fella that ever lived beside us was a disaster. After that I’d be very careful where I buy if there is social involved.

MarkR

You can get an awful neighbour who buys the house. I don't think social should be a big factor. Suppose I grew up in social housing, so a coloured opinion!

If you want no neighbour issues, you're going to have to go detached.

Your concern is understandable, but I've had 2 sets of really bad neighbours in my life, the last one so bad it forced me to move. Neither were social housing. Noisy, inconsiderate, antisocial people come from all walks of life.

Wanderer78

AlphaDelta1 wrote: »

Yeah but you get that anywhere.

absolutely, but its still not a solution, id be driven demented living next to some of my neighbours, some are beyond dysfunctional, theyve been much worse than normal throughout covid, i feel for folks putting down their hard earned cash, only to put up with that crap

cheif kaiser

I live in a 1940s property in what was once a council estate but the vast majority of houses are now privately owned. Some years back, the council snapped up a few private houses and let them as social housing, 2 of them being right next door to me and 1 directly across the road.

Next door was given to an older couple with older children and at first I didn't much take to them but they were quiet enough so no bother really.
The house 2 doors up and the one across the road were both let to families and to be honest, the first year of them moving in was dreadful. We actually nicknamed them the Dingles such was the state of their gardens and the screaming out the windows at the kids. However, after the first year, they seemed to realise that this was not the way the vast majority lived and they started to calm down. Within 2 years, they were out doing there gardens, painting their walls and speaking to the neighbors in a friendly manner and basically behaving like everyone around them.

My point being, I think people change to suit their surroundings. They may have been raised somewhere where everyone screamed out the windows and they were just doing what everyone else did. Now they are sandwiched between people who look after their houses and behave, they are doing the same.

With one social house dotted here and there, I think you'll find they will blend in the majority and are unlikely to want to stand out, cause trouble and risk losing a house that they are probably delighted to get.

Caranica

At least with social housing there's someone you can go to if there's a problem and can escalate it to public reps too.

I've lived beside nightmare owners and private tenants and they're a lot harder to deal with. Also there's no guarantee that a private owner/investor won't rent to the local authority so you'd end up with social housing next door anyway.

Personally I'd go ahead, you never have any control over who lives next door. If that's something that bothers you then estate living isn't for you.

sbsquarepants

It is the luck of the draw - you can get great or terrible neighbours no matter where you live, but no matter what anyone will tell you - you are a lot more likely to get bad neighbours in social housing. It stand to reason if you are paying for the place yourself you will generally take better care of it.

Pkiernan

Your taking a gamble on a multi hundred thousand euro purchase.

Remember too that under the guise of Covid,many of our far left politicians are calling again for complete eviction bans.
No way will any public authority be evicting anyone.


You should be minimising risk here.

Your chances of getting burdened with gurriers are slim.

Crack on with the purchase.

No point thinking "What if?" twenty years from now.

Kintarō Hattori

Just to chime in here. My next door neighbour bought her house. I ended up having to take her to court over noise issues (and won). It really is just the luck of the draw who you get. The estate I live in has a mix of private buyers and social housing. Some of the social neighbours are lovey.

Panrich

I would say that for instance if there are two blocks of three houses like you have described in your new build estate. If the other one does not have social housing between the two others, then this will mean that your house will have a 'social tax' and will be worth less if you ever look to sell.

Of course you could have great neighbours who will look after the property and I hope you do, but there is always the chance that they move on and the house comes available again. The lottery of that would put me off, all other things being equal., as it is always hanging there. Is there any discount for this house because of the proximity to social housing?

AlphaDelta1

cheif kaiser wrote: »

I live in a 1940s property in what was once a council estate but the vast majority of houses are now privately owned. Some years back, the council snapped up a few private houses and let them as social housing, 2 of them being right next door to me and 1 directly across the road.

