[the truth]

his populist opinions make him a very very dangerous man

[Kazanne]

Originally Posted by joeysteele

They would indeed.

If Corbyn offers a room in his house to someone affected by this he will gain points from me.

[joeysteele]

Originally Posted by Kazanne

If Corbyn offers a room in his house to someone affected by this he will gain points from me.

Now I know that already Kazanne.

[LeatherTrumpet]

i must say when he cuddled that lady he did show his human side, i dont think you can fake that

[Withano]

Aw, they actual are going to be permanently rehoused in the luxury block. Some of you naysayers need a lot of thinking to do, Daddy Corbyn has provided once again.

[smudgie]

Originally Posted by Withano

Aw, they actual are going to be permanently rehoused in the luxury block. Some of you naysayers need a lot of thinking to do, Daddy Corbyn has provided once again.

I think the luxury block was already earmarked as social housing, only natural and fair that the people who survived that horrific inferno should be at the front of the queue to be rehoused.

[Vicky.]

I don't agree with seizing property as such, however I would not have a problem tbh if these people were paid what they paid for the properties. I find it ridiculous that in a time with such high homelessness levels and that we have people just buying up houses to leave derelict just for profit. Theres one across the road from me, guy specifically said he was buying to sell for more. He has let the place go awful too...overgrown jungle...still no curtains or anything up so just looks even worse on the inside and that. He even has an infestation of ****ing frogs somehow.

Our council is attempting to sort this actually by charging extra council tax on empty properties in the area. I am sure this idea would go down like a lead balloon with many on here

[Withano]

Originally Posted by smudgie

I think the luxury block was already earmarked as social housing, only natural and fair that the people who survived that horrific inferno should be at the front of the queue to be rehoused.

You'd think so, but there was outrage about the idea of this on several threads. Good to see empathy prevail.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

I don't agree with seizing property as such, however I would not have a problem tbh if these people were paid what they paid for the properties. I find it ridiculous that in a time with such high homelessness levels and that we have people just buying up houses to leave derelict just for profit. Theres one across the road from me, guy specifically said he was buying to sell for more. He has let the place go awful too...overgrown jungle...still no curtains or anything up so just looks even worse on the inside and that. He even has an infestation of ****ing frogs somehow.

Our council is attempting to sort this actually by charging extra council tax on empty properties in the area. I am sure this idea would go down like a lead balloon with many on here

I thought that council tax at 150% on empty properties was already in use?

I heard the new project they are being housed in was social housing... however the residents don't want the victims :/

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...-a7801896.html

[smudgie]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

I thought that council tax at 150% on empty properties was already in use?

I heard the new project they are being housed in was social housing... however the residents don't want the victims :/

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...-a7801896.html

Not sure if it varies at different councils, our local ruling that if the property is left empty for over two years then you pay 150% of normal council tax.

[Kizzy]

Ah right it is discretionary, and second homes can get a 50% discount too... wonder which postcodes could afford not to charge?

[smudgie]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

Ah right it is discretionary, and second homes can get a 50% discount too... wonder which postcodes could afford not to charge?

In our area 50% discount applies to people who have a second home because their job calls for it.

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

I thought that council tax at 150% on empty properties was already in use?

I heard the new project they are being housed in was social housing... however the residents don't want the victims :/

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...-a7801896.html

I am not sure. You know ages ago when IDS decided that those on low incomes had to pay towards council tax when previously they didn't? Our council sent round a letter informing everyone than instead of penalizing the poor like they were supposed to do, things would be staying as they were for people who couldn't find money from nowhere at the drop of a hat and the extra funding to pay for them refusing to implement that cut would be found by adding extra onto council tax bills of empty properties. So I think ours is even higher than other places for people who buy then purposely leave empty

[Kizzy]

Ah right so prior to that there was no excess to pay on empty properties?

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

Ah right so prior to that there was no excess to pay on empty properties?

Don't know, noone I know has an empty property as we all use houses to...live in...not as banks