Buying next to Social House MOD WARNING POST #118

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

The person at the end of the queue could very easily be living in emergency accommodation or they could be borrow to pay market rate rents while someone else is in a 3 bed council house while there is only one of them. how could be either reasonable or fair.
They do not own the property regardless of whatever emotional attachment they may have to it. Government must do what is best for the majority not to sustain people in the privileged positions they have become accustomed to.

And your solution is to toss older or single people out of their homes to make way for younger ones?

It's not the fault of those awaiting re-allocation to smaller units that there are larger (growing?) families waiting on housing, and nor is it their fault that the government hasn't factored in the need for smaller units for those who could downsize.

Instead of building / buying 3/4 beds, the government should be factoring in 1 and 2 bed units for an ageing population.

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

And your solution is to toss older or single people out of their homes to make way for younger ones?

It's not the fault of those awaiting re-allocation to smaller units that there are larger (growing?) families waiting on housing, and nor is it their fault that the government hasn't factored in the need for smaller units for those who could downsize.

Instead of building / buying 3/4 beds, the government should be factoring in 1 and 2 bed units for an ageing population.

if evicting one person who has a need for shelter is required to allow 4 or 5 others have shelter then most rational people would do that in a heartbeat. Those families in emergency accommodation are in emergency accommodation because the councils don't have suitable properties available for them. The position from which you are arguing is very weak.

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

if evicting one person who has a need for shelter is required to allow 4 or 5 others have shelter then most rational people would do that in a heartbeat. Those families in emergency accommodation are in emergency accommodation because the councils don't have suitable properties available for them. The position from which you are arguing is very weak.

I imagine thats a very easy position to adopt if you are not going to be personally impacted.

Personally, I think older and single people deserve far better treatment then to be made to leave their homes to make way for younger families. And despite what you say, rented or not, when someone has lived in a property for many years, it is a home.

Its an added irony that you'd like to see these older and single people put of their homes (and communities) to be replaced by these other families which according to this thread, many feel ruin areas, are typically workshy, undeserving troublemakers who are dragging their kids up, and who no one else wants to live beside anyway.

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

Personally, I think older and single people deserve far better treatment then to be made to leave their homes to make way for younger families.

Read that back to yourself out loud.

Mad_maxx

bubblypop wrote: »

So why is the country so concerned with the 'homeless ' issue then?
Seems to be the biggest problem in Ireland right now.

depends what you mean by " the country so concerned with " ?

the left wing media are obsessed with " homelessness " alright and the media of course always provide an open door to the homeless industry so its of course in the public domain a lot

Mad_maxx

mariaalice wrote: »

Has it occurred to all you are posting here that no one is forced to purchase a new build?

As for one of the other bit of nonsense here, there are politicians and journalists and the like who have purchased in new estates with social housing there are not preaching one thing and doing another.

it would be career suicide for either to raise a protest about same

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

Read that back to yourself out loud.

Just did.

Yep, I still personally think older and single people deserve far better treatment then to be made to leave their homes to make way for younger families.

I can't imagine any circumstances in which I would ever consider this fair, UNLESS there was an offer of a suitable smaller unit ready and available for them to downsize too.

Then, maybe.

(Isn't this the issue which resulted in the poll/bed tax being introduced in the UK?)

Nermal

mariaalice wrote: »

Has it occurred to all you are posting here that no one is forced to purchase a new build?

We are, however, forced to pay for the council to puchase them on behalf of the indolent.

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

Just did.

Yep, I still personally think older and single people deserve far better treatment then to be made to leave their homes to make way for younger families.

I can't imagine any circumstances in which I would ever consider this fair, UNLESS there was an offer of a suitable smaller unit ready and available for them to downsize too.

Then, maybe.

(Isn't this the issue which resulted in the poll/bed tax being introduced in the UK?)

their forever home which isn't actually "their" forever home?

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

their forever home which isn't actually "their" forever home?

It's not a "forever" home if it involves moving to somewhere smaller, is it?

And for the record, that doesn't mean moving into a temporary hotel room.

You're just trying to continue the argument for the sake of it now.

Anyone who rents somewhere long term, whether it be from a local authority or a private landlord, refers to it as "their home".

I'll leave you to argue with yourself.

dpham178

Going through a house purchase process ourselves (new build). And it's a pain. A real and lengthy pain. Income proof for AIP, payslips for loan offer, and more payslips for drawdown, probably more and more payslips if bank requests more. Headaches coming from temporarily lower salary because of Covid. Worked hard and saved hard enough on 2 good incomes to get to this stage, of being able to sign contracts for a 330k mid terraced house. And still haven't got the key yet.

So I don't think I can ever get my head around the fact that someone can get a similar or even better house for free (or rent it from council, well...) and that someone will live next to me or near me and might affect my quality of living in my hard earned house.

No I won't accept that. It's just wrong. Government has to change the way this works. Social integration is not a strong enough reason I think.

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

It's not a "forever" home if it involves moving to somewhere smaller, is it?

And for the record, that doesn't mean moving into a temporary hotel room.

You're just trying to continue the argument for the sake of it now.

