House Proud

15/01/2010 1:05 pm

I do feel this is a golden opportunity for those in housing and regeneration to become the next generation of planners building on the vast experience that we have as a profession. You do not need to Masters Degree to understand planning harry Lime is a good case in point. This strategy will cut time delays and improves understanding rather than vague terminology you find in LDFs All political parties must support the RSS to ensure housing is available to all forms of tenure. Hence all the joined up thinking is done and housing is safeguarded for the future.
Nb I do not have a Masters Planning degree!!!!!!!
Alex

18/01/2010 10:20 am

Just to let everone know that the RICS are holding an event at which Grant shapps will be attedningon jan 19th so plenty of planning and housing questions. hope this is of use to everyone in london its free alex

18/01/2010 2:24 pm

Suggest you call the RICS the event is at there HQ just a short distance for some lazy people to walk from the Commons!!!! Planning and housing questions please!!! Housing must make an inpact

22/01/2010 8:28 am

We cannot accept any cast iron guarantees from politicians or elections pledges they are simply delusional, housing must developed by gaining control and mastering planning, we must ensure people from our profession become he next generation of planners. For example look at the lame performance from the RTPI at the Election hustings held by RICS. The event also highlights the poor performance by all three leading politicians, must say Grant Shapps failed to inspire given the first question We should note that this country is broke!! We owe 850 billion pounds plus interest payments due to the behaviour of the banks. Has housing got the political influence to avoid sever cuts?? Think not!!!! We must introduce structural changes to influence change this is sound political rational. It should be noted than any grocers’ daughter would not put all her eggs on the one bag!!!!

22/01/2010 3:59 pm

The Lib Dems should not wait for the electorate asking them what their policies are in housing.

They should offer them in the clearest form without any need to be asked.
It's in their interest. They will not get many social tenants vote if we do not know where they stand.
And they might get some votes if their policies are the right ones.

24/01/2010 6:13 pm

As well as long term housing strategy, equal dedication must be given to the state of affairs of those already in social housing and long term quality of tenure. There seems to be a percentage housed in either rent or owned / part whose ‘lot’ has little chance of improving.

There is absolutely no mobility in social housing for renters. - CBL or otherwise - transfer applications take years. No mobility for Shared Ownership either - many, once their housing needs change (divorce, more children) are stuck with no way out.

The latest announcement re: RSL bond issue demonstrates these points in a way - yes they’ve got to raise money for future developments and housing needs but again all about future development and getting bigger and bigger for more incoming tenants with current tenants / owners prospects left behind.

Improve build quality. Do something about the noise nuisance caused by plasterboard conversions, new builds laminate floorboards and no carpet clauses. Many RSL (and private) residents can hear neighbours talking, walking, telly, neighbours sex lives. The reality of these tenancies equates to large house share noise, not self contained living. Stop the cheapest build option which creates long term poor quality housing - problems for later.

Stop rent increases of 30% percent via ‘block management ’charges.

Affordable property purchase options - they should be exactly that - not this 60k salary nonsense - the fact that Conservatives are mooting the part buy scenario, not outright sale clearly shows prices still out of range for those to whom it should serve.

Review the ownership options - what about reintroducing something along the lines of previous Tenant Incentive Scheme with a increased incentive - not popular with many but if an incentive allows a household to move out and frees up a home, this amount of money ( even if 70k ) is cheaper than building and more importantly can be organised and turnaround in weeks. It may also help some movement in the bottom end of private sale market too. There should be very strict criteria for this, especially in regard of facilitator ensuring home purchaser applicant not ‘ sub prime ’ ( as best they can ) so revolving door not created re: housing need because home owner back on housing list within months through home repossession.

What about the no children working couple earning £30k between them - where do they fit in to social housing - no chance ‘ down the council ’, no chance to actually ever own the current ‘ affordable housing ’ assuming they could get one in the first place. Housing must be affordable.

All sales money to be dedicated to replenishing housing stock, not for other council departments.

25/01/2010 11:21 am

WATT WATT Sun, 24 Jan 2010 18:13 GMT
I agree with what you say - although you missed to mentioning single people (a growing poulation of residents as couples split, partners die, people choose or end up living on their own, etc.).

The problem is how to make sure politician will make all you say possible. The danger is that those you vote in might do even less than those you vote out.

29/01/2010 10:37 am

The name "Houseproud" is registered as the trading name for The Home Improvement Trust. This name is legally protected and if used for a differing reason, it will not only be illegal, but also confusing for those in Government authority who already seemingly have problems in relating housing to the national social problems in education, health, etc.
I am a non executive Director of HIT (Home Improvement Trust ) and recently retired Finance Director of Boston Mayflower Ltd. - hence my interest to see a possible link between Social Housing and the Private Sector in your aspirations.
HIT are helping older home owners to stay in their homes by releasing equity locked in their homes to afford basic improvements where Grants are "drying up". Such equity release comes with a no re-possession guarantee if in default - and is only provided for home improvements (using HIA's wherever possible to "manage" works) and not for "Lifestyle" changes.
I hope HIT is included within the thinking and planning of yourselves and the CIOH.
John Nutton

29/01/2010 10:42 am

There's the spirit. What about 'House Proud' rather than Houseproud? In what proximity am I allowed to say the words house and proud before you threaten to sue me too?

29/01/2010 11:11 am

"Houseproud" as a registered trading name, for all I know, can only be impounded as such if someone else tries to use it also as a trading name. In any other case "houseproud" or "house proud" or any othe combination is just English language. So any issue here would only arise if Inside Housing had registered HOUSE PROUD for a trading purpose, which for all I know is not the case. From my point of view, House Proud is a great name for a campaign,