ForumGarden

What fun!

Log on each week and get excited to see that there are 15 or sometimes even 20 houses available for me to bid on.

Then I realise they are all in North Cornwall.

Seems no houses are being built around here and the forced downsizing the Government tried to set up to tackle the social housing issue is failing as there are not enough of the smaller properties for people to downsize to.

Protests are happening tonight in a lot of areas Pirate FM - News - Bedroom Tax Protest

There was a programme on television recently about how to get a council house. It was based in Tower Hamlets, I think, and another city. There really is a severe social housing shortage it seems.

Our politicians are completely divorced from reality. Worst of of it is they will probably get re-elected for no better reason that people wont bother voting because no party is offering a reasonable alternative. Bet any party with a platform of re-nationalising all the utilities and keeping the profits here and keeping the NHS out of private hands would do well.

gmc;1434346 wrote: Our politicians are completely divorced from reality. Worst of of it is they will probably get re-elected for no better reason that people wont bother voting because no party is offering a reasonable alternative. Bet any party with a platform of re-nationalising all the utilities and keeping the profits here and keeping the NHS out of private hands would do well.


The expectations of some people are just too high. The Bedroom Tax was only Introduced last April. What does anyone expect? Suddenly an entire wealth of two bedroomed houses to suddenly go up over night.?

Try building your own house. Just one. See how long It takes to get through the red tape of attempting to build on Greenbelt, acquiring the land, land registry etc etc. It'll take you anything up to two years just to acquire the land.

It's ridiculous to believe this was going to be a short term fix. It Is a long term policy because the social housing system needed to be changed.

I was at a council meeting recently at South Gloucestershire and the subject got round to this. The council and housing authorities state that Is Is extremely difficult to evict anyone and put them on the streets nigh Impossible. The Idea that they can just throw anyone out of their house Is scaremongering. They can't. Even If the tenant has amassed rent arrears they can still go to court and plead their case. No Judge will throw people and children out on the street because they can't pay the tax when there Is no alternative accomodation for them to go to.

The policy Is long term and people need to understand that. You can't expect two bed properties to suddenly spring up all over the country In one year.

gmc failed to mention the lack of council house stock is largely down to his favourite politician Mrs Thatcher, who sold the bloody lot off.

Bruv;1434364 wrote: gmc failed to mention the lack of council house stock is largely down to his favourite politician Mrs Thatcher, who sold the bloody lot off.


There are new houses being built but you have to work outside the box. It's no good waiting until they are built and then bidding. You need to contact your local elected councilors and find out from them what land proposals are In the offering.

Betty Boop;1434332 wrote: What fun!

Log on each week and get excited to see that there are 15 or sometimes even 20 houses available for me to bid on.

Then I realise they are all in North Cornwall.

Seems no houses are being built around here and the forced downsizing the Government tried to set up to tackle the social housing issue is failing as there are not enough of the smaller properties for people to downsize to.

Protests are happening tonight in a lot of areas Pirate FM - News - Bedroom Tax Protest


Miz Boop; Maybe if you'd been around 1895 you might have bought one of these!

Bruv;1434364 wrote: gmc failed to mention the lack of council house stock is largely down to his favourite politician Mrs Thatcher, who sold the bloody lot off.


Indeed, if all the housing stock hadn't been sold off by that government things wouldn't be quite as bad here.

I had no expectation of 'new' builds in this area at all when the government bought this policy in. What I did think would happen was that people would shift around within the system but that is not happening here. The elderly that are on their own living within three or two bed houses are actually well enough off to not be affected by the extra money they now have to pay.

Its the disabled that are being stung and are desperately trying to move to smaller properties, or fighting their corner to keep a spare room for the equipment they require. Single parents who have had a child leave their home are trying to downsize and unable to do so, so they get penalised for a situation they have no control over at all.

No, families rarely get thrown out on the streets, the councils won't take responsibility for them and tell them to stay put even if the landlord is taking them to court for not paying/topping up their rent. Then eventually months down the line when the courts go through their process and finally get the tenant out the landlord will never again consider anyone on housing benefit, making the private rentals market nigh on impossible to get into. Every two or three bed property that comes up around here always has restrictions of no children, no dss recipients, working couples only or retired couples only, it's a joke!

