5000 applicants turn down social housing

Pkiernan · 14-04-2019 8:44am #1

https://www.thejournal.ie/housing-application-refusals-4587311-Apr2019/

But everyone knows it's evil landlords causing homelessness

NIMAN · 14-04-2019 8:49am

Stats like this are rarely reported, as it doesn't fit the narrative that we have 10,000 people homeless. Once heard the main housing man from Donegal County Council saying that the refusal rate was 47%. That was maybe 2 years ago now.

There is a certain number of people playing the system, and it would be nice to see it publicised a bit more.

voluntary · 14-04-2019 8:49am

"Focus Ireland advocacy manager Roughan Mac Namara suggests that problems with a specific neighbourhood, such as drugs or antisocial behaviour, often leads to a reluctance among families to move there and is the most common reason for refusal."

So no surprises here really.

If we could only invest properly in reducing the crime in 'bad' places, many homes and areas would move from the dark side to the bright side.
Instead of blaming people for not wanting to leave in drug battled areas, just address the root cause here - target the crime.

overkill602 · 14-04-2019 10:01am

speculative comments from vested interests are not accurate the article states council offers are as close to what is an applicants requirements
A little more detail would go a long way...

Gumbo · 14-04-2019 10:02am

Thankfully the refusal is capped now. If you refuse 2 I believe, you are dropped to the bottom of the list.

14-04-2019 10:06am

Graces7 wrote: »

OP; we do have the right to refuse a house on certain grounds. So you need to research far far more.

True. But this is from the article quoted. ““It must be remembered that the offers of tenancy being made to qualified households are the types that the household had asked for in the areas of their preferred choice,” the spokeswoman added.
“In this context, it is not unreasonable to impose a more significant sanction after a first refusal, particularly given the current housing landscape.””

handlemaster · 14-04-2019 10:42am

Graces7 wrote: »

OP; we do have the right to refuse a house on certain grounds. So you need to research far far more.

What grounds have you refused on ?

14-04-2019 11:01am

voluntary wrote: »

Also, OP, your post is highly manipulative and offers a false information.
"5000 so called homeless turn down free housing".

You made this up in the purpose of trolling. The article clearly states there were about 5000 on social lists, not 5000 'so called homeless'.

While I can see your point, I also understand OPs one. If one is genuinely homeless, the offer of a property of the type requested in the area requested should be accepted with gratitude.
A close friend found herself alone, homeless with two children about 30 years ago. After a few months in her old bedroom in her parents house, she was offered a 3 bed house nearby. She accepted immediately.
When she got the keys the house was as the previous tenants had left it. This didn’t faze her. She got on with cleaning and painting it from top to bottom. None of this waiting for someone else to do it for her. In doing it herself, she not only gave her children a lovely home, she showed them the value of helping themselves.

NIMAN · 14-04-2019 11:19am

Deleted User wrote: »

True. But this is from the article quoted. ““It must be remembered that the offers of tenancy being made to qualified households are the types that the household had asked for in the areas of their preferred choice,” the spokeswoman added.
“In this context, it is not unreasonable to impose a more significant sanction after a first refusal, particularly given the current housing landscape.””

The piece in bold is VERY important in all this. I'd understand if they are being offered a smaller house than they need in an area they didn't specify.

But if the property fits the description and area the people said they'd like, then serious questions have to be asked as to whether those people are really desperate for a house or not.

bri007 · 14-04-2019 11:37am

I’m sorry I might sound cruel but you shouldn’t get all the choices on where your living, it’s a needs basis and if you are “homeless” any house/apartment/flat I would jump at the chance to take.... this transport/crime areas etc.....

Tell that to my cousin who paid €365k to live in a kip of an area, can’t sleep as joyriders and scramblers all day everyday. Unfortunately he has no choice.... he still has to pay his mortgage, bills etc yet his mental health has deteriorated rapidly due to the stress of it all. He gets on with it though.

I think it’s only fair, turn down housing and you go to the bottom, turn it down again and your off it......

tretorn · 14-04-2019 11:41am

voluntary wrote: »

"Focus Ireland advocacy manager Roughan Mac Namara suggests that problems with a specific neighbourhood, such as drugs or antisocial behaviour, often leads to a reluctance among families to move there and is the most common reason for refusal."

So no surprises here really.

If we could only invest properly in reducing the crime in 'bad' places, many homes and areas would move from the dark side to the bright side.
Instead of blaming people for not wanting to leave in drug battled areas, just address the root cause here - target the crime.

Oh, yes, the housing body with the vested interest in never having the housing problem sorted.