Next door was given to an older couple with older children and at first I didn't much take to them but they were quiet enough so no bother really.
The house 2 doors up and the one across the road were both let to families and to be honest, the first year of them moving in was dreadful. We actually nicknamed them the Dingles such was the state of their gardens and the screaming out the windows at the kids. However, after the first year, they seemed to realise that this was not the way the vast majority lived and they started to calm down. Within 2 years, they were out doing there gardens, painting their walls and speaking to the neighbors in a friendly manner and basically behaving like everyone around them.

My point being, I think people change to suit their surroundings. They may have been raised somewhere where everyone screamed out the windows and they were just doing what everyone else did. Now they are sandwiched between people who look after their houses and behave, they are doing the same.

With one social house dotted here and there, I think you'll find they will blend in the majority and are unlikely to want to stand out, cause trouble and risk losing a house that they are probably delighted to get.

It's why integration is so important. We are never going back to the days of huge social housing estates thankfully.

timmy_mallet

People are c***s, no matter if they are housed by the social or by the bank.

Barking dogs, imagine your bank funded neighbours big dog, what are you going to do about that? (I've experienced it).

We bought in a new estate, no issues with social tenants, and I've some empathy for the parents (as our kids socialise) - because they are actually embarrassed when talking to us because we all 'know' - massive elephant on the street.

The system is definitely unfair on people who buy, there is no doubt about that, and perhaps some longer term tax relief should be granted (dunno), but for the marginal cases that are impactful to the neighbours, as a society, it's probably the right thing to do.

(PS: When we bought, the sitemap had the social houses in a different colour, I asked the agent, they told me, there were 2 left to buy, we picked the one not beside the social house)

dartboardio

It definitely wouldn't put me off completely.

I live and grew up in a private estate, my parent owns the house. An estate of around 40 houses. We live in a small cul de sac at the top of the estate, everyone has been living here for years since the houses were built etc.

There was a woman living across the road from us for years who owned the house, who was a full blown alcoholic, nasty, paranoid, aggressive, annoying person, over the years she would cause many fights, knock on peoples doors asking for money for drink, pretending it was for food etc,

Her husband and children eventually left her and she died there 3 years ago from hitting her head after a nasty fall while drunk.

She had a mortgage and stopped paying it

Now, her house is being rented out for social tenants, and they are a lovely quiet family who fit in perfectly.. just goes to show it can be both sides of the coin.

Yellow_Fern

AlphaDelta1 wrote: »

It's why integration is so important. We are never going back to the days of huge social housing estates thankfully.

That case is anecdotal. There isnt much hard evidence to show this
https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.199.956&rep=rep1&type=pdf

rks

I have lived beside a social and it was nightmare. Not only for me but for the landlord as well.

Loud music, constant fighting, banging on my wall for no reason in the middle of the night, random guests coming and going, drinking and talking loudly day and night. The list goes on. I tried to talk to him but that made it worse. He became even more aggressive.

They completely wrecked the place. In the end the landlord had to evict them and that took some doing.

Not saying everyone will be that bad but for me that was a really bad experience.

riclad

My friend lives in a block about 40 units apartments run by cluaid in finglas .
i visited her about 7 times .i never saw any signs of trouble ,eg loud noises,
teens hanging round, or anything that you would not see in a private housing
block .
You could buy a house in santry in a private estate and live next to a rented house owned by a private landlord where theres 3 people living there ,making noise ,having loud partys .
The apartment block was clean and well run .
i have seen bad tenants in private house,s not owned by the council .

Heart Break Kid

Backofbeyond2 wrote: »

Myself and my partner are looking at properties in a new development in Dublin. While talking to the agent the other day, he mentioned that one of the 10 percent social houses would be next to the one we have our eye on.

We'd share a wall, ours being the end of a terrace of 3 houses. One social house in between two privately owned.

The builder seems to be taking the pepper approach. A couple of social houses here and there throughout rather than one road or section.

Sounds like proper social planning in relation to housing. Wouldn't bother me that much that theres a mix, many new developments require an allocation of social housing with private housing.

People that buy houses can be scummy too.

Jesus you would think that tenants of social housing are some kind of different species.
I hope no-one ever falls on hard times!