It is all knee jerk policies with no afterthought about what would actually happen, its a ploy to get votes from the middle classes and elderly who have been drip fed this idea that every person on benefits is a scrounger.

But it's all consistent stuff hey, under a conservative government the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. Hey ho, survival of the fittest at its finest.

jones jones;1434366 wrote: Miz Boop; Maybe if you'd been around 1895 you might have bought one of these!










Yes, maybe if I had been born with a silver spoon in me mouth, Port Issac is a place well out of reach of the average joe around here.

theia;1434344 wrote: There was a programme on television recently about how to get a council house. It was based in Tower Hamlets, I think, and another city. There really is a severe social housing shortage it seems.


Yes, I've seen some of the series, still need to catch up with the rest. The situation seems to be dire in a lot of places at the moment.

oscar;1434365 wrote: There are new houses being built but you have to work outside the box. It's no good waiting until they are built and then bidding. You need to contact your local elected councilors and find out from them what land proposals are In the offering.


Oh dear.....we all have to be canvassing our councilor to see what might or might not be happening in our local areas.

Meanwhile the sold houses, built by government and local money, are slowly being sold into private hands for long term rental profit by private companies or individuals.

That was the idea when they were built, the councils managed them long term for the benefit of the community.



I am sure the esteemed JJ lives in a world of his own making.

Bruv;1434374 wrote: Oh dear.....we all have to be canvassing our councilor to see what might or might not be happening in our local areas.

Meanwhile the sold houses, built by government and local money, are slowly being sold into private hands for long term rental profit by private companies or individuals.

That was the idea when they were built, the councils managed them long term for the benefit of the community.



I am sure the esteemed JJ lives in a world of his own making.


As with many things In this country, It's a postcode lottery and governed by where you live. Councils are also run Independently and manage their finances to suit. It could simply be the case that your council Is strapped for cash and doesn't have surplus for new builds.

Then there Is the problem of acquiring land for new builds.

I know It sounds harsh but no-one can expect to live In a rural area predominately green belt and then expect new estates to just spring up.

There will always be area's of the country where It Is easier for councils to acquire land and even government funding because they are more built up area's where It's easier to expand. That Is simply not the case In some rural area's. There could be a whole wealth of planning restrictions for that area.

In my neck of the woods, I'm still fighting for the council to pay for a footpath to lead Into one of the schools. Even that, I've had to badger various departments for the funding.

My advice to Betty would be to get on the rung first and worry about location second. Apply for houses outside the area that are less In demand and then she can swop Instead of bidding for houses that the whole county Is after.

I don't just bid on properties that take my fancy, I bid on anything within a 30 mile radius, never been higher than number 20 on the list and that was a one off!

I have an autistic son, we currently live with family fairly near to us. If we didn't benefit as a family for having the support of my family I would consider moving much further away, especially if I could guarantee my son getting the support he needs. I can't quite see why I should HAVE to leave my support network though when our council gets big pay outs for taking in problem families from around the UK that no one else wants.

theia;1434344 wrote: There was a programme on television recently about how to get a council house. It was based in Tower Hamlets, I think, and another city. There really is a severe social housing shortage it seems.


I just remembered something about that show that shocked me. One of the families had turned down nine properties that had been offered to them. Here you get the chance to refuse three, if you do you end up at the back of the list again. Also if you make it to the top of the list and don't bid for a couple of weeks you are told to bid no matter what or they will allocate any of the properties to you and if you refuse you go to the back of the list again.

Trouble is, we used to have Penwith council so we were pretty much just bidding in this area, then they joined with Kerrier making it an area twice the size. Now we have Devon and Cornwall combined so you could be living here and then find the housing association have assigned you a property in Devon allowing you no leeway should you be disabled, mentally ill etc to turn it down. That's why I was shocked to hear of a family turning down so many places!

oscar;1434375 wrote:

Then there Is the problem of acquiring land for new builds.

I know It sounds harsh but no-one can expect to live In a rural area predominately green belt and then expect new estates to just spring up.

There will always be area's of the country where It Is easier for councils to acquire land and even government funding because they are more built up area's where It's easier to expand. That Is simply not the case In some rural area's. There could be a whole wealth of planning restrictions for that area.




