View Single Post
Old 15-04-2015, 01:19 PM #38
rubymoo's Avatar
rubymoo rubymoo is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Deep in the woods, with pixies and fairies
Posts: 3,100

Favourites (more):
BB15: Chris
The Voice: Jermain Jackman
rubymoo rubymoo is offline
Senior Member
rubymoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Deep in the woods, with pixies and fairies
Posts: 3,100

Favourites (more):
BB15: Chris
The Voice: Jermain Jackman
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Josy View Post
It actually isn't impossible, it's very easy for a tenant to say that someone is living with them.

A family member claims to be living there, provides the money for the house and the tenant then stays in it until they die or moves elsewhere, the house belongs to the buyer or at the very least is jointly owned and is more than likely to be put up for let for an expensive price or sold on for the market price.

There is nothing wrong with people in housing association properties buying the house they live in but they shouldn't get a heavily discounted price at the tax payers expense and if it's not at the tax payers expense then were is the cash coming from? also if a housing association is forced to sell at a huge discount they will then not have the funds to replace that house in the same area.

In a housing crisis the likes of what is happening now this plan just doesn't make one iota of sense.

To add to all that Cameron is attempting to sell off properties that he doesn't have a right to, he doesn't own them and shouldn't be able to force the sales, he really is attempting to buy votes with this idea.
That's what my stepmum and dad were on about doing

I now think there's a hidden agenda, sell off the social housing stock, and let all the homeless, vulnerable, people as well as those on low incomes and living in poverty eek out their own existence, it wouldn't surprise me if trailer parks started to pop up everywhere like in America.
rubymoo is offline   Reply With QuoteReply With Quote