But the house OP, you can never pick your neighbors, unless you get a nice detached house on its own site!

eleventh

timmy_mallet wrote: »

Barking dogs, imagine your bank funded neighbours big dog, what are you going to do about that? (I've experienced it).

+1 It was a small dog in our case - high-pitched yelping outside when owners weren't there, wanting to be let in. It was next door. It was a nice place but loses a lot when you have to listen to that. They definitely weren't social.

OP - I think there can be thoughtless people anywhere. They have an over the top sense of being entitled (to do with they want). It can be someone without much wealth, or with more than enough. It's about 50/50.

JimmyVik

Backofbeyond2 wrote: »

Myself and my partner are looking at properties in a new development in Dublin. While talking to the agent the other day, he mentioned that one of the 10 percent social houses would be next to the one we have our eye on.

We'd share a wall, ours being the end of a terrace of 3 houses. One social house in between two privately owned.

The builder seems to be taking the pepper approach. A couple of social houses here and there throughout rather than one road or section.

It was also mentioned that the houses will be managed by a body (cluais or tuath I think) not the council. The implication was that these bodies take better care of social properties?

No worries about there being more than 10 percent social here, the houses are in big demand and most have sold. Including the one on the other side of the social house.

It's thrown my head in a spin. The house is basically exactly what we want and in budget and if it wasn't for this we'd be happy to proceed.

New account because I dont want to tie this to my other account which can be easily traced to my name. I'd rather people didn't know all about our housing plans.

Any thoughts? In a lot of cases you wouldn't know this in advance, and in most cases it works out totally fine. But just worried about rolling the dice.

Any advice or personal experience would be appreciated. We're first time buyers so it's all new.

Im trying to buy now and the amount of social houses in private estates or even councils buying up loads of them at the last minute made me make sure that I dont buy in a new estate.
I grew up in a council house, and while most people around us were lovely, there were a few families that destroyed the place and made the whole estate a misery for everyone. I dont want this where I buy.


Oh, and if the person beside you did turn out to be a dirty, ignorant person, you would be dying to get out of the place, but nobody would buy your house.

Idbatterim

Living beside someone getting the house paid for by you, enough to turn me off it , regardless of how hood or **** neighbours they were...

Idbatterim

bubblypop wrote: »

Jesus you would think that tenants of social housing are some kind of different species.
I hope no-one ever falls on hard times!

But the house OP, you can never pick your neighbors, unless you get a nice detached house on its own site!

Lol! Plenty on hard times, paying for this lumacy and living in **** conditions, situations. But as they are rich on 40k etc, they dont qualify. They also dont have "angles" they can use to abuse their position and many didnt gabe the vision to put themselves on the housi g kist o er a decade ago for free lyxury apartments in dundrum, donnybrook etc...

daheff

Yellow_Fern wrote: »

You will be surprised to learn there isn't really much academic evidence that a pepper approach is superior. I can think of reasons why it might be inferior for the development of working class kids, although there is no data available on it.

I live in an estate which has this approach. Lived in one before where it was a row/street.

Previous estate had no go area, whereas this one has one or two you walk past quickly.

That said, if your house is next to the social housing one, it will devalue your house...by how much depends on who moves in next to you.

A decent skin not so much, but there would be a discount because of 'just in case they move out'
to
A right scummer... junkies & shouting in the streets, garden full of rubbish, and your house will only be saleable to a housing charity.

Sleeper12

I don't get the whole thing about council tenants tbh. Yes you can get bad ones but you can get bad private tenants. A LL could buy the property next to you and have worse tenants than your council tenants. A few years after you buy a property the council could buy the one next door.

Not all council tenants /social housing goes to the permanently unemployed. Many go to low paid full time workers.

Lolle06

I agree that you never know what neighbours you get, but if you ever have to sell a house that is attached to a social house, it will have a lower value, than the same house that’s not attached to a social house.
If the house purchase price reflects this, then go ahead. But if you could get a house without the social attachment for the same price, I‘d go for the latter.
Purely for the future resale value though.