I forget how long ago it happened, but there was a massive plan to expand Wye College, it was a secretive ploy to build housing and big processing plants on green field site in an area of outstanding beauty.

I read a book that explained how it was a done deal between Our Elected Councilors and the property company, only a concerted plan thwarted the underhand way it was proposed.

Currently there is another Council sponsored plan to build a large "Village" in a local hamlet that would devastate that area.

I live in an ex Railway town with large areas of ex railway works.................begging to be built on.

There is a cabal of Tory councilors in a blue dominated council, many with interests in promoting new builds.

Chilmington Green 1

Chilmington Green 2

Our new street lights

I am loosely associated by my wifes interests in the local Independent group, what I have heard gives me no faith in the elected representatives that call the shots.

So it is not only a local lottery about available land, it's also about the quality of your local councilors.

Betty Boop;1434376 wrote: I don't just bid on properties that take my fancy, I bid on anything within a 30 mile radius, never been higher than number 20 on the list and that was a one off!

I have an autistic son, we currently live with family fairly near to us. If we didn't benefit as a family for having the support of my family I would consider moving much further away, especially if I could guarantee my son getting the support he needs. I can't quite see why I should HAVE to leave my support network though when our council gets big pay outs for taking in problem families from around the UK that no one else wants.


Unfortunately, housing authorities work on a points system and It's not always the case that the most genuine cases go to the top of the list but the one's who accumulate the most points. This Is why some people can manipulate the system.

No, you shouldn't have to leave your support network I agree.

Housing authorities give points for such as Impending homelessness, those with restraining orders against partners, cramped or unhealthy conditions etc etc.

Unfortunately, you have a roof over your head and a support network around you and that doesn't make you priority,

Bruv;1434378 wrote: I forget how long ago it happened, but there was a massive plan to expand Wye College, it was a secretive ploy to build housing and big processing plants on green field site in an area of outstanding beauty.

I read a book that explained how it was a done deal between Our Elected Councilors and the property company, only a concerted plan thwarted the underhand way it was proposed.

Currently there is another Council sponsored plan to build a large "Village" in a local hamlet that would devastate that area.

I live in an ex Railway town with large areas of ex railway works.................begging to be built on.

There is a cabal of Tory councilors in a blue dominated council, many with interests in promoting new builds.

Chilmington Green 1

Chilmington Green 2

Our new street lights

I am loosely associated by my wifes interests in the local Independent group, what I have heard gives me no faith in the elected representatives that call the shots.

So it is not only a local lottery about available land, it's also about the quality of your local councilors. That's some build.

I am assuming that the local housing authorities will be asking for 10 to 20 % of these to be handed over for social housing ?

It hopefully will not happen, there is no need for it, why import people to an over crowded town with minimum facilities.......and plenty of brown field sites available.

Wye College................same sort of carry on I reckon.

Bruv;1434399 wrote: It hopefully will not happen, there is no need for it, why import people to an over crowded town with minimum facilities.......and plenty of brown field sites available.

Wye College................same sort of carry on I reckon. It's far more complicated than that. Unknown to you, there may be planning In the pipeline for business Investment and the homes will be needed for people moving to the area, that's what's happening near me.

It depends who owns Wye College and weather they can sell land associated with It. If It's the council or even the Church, they can sell It to developers.

Looks like you have some serious development going on In your area.... I'd advise a trip to the local Library and ask to see any proposals.

In April, Ashford Borough Council gave the go-ahead for the university to look at splitting up the site, which has been earmarked as a development area known as WYE3.

Read more: Wye residents asked for views on future of former college campus | This is Kent

Follow us: @thisiskent on Twitter

Looks like Councils are being urged to build more for the elderly.

Councils urged to build thousands of new BUNGALOWS to meet demand from ageing population | Mail Online

oscar;1434401 wrote: It's far more complicated than that. Unknown to you, there may be planning In the pipeline for business Investment and the homes will be needed for people moving to the area, that's what's happening near me.


It is or was a policy set up by 2 jags Prescott many years ago

I have sat in Independent Party meetings, and heard of the underhand dealings.

Of the closeness of councilors and builders etc etc.

The book I was given at these meetings opened my eyes further.................local politics is nasty.................in my town at least.

