Has anyone rented a council house for over 3 years?

Just take me on directly mate with regard to what I posted.

Then we can have a discussion .

The mate you're agreeing with has been in the past wholly and egregiously abusive and insulting to individual posters such that it beggars belief that he still is allowed to post, unless we forgive him for he knows not what he did.

Can we have a laugh about that? Did you take him to task? I suspect not.

By the way my dad was indeed a socialist.

 

He didn't have to pay tend all his life did he? He 'could' buy a house.

Rather than saying it's only fair that after paying rent to the council for a few years means you should be allowed to force them to sell you the house look at it another way.
If you owned a house and allowed a mate to rent it from you below your mortgage rate with you subsidising the shortfall because you knew he was struggling would you agree with the idea that after 3 years he could force you to sell the house to him below market value because it's not fair him having to rent? No of course you wouldn't but it's exactly what you're saying here.

Your dad benefited from below market value rental fees for 30 years, saving money on if he's rented privately. He then purchased the house for well below market which is fair enough, can't fault him for it, but let's be reyt here he was never a rent prisoner or forced to rent for 30 years from the council. He chose to just like my parents did by the way and they too bought the house via right to buy so I'm not criticising anyone for doing it. I'm criticising the policy which allowed and encouraged it.

 

I'd be happy for your council to build one for you. But just like me you've had the time and opportunity to sort your life out by now. If you haven't managed it met, there's still time.

 

Likewise, the ‘rich’ buying holiday homes in desirable places, which they might inhabit for a few weeks a year? Pricing young generations out of the market & prompting an exodus from their home places, where they might rather well stay.?
& will be the first people to complain about brown belt developments.?

 

Imagine a world where a 1 bedroom home is gifted to you on your 18th birthday.
When you have your first child you get upgraded to a 2 bed on surrendering one of the 1 bedrooms you and your partner have been gifted.
Have another child and you get a 3 bed. Children 3 and 4 may have to share with 1 and 2 or you may get upgraded to a four bed.
When the kids leave home you move back to a one bed.

This is how social housing should work. It means that people get what they need, not what they want.

 

That's a fair critique.

I would not advocate a policy of "rent it for 5 years then buy it at half price"

But no matter whether you rent or own it doesn't increase the overall housing stock.

On a personal note my dad would never have gone "private" and bought a house, unless his council - the one he worked for - was openly all of a sudden advocating it. They wanted the money.

 

It’s such a fine line. Personally, my ethics says no. But I find it hard to begrudge a working family getting ahead. Thatcher’s policy wasn’t about that, though. It was all about balancing bad books. Which Labour hadn’t left behind in the worst state as Tories claimed..

 

If it applies to public sector housing let's apply it to private rentals as well. To be a landlord is to be a parasite.

 

The right to buy is fine IF there are not just more houses built to replace them but also infrastructure to cope with the growing community, A doctor's medical centre has to cope with the extra demand as well as BDGH, extra schools etc. this is a major thing that is not happening

 

There should be permanent huge fees on second+ houses used for renting along with a short-term government grant to help tenants buy the houses from their parasites. Disincentivise landlord ownership and make it easy for them to sell and the housing market will fix itself overnight.