Right to Buy Council houses

[garinda]

Originally Posted by andrewb

The Thatcher Government did build more council housing than the Blair and Brown Governments combined. Lets not allow that to get in the way of a good rant about Thatcher though, eh Mancie.

Not disputing that statement, but do we have any figures to illustrate who built what?

Or are we talikng under ten houses being built, in total?

[Mancie]

Originally Posted by andrewb

The Thatcher Government did build more council housing than the Blair and Brown Governments combined. Lets not allow that to get in the way of a good rant about Thatcher though, eh Mancie.

I doubt you can prove that... and it is not down to any government to build "council houses" councils build them... can you think of a good reason to ban councils from using money made from selling homes to build new homes?... here is an example of your new Lib-Demolition brothers views on the destruction you are causing.

Opinion: Council Housing ? our role in its downfall

Lets build!

[garinda]

With the projected UK populatin figures set to soar to over seventy million by 2033, someone better get busy building affordable housing.

Luckily most of that growth is forecast for the south-east.

So Mancie could always fill his gaff with bunkbeds, and make a killing.

[Ken Moss]

Originally Posted by garinda

With the projected UK populatin figures set to soar to over seventy million by 2033, someone better get busy building affordable housing.

Affordable housing, I love that term. So warm and friendly and speaks of sunlit uplands and a new age of prosperity for first time buyers struggling to make their way in an expensive world.

What do new 'affordable' houses in Hyndburn cost? On average £160,000 whilst the average wage remains at £18k for the borough. They then wonder why they don't sell but continue to harbour under the idea that people in terraced properties need something to aspire to.

It would be far cheaper to buy up dilapidated terraces and bring them back into use instead of chasing the dream of new builds that no one can afford.

If you don't want a terraced house don't move to Hyndburn.

[garinda]

Originally Posted by Ken Moss

Affordable housing, I love that term. So warm and friendly and speaks of sunlit uplands and a new age of prosperity for first time buyers struggling to make their way in an expensive world.

What do new 'affordable' houses in Hyndburn cost? On average £160,000 whilst the average wage remains at £18k for the borough. They then wonder why they don't sell but continue to harbour under the idea that people in terraced properties need something to aspire to.

It would be far cheaper to buy up dilapidated terraces and bring them back into use instead of chasing the dream of new builds that no one can afford.

If you don't want a terraced house don't move to Hyndburn.

We've agreed before, about how the area's terraced housing would be better refurbished, than demolished, and new Toy Town houses built in their place, however, I used the term affordable housing in relation to social housing, and their rents being relatively affordable.

[Mancie]

Originally Posted by Ken Moss

Affordable housing, I love that term. So warm and friendly and speaks of sunlit uplands and a new age of prosperity for first time buyers struggling to make their way in an expensive world.

What do new 'affordable' houses in Hyndburn cost? On average £160,000 whilst the average wage remains at £18k for the borough. They then wonder why they don't sell but continue to harbour under the idea that people in terraced properties need something to aspire to.

It would be far cheaper to buy up dilapidated terraces and bring them back into use instead of chasing the dream of new builds that no one can afford.

If you don't want a terraced house don't move to Hyndburn.

You say there is no such thing as affordable housing,and that maybe true these days.. but I was under the impression that council housing was created as an affordable option for those families that had low incomes.. not for free and paying rent.

"It would be far cheaper to buy up dilapidated terraces and bring them back into use instead of chasing the dream of new builds that no one can afford."
Are you a closet tory? those words are close to a quote made by Thatcher when the tories implemented the right to buy.. they said the same thing.. more or less ****** social housing and leave it to money grabbing landlords to buy up ex-council homes and make money out of those on low incomes . at the same time provide bad housing for most immigrants .. and it carries on.

[DaveinGermany]

Originally Posted by kestrelx

it was her and her government that allowed people to buy counil houses at a reduced price

So enabling many people to own their own home, these people being mainly working & middle class. At the same time legislation was put in place to prevent people making massive profits, see below:-


Housing Act 1980
Part 1 of the Housing Act 1980 covers Right to Buy legislation in the social housing sector. Landlords are local authorities and Housing Action Trusts. Sitting tenants can purchase the homes they have been renting with the sale price being based on its market valuation. A mortgage with mortgage interest tax relief is granted by their local authority. For those who have lived in their houses for at least 3 years, it also includes a discount of 33% to reflect the rents and also to encourage take-up.For a flat lived in for the same duration, it is a discount of 44%. A tenant of over 20 years gets a discount of 50%.

