Project Lame Duck

Acrylic-bob · 11-09-2005, 17:22

What is the difference between a grant and a loan?

Residents in the phase II area of the Project Phoenix redevelopment are wondering.

Councillor Tony Dobson, speaking for the council said that, "People in phase one are not getting a better deal than those in phase two."

At issue is the fact that residents in Phase I were given a grant of up to £30,000 to help them buy another home which they will not have to pay back - ever. It now turns out that residents in Phase II will be allowed an Equity Loan of up to £30,000 for the same purpose but, they will have to pay back this loan when they either sell their home or when they die, whichever happens first.

Contrary to councillor Dobson's assertion I would say that on balance the residents of Phase I were actually getting a damn sight better deal than those in Phase II.

What do you think?

Gayle · 11-09-2005, 17:27

I wondered about that. It didn't seem to add up to me either!

Neil · 11-09-2005, 18:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by Acrylic-bob

they will have to pay back this loan when they either sell their home or when they die, whichever happens first.

I can see HBC hiring hit men so they can recover the money

Sounds like phase 2 people are getting the yukky end of the stick.

SPUGGIE J · 11-09-2005, 19:13

Is it not time the council played fair? The people who are being messed around and HBC have forgotten they are voters. There should be no difference between I and II as they are not going willingly are they.

grego · 11-09-2005, 19:33

I'd say there's a massive difference between the two, and I'm sure anyone having to payback the £30,000 would agree.

SPUGGIE J · 11-09-2005, 19:37

The council must have thought it a great idea at first but when phase 2 came about the realised the cost and had monetory heart failure. They need to realise this is peoples lives they are messing with and not one of their hair brained town centre ideas. They have no idea what damage they are doing to these people as they are like the tin man no heart.

accymel · 11-09-2005, 19:39

The difference between the 2 is £30,000 but cannot understand why pay one as a grant & the other as a loan

it beggars beleif

Gayle · 11-09-2005, 20:49

It's not the Council that will have to pay any of the £30ks to anyone. As I understand it it's all coming from Elevate.

WillowTheWhisp · 11-09-2005, 20:51

Wait a minute A-b, let me think.

£30,000 you never have to pay back at any time ever versus £30,000 you have to pay back if you sell your house or die.

Erm, takes a lot of thinking about that does. I can see why the council got confused. I mean the figure of £30,000 features in both alternatives so that has obviously confused them.................but I know which one I'd prefer and I dare say any given member of Hyndborg BC if asked "Hey would you like £30,000 for free or £30,000 you have to pay back?" would pretty soon find they can understand the difference too.

No wonder the residents in Phase II are complaining.

Anyoldhow. Quite apart from anything else surely it's is the council's responsibility to rehouse these people? Will they find alternative housing for £30,000?

lettie · 12-09-2005, 07:01

Hmmmm, I'd say that there is a huge difference between a grant and a loan.

If Mr Dobson thinks that the people in phase 1 are not getting a better deal, then maybe it's time he was voted out for being so obviously dim.......

Mick · 12-09-2005, 07:07

And you only get the equity loan if you buy a house in the HYNDBURN area if you want to move out of this area then you will not get the £30,000 equity loan.
I went last week to a meeting with Less and was given a (HELP PACK)

WillowTheWhisp · 12-09-2005, 07:12

So don't they get any compensation for being turfed out on the street? I mean if the area wasn't being re-developed and they wanted to move out of Accy they'd have a house to sell.

The council can't just chuck people out of the homes they OWN and not pay them a penny. That's little short of robbery. What happened to "compulsory purchase" where the owner was given what was deemed to be the market value of the property? Mind you they never really did get the full market value but the council can't just take their homes and give them nothing! Can that be legal?

Mick · 12-09-2005, 07:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by WillowTheWhisp

The council can't just chuck people out of the homes they OWN and not pay them a penny. That's little short of robbery. What happened to "compulsory purchase" where the owner was given what was deemed to be the market value of the property? Mind you they never really did get the full market value but the council can't just take their homes and give them nothing! Can that be legal?

They will apply for Compusory Purchase Orders and you will get very little for your house.

WillowTheWhisp · 12-09-2005, 07:31

You can see how it works can't you? Let the area get as run down as possible, value the houses at next to nothing because they are in such a run down area and then tell the residents that chucking them out is for their own good.

Neil · 12-09-2005, 10:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by WillowTheWhisp

You can see how it works can't you? Let the area get as run down as possible, value the houses at next to nothing because they are in such a run down area and then tell the residents that chucking them out is for their own good.

Who do you blame for the area being run down and why?