A working person on a low income but not low enough to qualify for Social housing doesnt have the luxury of picking and choosing where he lives. There are plenty of fabulous families living in drug battled areas because they dont have a choice and they are too proud to squash their family into a Nissan and pretend they are homeless.

Beggars cant be choosers and all that. If you cant afford to buy your own house then you take whatever council house is offered. I wouldnt allow any refusal at all or maybe a situation where would be tenant is guaranteed if he or she turns down a house the next house offered will be inferior and another refusal will mean this person goes to the very bottom of the list.

There are too many of these vested interests and Approved Housing Bodies involved, an immediate culling of them is required as monies being transferred to them by Government is mostly a total waste of money.

punisher5112 · 14-04-2019 11:43am

Ridiculous people who don't work and never will get to choose and have a forever home in a city or town where people such as me that works can't afford to live anywhere near the city.

I've had to buy 2 counties away or stay renting at a extortionate rate where at least all of one of our incomes was going on this alone.

How can this be.

Working people should be able to get housing where they need it not those who don't....

Richard Hillman · 14-04-2019 12:10pm

Essentially, crime is the biggest factor for the housing crisis.

The state don't want to build corporation estates anymore because they turn into sink estates. They are in fear of their lives of Ballymun 2.0.

Developers don't want to build because they end up having to provide a percentage of social housing.

It only takes 1-2 families to sink an estate of 100 or so houses. The problem is, despite the fact that they don't even own the homes, anti social families are never removed.

My area has a bit of a reputation. If we got rid of 5-10 families out of about 2000 houses, it would transform the area. The value of people's homes will rise, their children are safer and less likely to fall down a bad path, the council don't have to spend money on litter, grafitti, providing "facilities", the Garda are able to investigate real crime and not spend hours moving teenagers on. Just build actual sink estates, halting sites even, away from everyone and let them fend for themselves.

punisher5112 · 14-04-2019 12:13pm

Communities need to come together to stamp out those sorts and rally behind it.

The Gardai would be then forced to do something.

padd b1975 · 14-04-2019 1:23pm

kceire wrote: »

Thankfully the refusal is capped now. If you refuse 2 I believe, you are dropped to the bottom of the list.

Hopefully that's being enforced with 100% consistency and not being paralyzed by local representatives.

Underground · 14-04-2019 1:58pm

voluntary wrote: »

Also, OP, your post is highly manipulative and offers a false information.
"5000 so called homeless turn down free housing".

You made this up in the purpose of trolling. The article clearly states there were about 5000 on social lists, not 5000 'so called homeless'.

From the article linked in the OP:

Figures obtained by TheJournal.ie from 28 of Ireland’s 31 city and county councils reveal that 5,459 applicants turned down an offer of social housing since 2016.

If I am on a "social list" as you say and am in application for social housing, I have declared myself homeless, no?

Maurice Yeltsin · 14-04-2019 5:27pm

NIMAN wrote: »

Stats like this are rarely reported, as it doesn't fit the narrative that we have 10,000 people homeless. Once heard the main housing man from Donegal County Council saying that the refusal rate was 47%. That was maybe 2 years ago now.

There is a certain number of people playing the system, and it would be nice to see it publicised a bit more.

Quiet blueshirt. Each and every person homeless is something something Fine Gael.

There needs to be a serious look at whether money being used for social housing in places like Donegal that have an abundance of cheap housing could be better spent elsewhere. What I mean is, a forklift driver in certain counties on 11.50 per hour is in a far better position to raise a family and buy a home for himself than a worker on the exact same income in Dublin.

Tacklebox · 14-04-2019 5:40pm

Maurice Yeltsin wrote: »

Quiet blueshirt. Each and every person homeless is something something Fine Gael.

There needs to be a serious look at whether money being used for social housing in places like Donegal that have an abundance of cheap housing could be better spent elsewhere. What I mean is, a forklift driver in certain counties on 11.50 per hour is in a far better position to raise a family and buy a home for himself than a worker on the exact same income in Dublin.

Thats absolutely true, you could have a way better lifestyle in the West of Ireland on a lot less money.

I know families from Dublin who decided to get out of Dodge and relocate to Clare.

They may be rough around the edges, but are a different mindset to what they left behind.

Good honest hard working creative people with a bit of an innercity accent but had the brains and will to do better.

Which is better ? A house in suburbia 2000 a month mortgage, new car and nice clothes and just the light in the fridge in the middle of the week, or an older car 3 bed insulated b rated home, 500 euro a month rent or 750 mortgage, plenty of food and the beach down the road and a town near by....
Nice garden and green pastures from the window..
I know what I would choose that's for sure.