These discounts however come with the proviso that if they sell their property before a minimum period expires, they will have to pay back a proportion of the discount. Those that are not eligible to buy are tenants of charitable housing associations.

The Act also gives those who pay a £100 deposit the right to buy their home at a fixed price in a period of two years after paying the deposit. If the tenant wants to sell the home they bought under the Act within five years of purchasing it they have to share the capital gain between themselves and their local authority.

Unsurprisingly, the right to buy proved really popular but even though proceeds of the sales were paid to the local authoritie they had to spend the money on reducing then clearing their debt rather than being able to spend it on building more homes. This led to council housing stock being drastically reduced especially in areas where property prices were high, such as London and the south-east of England.

Now if as you claim it was so detrimental why then didn't labor repeal or change the rulings ? They came into power in 1997 & as such had plenty of chance to reform things ! There is no doubt plenty of information out there to back up your argument but the same logic applies to the points I have also stated. Below an example :-

Article | Full Fact - FullFact.org

[shillelagh]

Originally Posted by DaveinGermany

So enabling many people to own their own home, these people being mainly working & middle class. At the same time legislation was put in place to prevent people making massive profits, see below:-


Housing Act 1980
Part 1 of the Housing Act 1980 covers Right to Buy legislation in the social housing sector. Landlords are local authorities and Housing Action Trusts. Sitting tenants can purchase the homes they have been renting with the sale price being based on its market valuation. A mortgage with mortgage interest tax relief is granted by their local authority. For those who have lived in their houses for at least 3 years, it also includes a discount of 33% to reflect the rents and also to encourage take-up.For a flat lived in for the same duration, it is a discount of 44%. A tenant of over 20 years gets a discount of 50%.

These discounts however come with the proviso that if they sell their property before a minimum period expires, they will have to pay back a proportion of the discount. Those that are not eligible to buy are tenants of charitable housing associations.

The Act also gives those who pay a £100 deposit the right to buy their home at a fixed price in a period of two years after paying the deposit. If the tenant wants to sell the home they bought under the Act within five years of purchasing it they have to share the capital gain between themselves and their local authority.

Unsurprisingly, the right to buy proved really popular but even though proceeds of the sales were paid to the local authoritie they had to spend the money on reducing then clearing their debt rather than being able to spend it on building more homes. This led to council housing stock being drastically reduced especially in areas where property prices were high, such as London and the south-east of England.

Now if as you claim it was so detrimental why then didn't labor repeal or change the rulings ? They came into power in 1997 & as such had plenty of chance to reform things ! There is no doubt plenty of information out there to back up your argument but the same logic applies to the points I have also stated. Below an example :-

Article | Full Fact - FullFact.org

they did ...

The Right to Buy rules were changed in 2005. Five years' tenancy is now required for new tenants to qualify, and properties purchased after October 2004 can no longer immediately be placed on the open market should the owner decide to sell. Such owners must now approach their previous landlord (Registered Social Landlords RSLs) and offer them 'first right of refusal.' If the RSL is unable to offer a realistic purchase price, then that landlord still has the right to offer the property to an alternative RSL.

Since 1997 the Labour government has reduced the discount available to tenants in local authorities which have severe pressure on their housing stock; this includes almost the whole of London.


i cant really say owt .. i bought mine under the right to buy scheme .. got 60% discount .. due to buying it with my mother .. who had the full discount ...

[Mancie]

Originally Posted by DaveinGermany

So enabling many people to own their own home, these people being mainly working & middle class. At the same time legislation was put in place to prevent people making massive profits

Now if as you claim it was so detrimental why then didn't labor repeal or change the rulings ? They came into power in 1997 & as such had plenty of chance to reform things ! There is no doubt plenty of information out there to back up your argument but the same logic applies to the points I have also stated. Below an example :-

Article | Full Fact - FullFact.org

And because Labour did not repeal or change the regulations it must be right to sell council homes ? ..make your mind up.

[DaveinGermany]

Originally Posted by Mancie

And so those who oppose tory polocies that have destroyed all sense of community are to be labled as "Socialist/Laborite/Raging Reds"

No Mancie, not all ! There are plenty within the ranks of Tory backbenchers & Lib-Dems who don't agree with their parties policies or with the Coalitions dilution of party manifesto's. I would hardly label them SLRR's.