Bruv;1434439 wrote: It is or was a policy set up by 2 jags Prescott many years ago

I have sat in Independent Party meetings, and heard of the underhand dealings.

Of the closeness of councilors and builders etc etc.

The book I was given at these meetings opened my eyes further.................local politics is nasty.................in my town at least.


Of course there are dealings but then that's up to the electorate next time you have council elections.

I had a situation last year where we were all stalemate. I wanted traffic restrictions put In, the local school didn't. The school wanted the car park extended cutting Into green space, the Tory was flat against It. The Labour councilor voted against extra pupil Intake which meant kids being bussed out of the area, the school didn't want this.... on and on It went... until I myself and the Tory conceded we'd give up the green space for the extra parking. The Labour councillor agreed he'd concede his veto for extra Intake providing the council gave me my traffic restrictions and on It went..... That was just day to day stuff so you can Imagine when It's high property Investment.

I notice your article blames Immigration for the extra homes needed. I wasn't going down that route but It Is fact that Immigrants take much of the social housing. Not so much because of under-hand dealings but simply If they arrive homeless, they get points quicker than someone like Betty with a roof over their head. We all know It's not fair In some cases but It's the points system and anyone homeless goes to the top of the queue.

oscar;1434358 wrote: The expectations of some people are just too high. The Bedroom Tax was only Introduced last April. What does anyone expect? Suddenly an entire wealth of two bedroomed houses to suddenly go up over night.?

Try building your own house. Just one. See how long It takes to get through the red tape of attempting to build on Greenbelt, acquiring the land, land registry etc etc. It'll take you anything up to two years just to acquire the land.

It's ridiculous to believe this was going to be a short term fix. It Is a long term policy because the social housing system needed to be changed.

I was at a council meeting recently at South Gloucestershire and the subject got round to this. The council and housing authorities state that Is Is extremely difficult to evict anyone and put them on the streets nigh Impossible. The Idea that they can just throw anyone out of their house Is scaremongering. They can't. Even If the tenant has amassed rent arrears they can still go to court and plead their case. No Judge will throw people and children out on the street because they can't pay the tax when there Is no alternative accomodation for them to go to.

The policy Is long term and people need to understand that. You can't expect two bed properties to suddenly spring up all over the country In one year.


The expectation of the people is that the infrastructure should be in place before they are penalised for it not being there!

The government cannot legislate against the people for not coping with the government's failures.

The courts might well not throw them out onto the streets but they still end up in debt because of it.

Bryn Mawr;1434820 wrote: The expectation of the people is that the infrastructure should be in place before they are penalised for it not being there!

The government cannot legislate against the people for not coping with the government's failures.

The courts might well not throw them out onto the streets but they still end up in debt because of it.


It Is a very difficult balancing act Bryn. Housing authorities have their budgets the same as any other department.

Build too many houses and houses sit empty gathering no rent. Build too few, people sit on waiting lists. Build the wrong type of houses and families end up In cramped conditions.

If you have had say a small town with predominantly families and low ratio elderly, then the need will have been for 3 and 4 bed houses. Yet, 30 years on, residents are then alone In a large house because the kids have moved out and there's no 1 and 2 bed properties for them to downsize to.

The Ideal answer would be to build a proportion of all properties and preempt the population Increase but that Is actually very very difficult to do. Ten years down the line, business's may have moved out of the town taking workers with them and then you have empty houses.

Demographics, demand and decline In population Is an ever changing shift.

I viewed a private four bed house today, the hoops you have to jump through!! Fingers and everything else crossed please. :-6

Betty Boop;1434833 wrote: I viewed a private four bed house today, the hoops you have to jump through!! Fingers and everything else crossed please. :-6


Well I wish you the very best of luck after your long wait.

oscar;1434832 wrote: It Is a very difficult balancing act Bryn. Housing authorities have their budgets the same as any other department.

Build too many houses and houses sit empty gathering no rent. Build too few, people sit on waiting lists. Build the wrong type of houses and families end up In cramped conditions.

If you have had say a small town with predominantly families and low ratio elderly, then the need will have been for 3 and 4 bed houses. Yet, 30 years on, residents are then alone In a large house because the kids have moved out and there's no 1 and 2 bed properties for them to downsize to.

