Tuesday, 02 September 2014

Proposed Right to Buy Amendments...

Posted in: Need to Know | Ask the Experts

18/01/2012 9:59 am

Unsuitable or offensive? Report this discussion

Sort: Newest first | Oldest first

Author

Message

F451

F451

Location: Europe
Posts: 188

18/01/2012 10:18 am

An automatic offer to repurchase should be the first covenant attached to Right-to-Buy. This would allow the local authority a mechanism to keep the 141 pledge by the government, so long as the government does not continue to make off with the proceeds of the sales, with buy-backs.

A anti-subletting covenant would be useful in ensuring that taxpayer funds were really used to give tenants a hand up and not give a prospective buy-to-let landlord a hand out.

The tenure conversion idea, where a struggling home owner can convert to a tenancy, was one of a few positives to be thought of by Labour - but it needs greater backing and funding to make it have a real effect. However, as a mechanism to increase the availability of affordable housing there is the potential for up to 4 Million homes to be purchased and rented back under such a scheme, as this is the estimate by lenders of the numbers in mortgage difficulty currently. Now whilst the owner will be the immediate tenant, what is avoided is the owner needing to be placed by the local authority into private sector accomodation as homeless etc, or for the local authority to do what it has had to do since the Tories ensured RTB as a regressive action, and use a social let to rehouse the failed owner.

The additional bonus of course would be that by increasing the social housing stock by such a factor would restore the original flexibility and cost saving volume that once existed. This would allow truly affordable rents (saving masses from the benefit bill) and also the prospect of moving within the stock as one's housing needs change over time (reducing under and over occupancy issues).

Of course, nothing like this would ever be agreed to as it would undermine the sole objective behind each of Shapps's policies, namely the total erradication of social housing and the social exclusion of those associated with it.

Unsuitable or offensive? Report this reply

Salt & Vinegar

Salt & Vinegar

Posts: 2

18/01/2012 12:58 pm

I agree with the diea for Section 141 therefore extinguishing current assured tenancies through people exercising their RTB, but then the LA getting back their stock (eventually) for social re-use.

Anti-subletting - this could not be for the life of the tenancy - it would be extended admittedly.  But otherwise could hamper the rejuvination of the housing market as eventually with RTB lettings/sales clauses expiring movement within the housing sector will increase (much like when it was first introduced) - I'm not arguing whether this is good or bad.  Just the probable thoughts of the government.

I'm assuming when the consultation ends (02/02/12) we will see the results thereafter.  I don't see the new legislation being pushed through for the start of the new financial year as they expect though.

Unsuitable or offensive? Report this reply

Anonymous

Anonymous

18/01/2012 1:47 pm

What about a RTB amnesty so all those who purchased but would now like to change their mind can revert to being tenants of the Council, including all those thousands who now are private tenants paying extortionate rents to rip-off landlords. How can an ex-council home be let out at over £1,000 per week be justified in this day and age when the neighbouring home is still be rented out by the council for £135 per week (Westminster City Council property)

If the government is so convinced that private renting is popular put it to a referrendum for private tenants, and to add spice make it a transfer ballot: Private Landlord / Council / Housing Association / Co-op. I bet that they are too scared to offer the choice.

Unsuitable or offensive? Report this reply

Anonymous

Anonymous

18/01/2012 2:49 pm

The reason Shapps does not care about the details is he knows full well that the majority of those persuaded to buy will simply be repossessed down the line and provide another cheap house for dear private rent. Why he doesnt just give his friends a blank cheque book instead.

Unsuitable or offensive? Report this reply

Anonymous

Anonymous

25/01/2012 11:18 am

Scrap the right to buy and preserve houses for those who need them.

Unsuitable or offensive? Report this reply

Rate this topic (4 average user rating)

  • 1 star out of 5
  • 2 stars out of 5
  • 3 stars out of 5
  • 4 stars out of 5
  • 5 stars out of 5

You must be signed in to rate.

Post a Reply

You must sign in to rate this topic or make a post

sign in register

Why not register?

Registration allows you to sign up for newsletters, comment on articles, add posts in the forums, quiz our panel of experts, and save articles and jobs in the My IH section.

Register now

Newsletter Sign-up

More Newsletters

Most active members

Most recent posts

  • posted Anonymously, 28/08/2014 1:50 pm in Options for rehousing a person with mobility needs

    HI, Firstly the fact that two of you are working should really make no difference to the scenario although they may have a better chance in securing a private rented propetry is they wanted to do so.

  • From TrackDay, 27/08/2014 4:47 pm in What makes some estates worthy of regeneration while a lot are being demolished?

    Hi, first question last.  Park Hill Flats was one of the first of its type to be developed in England in the early 1960s.  The back to back terraced pre 1919 houses it replaced were highly unpopular.  The vision of Streets in the Sky had not been sullied by bad mangement, poor (in some cases) construction and thermal insulation, and anti-social behaviour.  As a result the flats were very popular when they first opened, and even up until the late 1980s many of the original tenants were still living there.  Later developments of similar flats in Sheffield failed to ...

  • From Housing Troll Returns, 27/08/2014 4:26 pm in Resident Scrutiny Committee Ascham Homes

    Crikey, is this what 'Ask the Experts' has devolved into?

  • posted Anonymously, 17/08/2014 7:15 pm in Removing a joint tennant

    seek legal advice on having the tenancy transferred into your name via a property transfer order.

  • posted Anonymously, 11/08/2014 4:14 pm in Tenancy Succession - Urgent Advice

    To start a new thread click on Ask the Experts then after new page has loaded click on Start new discussion.

  • From Tulyar, 10/08/2014 11:59 am in Transport cost reductions - benefits for landlord and tenant

    Thanks

  • posted Anonymously, 04/08/2014 2:49 pm in Housing Association Secure tenancy into Shared Ownership - Rent Help and Advice.

    Thank you all for your responses - and appologies for my delay in replying. 

  • From izzit right, 04/08/2014 1:51 pm in Future of Supporting People

    Supporting People as a programme ceased last year (or was it the year before?) and the funding from central Govenment to Local authorities was pooled with other grants with no specific identity - I.E the LA got a sum of money that included the previous SP grant but were not told how much of the grant represented SP.

  • From Goldenchile, 04/08/2014 1:44 pm in Shared Owners & Involvement

    I have found this too as a SO customer. It seems you exist in this strange limbo state whereby you're not encouraged to communicate with the developers but if you call the HA and speak to the frontline staff they won't help once they know you are an SO customer.

  • From Rexroth, 04/08/2014 11:27 am in Tenants Charter ?

    Sorry should be Housing Corporation not HCA.

IH Subscription