Eric Cartman · 14-04-2019 5:40pm

"Focus Ireland advocacy manager Roughan Mac Namara suggests that problems with a specific neighbourhood, such as drugs or antisocial behaviour, often leads to a reluctance among families to move there and is the most common reason for refusal."

which are all massive problems in social housing,

'people in need of social housing don't want to be surrounded by other people in social housing'

Maurice Yeltsin · 14-04-2019 5:58pm

Tacklebox wrote: »

Thats absolutely true, you could have a way better lifestyle in the West of Ireland on a lot less money.

I know families from Dublin who decided to get out of Dodge and relocate to Clare.

They may be rough around the edges, but are a different mindset to what they left behind.

Good honest hard working creative people with a bit of an innercity accent but had the brains and will to do better.

Which is better ? A house in suburbia 2000 a month mortgage, new car and nice clothes and just the light in the fridge in the middle of the week, or an older car 3 bed insulated b rated home, 500 euro a month rent or 750 mortgage, plenty of food and the beach down the road and a town near by....
Nice garden and green pastures from the window..
I know what I would choose that's for sure.

Each to their own but I find that terribly sad. A country upbringing is so much worse for children than a city one.

Granted, if you're born and raised there you know no better, but city kids having to move to a small village or even a pure rural area, it's very sad.

Eric Cartman · 14-04-2019 6:32pm

Maurice Yeltsin wrote: »

Each to their own but I find that terribly sad. A country upbringing is so much worse for children than a city one.

Granted, if you're born and raised there you know no better, but city kids having to move to a small village or even a pure rural area, it's very sad.

Complete nonsense , theres nothing sad/unfortunate/worse about a country upbringing, if anything its a safer , healthier environment for kids. Inner city dublin is the last place id ever want to raise a child. Especially in the cases where the liability of the kids falling in with a bad crowd the country is a lot better. Id much rather little billy is bored or has to walk 2km to the village than hanging around with young lads selling heroin.

splinter65 · 14-04-2019 6:38pm

Maurice Yeltsin wrote: »

Each to their own but I find that terribly sad. A country upbringing is so much worse for children than a city one.

Granted, if you're born and raised there you know no better, but city kids having to move to a small village or even a pure rural area, it's very sad.

What a load of uneducated backward nonsense this post is.
Billions of children all over the world reared in the country and would buy and sell most city kids.

NIMAN · 14-04-2019 6:41pm

I think we have another troll here.

He's doing well. I do feel so sorry for my kids, they have no chance at life having been unfortunate enough to be raised in the countryside.

Graham · 14-04-2019 6:53pm

Mod Note

Maurice Yeltsin, quit the trolling.

voluntary · 14-04-2019 7:04pm

Richard Hillman wrote: »

Essentially, crime is the biggest factor for the housing crisis.

The state don't want to build corporation estates anymore because they turn into sink estates. They are in fear of their lives of Ballymun 2.0.

Developers don't want to build because they end up having to provide a percentage of social housing.

It only takes 1-2 families to sink an estate of 100 or so houses. The problem is, despite the fact that they don't even own the homes, anti social families are never removed.

My area has a bit of a reputation. If we got rid of 5-10 families out of about 2000 houses, it would transform the area. The value of people's homes will rise, their children are safer and less likely to fall down a bad path, the council don't have to spend money on litter, grafitti, providing "facilities", the Garda are able to investigate real crime and not spend hours moving teenagers on. Just build actual sink estates, halting sites even, away from everyone and let them fend for themselves.

The assumption made is that the community of 190 families would support the 10 families into moving up the ladder in the society. This doesn't really work in reality for various reasons. One of the reason is that the 190 families prefer not to get involved or are simply afraid to get involved.

Concentrated social housing isn't a solution either. Creating ghettos is asking for trouble.

voluntary · 14-04-2019 7:07pm

punisher5112 wrote: »

Communities need to come together to stamp out those sorts and rally behind it.

The Gardai would be then forced to do something.

Gardai is to intervene in case of crime or disturbance. They're to intervene not to fix root causes. The problems are very deep and not easily sorted. It takes a lot of knowledge, resources, experience and planning to work with disadvantaged families so they improve and don't walk the criminal path.
It's rarely as easy as 'lock them up in prisons and pretend the problem does not exist'.

voluntary · 14-04-2019 7:10pm

Underground wrote: »

From the article linked in the OP:

If I am on a "social list" as you say and am in application for social housing, I have declared myself homeless, no?

No, you may be simply on an income below the limit. Limits for social housing are very high TBH. In Dublin if your family is on below 42k or so you can apply for social housing and get on the list. There's a lot of people in the private rental sector who go on the social housing list.