Their attitude and the amount of crap you've to put up with will depend on your street layout, too. Many people offered social housing in your estate will all know each other and will congregate together. If your street has a bit of space, or a green area, or whatever, then you'll have them at your house a lot of the time. You'll get the associated noise, litter, etc.

If there's nowhere for them to hang out at your house, they will likely hang out at another social house in the estate where the space is there. Social tenants generally have either part time jobs or no jobs, as they are 'full time mammies' or 'owner of- full time mad bastard'.

It's, I'd say, a 20% chance of getting someone who's antagonistically noisy and dirty, as that is their personality and you won't change them. You'll just have to put up with them because, despite what people have said about Cluaid in this thread, they are a waste of time when it comes to evicting anyone. They may well evict the tenant, but it'll take years.

More realistically, what you'll get is the 80% chance of a social tenant who isn't deliberately noisy, but who has a limited income and, as such, will cut corners compared to the private houses. The house won't be maintained as well, if the person has a few kids, you'll likely have overflowing wheelie bins that blow all over the place, the garden/s will be a mess and the house itself will be the place for social events as they won't want to hire out function rooms etc. so you'll have gatherings for birthdays, communions, etc. so the usual horde of cars and kids and many social parents who tend to know others, will have their parties go late into the night as they don't have to consider work the following day, and their kids will just take care of themselves.

Most social tenants will do very annoying, frustrating things, but generally it isn't actually meant that way. It's just the consideration for people having to get up for work early etc. isn't something that's taken on board as it's not something the person themselves are used to.

Also, I'd suggest a disproportionate amount of social tenants (vs private owners/renters) will be involved in drugs. Almost every house you ever see raided by Gardai, searched or harrassed in relation to drugs, is a social tenant. I'd say you run about a 10% chance of getting a serious druggie who'll have the Gardai at the door making a show of the place in no time. Again, eviction will take forever.


In my own area, I've seen a few people nearby me celebrating out in their front garden a few months back as a couple of them had been offered council houses in a new development in a nearby village. The people celebrating were the scum of the earth. A family who never, ever had jobs, about 10-15 years ago were one of the biggest drug dealing families in the area, and although have been knocked off their perch and are "quieter" now, they have Gardai knocking the front door in every few months, and are the type with a bench in the front garden who sit with music playing all day, smoking and drinking and making a mess. I feel sorry for whoever ends up beside them, though it's great that some of them are leaving our estate to go elsewhere instead.


I've spent my life in and around council areas and in private areas with council allocation. The biggest impact on your quality of life will be the estate layout. After that, you run the risk of a scumbag neighbour, but realistically this isn't likely to be the stereotype you picture in your head. Most people in my estate are the 80% group - quiet, heads down, enjoy a drink or a party but not at the expense of others. Unfortunately, it's the 20% that have my estate covered in graffiti, bonfire material, litter, and Gardai constantly out as the 80% get harassed and given grief to, with no way to officially defend themselves.


...And yes, I do feel like Scott Steiner with this post..

HerrKuehn

JimmyVik wrote: »

I grew up in a council house, and while most people around us were lovely, there were a few families that destroyed the place and made the whole estate a misery for everyone.

This is exactly my experience. It is just a few bad apples, probably 1 in 20, but their effect on everyone else is dramatic.

riclad

If you are single you can buy a 2 or 3 bed house in the city centre, drumcondra , east wall,cabra etc
its not just city apartment versus house in a rural area .
Of course a new house will have a high level of insulation ,good energy rating versus a 50 year old house in cabra .
no one gets a house Free ,
the rent is based on your income , the rent go,s up if your income go,s up.
The system is not perfect, i know someone who lives in a 3bed council house
by himself.
His children left 10 years ago.
As long as he pays the rent he can stay there .
Theres not alot of one off houses for sale in country for sale unless you want to buy a an old house and modernise it ,put in new window,s , insulation etc
In many rural area,s ,broadband is not avaidable , which is becoming more important as people work from home .