Anyone who rents somewhere long term, whether it be from a local authority or a private landlord, refers to it as "their home".

I'll leave you to argue with yourself.

No, I'm just waiting for it to dawn on you that taking a residence suitable for a family of four or five out of circulation leaves a family in emergency accommodation and in precarious position making the challenge of that family self-sustaining even more difficult. Parents find it hard to parent while seeking gainful employment, the outcome for children is worse than it would be if given the stability of a family home.
Now, do tell us about this person you know who is not allowed to stay in the council house that was assigned to their parents. Is it just the one of them? How many bedrooms are there in this residence?

dpham178

dpham178 wrote: »

So I don't think I can ever get my head around the fact that someone can get a similar or even better house for free (or rent it from council, well...) and that someone will live next to me or near me and might affect my quality of living in my hard earned house.

No I won't accept that. It's just wrong. Government has to change the way this works. Social integration is not a strong enough reason I think.

Any neighbours can affect your quality of living.

If you think it's so good getting a house from the council, why don't you do it?
Why don't you stop working, stop saving, live off the dole and look for a council house?

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

UNLESS there was an offer of a suitable smaller unit ready and available for them to downsize too.

My brother lives next to a man, 55 or so, in a 3 bed council house. They've offered him alternative accommodation, and even offered him a cash incentive (€5k apparently), and he won't go.


His reason is the same as the theme on this thread; he knows what he has at the moment. He likes all his neighbours and he's in a quiet area. Why would he risk that, and possibly end up getting abuse from teens for the rest of his life. I can fully understand his position.

bubblypop wrote: »

Any neighbours can affect your quality of living.

Yep. But as has been said over and over, to you specifically, in this thread, it's rarely, almost never, private-owner neighbours that cause trouble.

dpham178

bubblypop wrote: »

Any neighbours can affect your quality of living.

If you think it's so good getting a house from the council, why don't you do it?
Why don't you stop working, stop saving, live off the dole and look for a council house?

Not any neighbors I'm afraid. People who buy the house with their hard earned hard saved money will surely appreciate the house better and the neighborhood in general. If you get a thing for free or cheap, do you appreciate it?

Answer to your second question, I never said I think it's good to get a house from the council - I said it's unfair for private owners. Why we still work? Because laziness is not our nature. We work and save for a house, it's a choice. But the painful process to get that house is not our choice unfortunately.

I'm not against social housing. I'm against mingling social houses with privately owned houses.

Mimon

bubblypop wrote: »

So why is the country so concerned with the 'homeless ' issue then?
Seems to be the biggest problem in Ireland right now.

It's more that the lack of affordable housing is affecting a huge amount of people.

The people who are in their late 20's and into their 30's living at home with their parents.

People who are paying crazy rents so have feck all left over to have any kind of life/can't save to buy a place.

The people who can afford to buy but maybe only say an hours drive from where they work so spend hugely on commuting in terms of time and money

People who say lose their job so can't pay over inflated rental prices so need to be accommodated in hotels etc. - they still gave a roof over their heads but not ideal for long term living.

There is only a small number of people who are genuinely homeless - rough sleepers who can't live in normal situations due to mental health/drink/drug issues.

As a person who cut my cloth to fit my situation - I saved and bought a good distance from where I work and commute it is annoying to see people who don't work or didn't have to scrimp and save get a house in a prime location. No equality there whatsoever. Government intent on jacking up the price to commute also.

dpham178

dpham178 wrote: »

Not any neighbors I'm afraid. People who buy the house with their hard earned hard saved money will surely appreciate the house better and the neighborhood in general. If you get a thing for free or cheap, do you appreciate it?

Answer to your second question, I never said I think it's good to get a house from the council - I said it's unfair for private owners. Why we still work? Because laziness is not our nature. We work and save for a house, it's a choice. But the painful process to get that house is not our choice unfortunately.

I'm not against social housing. I'm against mingling social houses with privately owned houses.

It's not at all unfair. They are in council accommodation because they cannot, for whatever reason, house themselves.
You seem to be happy that you can look after yourself, so good for you.

And I can tell you know, having spent the last 22 years in and out of thousands of homes, their are plenty of private houses you wouldn't put a pig into.
And thousand of social housing tenants who are so appreciative of the home they have, that they are like little castles.

It's prejudiced and snobby to believe the lazy stereotypical view of social housing = bad, private housing = good.

[Deleted User]

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Yep. But as has been said over and over, to you specifically, in this thread, it's rarely, almost never, private-owner neighbours that cause trouble.

That's not true I'm afraid, the majority of disputes between neighbours that I have attended, were mostly home owners,

Mrs OBumble

Deleted User wrote: »

Just did.

Yep, I still personally think older and single people deserve far better treatment then to be made to leave their homes to make way for younger families.

I can't imagine any circumstances in which I would ever consider this fair, UNLESS there was an offer of a suitable smaller unit ready and available for them to downsize too.

Then, maybe.

(Isn't this the issue which resulted in the poll/bed tax being introduced in the UK?)