NasserShammaz · 14-04-2019 7:12pm

Focus Ireland advocacy manager Roughan Mac Namara suggests that problems with a specific neighbourhood, such as drugs or antisocial behaviour, often leads to a reluctance among families to move there and is the most common reason for refusal"

Brilliant' so some wasters don't want to live next door to people just like them because they are worried about antisocial behaviour even though they are just as bad . The only reason you should get to turn down housing is if you are genuinely working poor and actively trying to improve the life of you and your kids , living next to the local vermin is not a apropriate and would be unfair. However if you are lifelong sponging assh#le or have being moved from previous social housing because of your behaviour tough **** . We need two housing lists 1 working poor / 2 non working class no hoppers.

Why are the likes of Mcverry et al never taking up on this sense of entitlement and lifetimes spent taking but never contributing and the same goes for Collins/ paved point twat.the amount of resources wasted on those who contribute nothing economically, socially, culturally is appalling . Scum towns is what we need these scun dont need galleries museum etc . . .give them a fu$king McDonald's and a piss cheap off licence and let them at it

voluntary · 14-04-2019 7:15pm

Eric Cartman wrote: »

"Focus Ireland advocacy manager Roughan Mac Namara suggests that problems with a specific neighbourhood, such as drugs or antisocial behaviour, often leads to a reluctance among families to move there and is the most common reason for refusal."

which are all massive problems in social housing,

'people in need of social housing don't want to be surrounded by other people in social housing'

You see, some of the people from the list get offered brand new A rated houses in new developments which even low earners cannot afford. Some others get offered old stock in disadvantaged estates. Only desperate and unwise applicants would accept an old house in bad location while you can wait a bit longer and get a shiny new A rated house in good neighborhood.

Only some people on social housing lists are desperate for housing. With limits of 42k euro income a lot of non-desperate families are on the social housing lists.

bri007 · 14-04-2019 7:20pm

When I worked with mccerry trust, within the services when the homeless clients were staying in their supported housing. They didn’t have to clean up after themselves, their beds were made, often left food on couches and chairs and staff were told to clean it. It didn’t set the people up for future independent living. I remember going into one particular room one morning and this guy was getting out of bed and eating a mc Donald’s, I said we need to change the bed for him so he left and then dropped all his rubbish in the ground after him for me to pick up.....

My point I’m making, to house these certain individuals would cause a lot of difficulties going forward within a community. I might add this isn’t a one off situation, I found this across most of the service when I worked there. There was often the outlier but that was rare, most just got away with murder and when they got their own accommodation from the council they Carried on and this time their behavior affected the whole community they then lived in.

NasserShammaz wrote: »

Focus Ireland advocacy manager Roughan Mac Namara suggests that problems with a specific neighbourhood, such as drugs or antisocial behaviour, often leads to a reluctance among families to move there and is the most common reason for refusal"

Brilliant' so some wasters don't want to live next door to people just like them because they are worried about antisocial behaviour even though they are just as bad . The only reason you should get to turn down housing is if you are genuinely working poor and actively trying to improve the life of you and your kids , living next to the local vermin is not a apropriate and would be unfair. However if you are lifelong sponging assh#le or have being moved from previous social housing because of your behaviour tough **** . We need two housing lists 1 working poor / 2 non working class no hoppers.

Why are the likes of Mcverry et al never taking up on this sense of entitlement and lifetimes spent taking but never contributing and the same goes for Collins/ paved point twat.the amount of resources wasted on those who contribute nothing economically, socially, culturally is appalling . Scum towns is what we need these scun dont need galleries museum etc . . .give them a fu$king McDonald's and a piss cheap off licence and let them at it

voluntary · 14-04-2019 7:26pm

bri007 wrote: »

When I worked with mccerry trust, within the services when the homeless clients were staying in their supported housing. They didn’t have to clean up after themselves, their beds were made, often left food on couches and chairs and staff were told to clean it. It didn’t set the people up for future independent living. I remember going into one particular room one morning and this guy was getting out of bed and eating a mc Donald’s, I said we need to change the bed for him so he left and then dropped all his rubbish in the ground after him for me to pick up.....

My point I’m making, to house these certain individuals would cause a lot of difficulties going forward within a community. I might add this isn’t a one off situation, I found this across most of the service when I worked there. There was often the outlier but that was rare, most just got away with murder and when they got their own accommodation from the council they Carried on and this time their behavior affected the whole community they then lived in.

You see, the genuinely homeless have often underlying issues, mental problems, deep depressions, drug/alkohol related brain dysfunctions. You're right. It's not enough to give them food and shelter. They need a complex support, assuming they even want a change. Many of homeless would qualify for treatment in psychiatric hospital or at least attend proper, long term therapies.

5000 applicants turn down social housing

Comments