Quote:
Originally Posted by Josy
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.
|
Spot On.
Selling any kind of 'Social Housing' like selling 'Council Houses' is totally wrong and cannot be justified.
It aggravates the UK's Housing Crisis creating more 'homeless' people, rewards certain people who lack the will, ambition and initiative to 'better' themselves, and punishes all hard-working people who do have those qualities by depriving them of any similar financial 'gifts' from the state. Yet, a greater percentage of the latter actually PAID the greater amount in taxes which the government is now giving to the former.
This is a resurrection of the same tactics Thatcher utilised with so much success in the 1980's and for the very same reasons:
1) It converts huge numbers of probable traditional 'Grass Roots' Labour voters to the Tory cause.
2) It increases the Housing shortage therefore strengthening the businesses of the largely Tory voting Private Landlords, by increasing 'Demand' over 'Supply' - thereby causing and justifying consequential rent increases.
3) Already prohibitively high 'House Prices' do not by themselves mean a property boom, because for this to be achieved adequate numbers of home-owners have to move up the 'Property Ladder' - something which is a slow process when those at the bottom cannot sell their homes because of a dearth of 'First Time Buyers'. This 'Social Housing' sell off will 'kick start' the 'Boom' because a lot of the suddenly
'Noveau Riche' buyers of those massively discounted 'Social Houses' have considerable 'instant equity' and no matter what 'caveats' the government put in place as prerequisites for buying, there are myriad ways for artful property finance companies to circumvent all impediments to realising that equity, and so a lot of these buyers will eventually sell and move on or become 2nd property owners.
What is forgotten, is that 'builders' of the very same 'Social Housing' now being 'sold off' received all manner of weird and wonderful tax incentives (more tax payers money) when they were building them in the first place.