So you think it's OK that a 55 year old (widowed, children have left home, and now earning a decent wage) should be left to rattle around in a 3brm home, (even though a suitable 1brm unit is available in the area), while a young family who are working for shyte wages are left living in a sh*thole and subsidised to pay private sector rents?

Of course it means that the rich old person has plenty of space to work from home :rolleyes:

But it's not what I pay taxes for.

Mimon

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

So you think it's OK that a 55 year old (widowed, children have left home, and now earning a decent wage) should be left to rattle around in a 3brm home, (even though a suitable 1brm unit is available in the area), while a young family who are working for shyte wages are left living in a sh*thole and subsidised to pay private sector rents?

Of course it means that the rich old person has plenty of space to work from home :rolleyes:

But it's not what I pay taxes for.

Bit Fascist to make people leave their homes. Would rather the carrot than the stick in this situation and the government incentivise people to downsize or retired people to move down the country and leave more space for working people where the jobs are.

L1011

This thread has long, long since diverged from the topic. The Humanities or Politics forums are more suited for general discussions on the provision of social housing.

Please return to the original topic

Mrs OBumble

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

So you think it's OK that a 55 year old (widowed, children have left home, and now earning a decent wage) should be left to rattle around in a 3brm home, (even though a suitable 1brm unit is available in the area), while a young family who are working for shyte wages are left living in a sh*thole and subsidised to pay private sector rents?.

That's not what was said at all. In fact I specifically stated that a big part of the problem is there is a lack of 1/2 bed units available for downsizing.

You know, if you're going to try and attack my posts, at least read them properly first, otherwise you just make yourself look foolish. K?

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Of course it means that the rich old person has plenty of space to work from home :rolleyes:

Why are you dragging something from a completely unrelated thread into this one? Thats very poor form.

And we all pay tax.

Cork Trucker

I live in a social house in a 95% privately owned estate, i've never bothered anyone, but what is blatant is the owners -V- Council tenants.

Home owners believe they can park their car where they want, put their bins where they want, wash their cars when and how they want, but if you're a council tenant and try to do any of that the county council get a call. Just because i cannot afford to buy the property i live in it gives my property owning neighbours the belief they can do as they please.

Roger Mellie Man on the Telly

^^^ How do the owner occupiers know you're a council tenant?

Cork Trucker

Roger Mellie Man on the Telly wrote: »

^^^ How do the owner occupiers know you're a council tenant?

Big metal shutters were on the windows/doors prior to my occupancy and a big van saying 'Cork County Council' was in the drive the day we took occupancy to remove said shutters.

Eric Cartman

Cork Trucker wrote: »

I live in a social house in a 95% privately owned estate, i've never bothered anyone, but what is blatant is the owners -V- Council tenants.

Home owners believe they can park their car where they want, put their bins where they want, wash their cars when and how they want, but if you're a council tenant and try to do any of that the county council get a call. Just because i cannot afford to buy the property i live in it gives my property owning neighbours the belief they can do as they please.

Please explain where theyre putting their bins or how/where theyre washing the cars that causes you an issue ?

Cork Trucker

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Please explain where theyre putting their bins or how/where theyre washing the cars that causes you an issue ?

Putting their bins in front of my car, I must move them to get my car out. Also putting bins outside my back gate blocking it. Washing the car does not cause me an issue, when I wash mine It does however as the home owners complain

Next question your majesty?

Eric Cartman

Cork Trucker wrote: »

Putting their bins in front of my car, I must move them to get my car out. Also putting bins outside my back gate blocking it. Washing the car does not cause me an issue, when I wash mine It does however as the home owners complain

Next question your majesty?

Theres no need for the passive aggressive response, I was just asking because your post made little sense.

Putting bins in inconvenient places is a problem as old as the hills, doubt theyre targeting you. What could they possibly give out about while you wash the car,

Cork Trucker

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Theres no need for the passive aggressive response, I was just asking because your post made little sense.

Putting bins in inconvenient places is a problem as old as the hills, doubt theyre targeting you. What could they possibly give out about while you wash the car,

I’ve faced similar questioning on here before, hence the response.

I’ve been lucky that I found out through a neighbour that a contact in sporting circles was the previous owner prior to selling to the council, he said the issue only arose once the property was sold and long term vacant, while he lived there it never happened.

As for washing the car, the water is is running down towards a drain outside their back gate about 8 feet from the path. The current next door neighbour said they just look for anything to complain about and are a thorn in the side of the council. He’s the secretary of the residents committee to make it worse

The same guy even got a petition going to try and block all future purchases by the council. This place can be hell on earth at times

Thrillhouse11

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Theres no need for the passive aggressive response, I was just asking because your post made little sense.

Putting bins in inconvenient places is a problem as old as the hills, doubt theyre targeting you. What could they possibly give out about while you wash the car,

What's hilarious is how you instantly and forthrightly came to the defense of these private homeowners, as if the notion that anyone other than the "layabouts" could cause hassle in a community was just inconceivable. And this is after 16 pages of sweeping, rabid demonising of social tenants based on vague anecdotal prejudices that went basically unchallenged for the most part.