Whereas yourself & some others like you with similar tendencies have these strongly held belief verging on fanaticism, that the only way to go is red regardless of outcome

Furthermore us "middle of the road & sensible types", don't necessarily perceive that an out & out Tory Government any more than an out & out Labor Government is the way to go, As to the Lib-Dems, they're a non party doomed to sell themselves to whomever, whenever !

[Ken Moss]

Originally Posted by Mancie

You say there is no such thing as affordable housing,and that maybe true these days.. but I was under the impression that council housing was created as an affordable option for those families that had low incomes.. not for free and paying rent.

"It would be far cheaper to buy up dilapidated terraces and bring them back into use instead of chasing the dream of new builds that no one can afford."
Are you a closet tory? those words are close to a quote made by Thatcher when the tories implemented the right to buy.. they said the same thing.. more or less ****** social housing and leave it to money grabbing landlords to buy up ex-council homes and make money out of those on low incomes . at the same time provide bad housing for most immigrants .. and it carries on.

No matter who came up with the quote (I must admit to being ignorant of Mrs Thatcher's original) it's the common sense approach in Hyndburn. We simply don't have the money to launch a social house building scheme.

The council need to look at the resources it already has in the borough rather than trying to be something it's not and bankrupting itself. Landlords need regulating and empty properties should be brought under the wing of the council.

[Mancie]

Originally Posted by DaveinGermany

No Mancie, not all ! There are plenty within the ranks of Tory backbenchers & Lib-Dems who don't agree with their parties policies or with the Coalitions dilution of party manifesto's. I would hardly label them SLRR's.

Whereas yourself & some others like you with similar tendencies have these strongly held belief verging on fanaticism, that the only way to go is red regardless of outcome

Furthermore us "middle of the road & sensible types", don't necessarily perceive that an out & out Tory Government any more than an out & out Labor Government is the way to go, As to the Lib-Dems, they're a non party doomed to sell themselves to whomever, whenever !

Same old stuff..if anyone opposes the policey of this Tory government they are a raging left wing fanatics.. Dave.. I can see where you are coming from..you are a tory.. face up to it and be honest.. then we can argue and it's all above board.

[DaveinGermany]

[quote=Mancie;859794And because Labour did not repeal or change the regulations it must be right to sell council homes ? ..make your mind up.[/quote]

Well it must be ! Since the party who were dead set against this social disgrace at the outset then went on to gain power, what was their response ? Carried on selling but with more layers of bureaucracy ! So I don't see what you're on about here !

Your man there is blaming the Tories for RTB, & people making profit & depleting the social housing market, so you get up on your hind legs & decry the whole situation, so I ask again ! If it was that bad why didn't Labor stop this abuse of social housing ?

[Mancie]

Originally Posted by DaveinGermany

Well it must be ! Since the party who were dead set against this social disgrace at the outset then went on to gain power, what was their response ? Carried on selling but with more layers of bureaucracy ! So I don't see what you're on about here !

Your man there is blaming the Tories for RTB, & people making profit & depleting the social housing market, so you get up on your hind legs & decry the whole situation, so I ask again ! If it was that bad why didn't Labor stop this abuse of social housing ?

All this Labour/Tory stuff makes no difference to me..but I know a wrong un when I see em.. and the tories are wrong un's

[andrewb]

Originally Posted by garinda

Not disputing that statement, but do we have any figures to illustrate who built what?

Or are we talikng under ten houses being built, in total?

http://www.communities.gov.uk/docume...ls/1473575.xls

From 1980-89 392,090 local authority houses were built. From 2000-09 it was just 3,500.

Obviously you can see from those figures that as time goes on less and less local authority housing was built.

75% of the money the local authority gets from Right to Buy sales has to be used to pay down local authority debts. The other 25% can be used to carry out capital expenditure, so can be immediately put towards building more local authority housing if the council wishes. If the debt is already paid off then they can use 100% of it for capital projects.

If the rule wasn't in place then local authorities would still need to pay down the debts, so they'd just be forced to borrow more to sustain the debt if they wanted to build more houses with Right to Buy money. I'm not sure where we're at in terms of the spending of Right to Buy receipts now. I know there were proposals to pool receipts nationally which would adversely affect local authorities who haven't got huge capital debts, but I'm not sure if they're in effect or not.