The Ideal answer would be to build a proportion of all properties and preempt the population Increase but that Is actually very very difficult to do. Ten years down the line, business's may have moved out of the town taking workers with them and then you have empty houses.

Demographics, demand and decline In population Is an ever changing shift.


In most areas today, due to the policies of the 80s, there is a vast shortage of social housing.

To penalise the low paid for being in the wrong size of house when the right size of house is just not available is crass.

It is not a balancing act when the sea saw is so far over to one side - your excuses do not work in real life.

Betty Boop;1434833 wrote: I viewed a private four bed house today, the hoops you have to jump through!! Fingers and everything else crossed please. :-6


May it be your turn this time Betty :-6

I hope so, thank you for the good wishes. Reality is that around ten others have viewed and one other is definitely interested. So I guess it falls to who the estate agent prefers and that person gets to pay £350 in fees for the privilege of being picked!

Bryn Mawr;1434836 wrote: In most areas today, due to the policies of the 80s, there is a vast shortage of social housing.

To penalise the low paid for being in the wrong size of house when the right size of house is just not available is crass.

It is not a balancing act when the sea saw is so far over to one side - your excuses do not work in real life. It wasn't excuses, just an alternative viewpoint.

I happen to agree that everyone should have affordable housing. The counter effect Is that we are seeing more and more Rachman style private landlords letting sub standard properties out to those In desperate need because getting on the property ladder Is surmountable these days especially for young couples starting out and one parent families.

oscar;1434849 wrote: It wasn't excuses, just an alternative viewpoint.

I happen to agree that everyone should have affordable housing. The counter effect Is that we are seeing more and more Rachman style private landlords letting sub standard properties out to those In desperate need because getting on the property ladder Is surmountable these days especially for young couples starting out and one parent families.


So why are the government forcing families out of the council housing that they're in through this bedroom tax if this is the alternative?

Bryn Mawr;1434852 wrote: So why are the government forcing families out of the council housing that they're in through this bedroom tax if this is the alternative?


The Bedroom tax In essence was needed but typical of Tory rushed through policy, It wasn't thought through and there are casualties. The carers of the disabled for one. When I said people's expectations are too high, I meant that the tax was a long term policy of change and not a quick fix given It was only Introduced last April.

In essence It was needed. I know from Housing how difficult It was getting anyone to downsize. Sorry but some people are damn selfish. There are thousands of people In 3 and 4 bed houses where the kids are grown up and gone leaving two, even one parent rattling around a family sized house while desperate families were crammed Into Bed and Breakfast. That Is wrong.

In hindsight, the new properties needed to be built and In place before the tax was Introduced but I suspect Cameron knew he wouldn't be In power long enough to see that through and the Left would abolish the tax If they win the next election.

I agree with the tax per say to free up family homes but I don't believe we will see any real change for at least another five years.

Anyone over working age Is exempt and this doesn't help. While I'm not advocating throwing elderly folk out, It Is ridiculous when you have a 75 year old single woman In a family house alone unable to keep the property up and children In Bed and Breakfast.

You are talking of a family home, a place they brought their children up in.

They have spent 20 plus years there, the remaining years of their lives should be the least of it.

Given the chance of downsizing, many will take it, but don't penalise for wanting to stay in their homes.

Whatever way it's put there are not enough housing stock available, and we all know why.

Bruv;1434868 wrote: You are talking of a family home, a place they brought their children up in.

They have spent 20 plus years there, the remaining years of their lives should be the least of it.

Given the chance of downsizing, many will take it, but don't penalise for wanting to stay in their homes.

Whatever way it's put there are not enough housing stock available, and we all know why. Anyone over the working age Is not affected so they are not under any pressure to downsize but they should be.

I know they have raised families In those houses but we musn't lose sight of the fact that realistically, they are tenants. They have enjoyed low rents and free maintenance for decades and If they were renting privately, the landlord could serve them notice at any time. Why should social housing tenants be any different.

Anyone In social housing Is a tenant and housing authorities have the same rights as private landlords.

I know that sounds harsh but It's the attitude of ' It's my family home' that see's so many families In unsuitable accomodation waiting on the housing list.

If there happens to be no smaller properties available, then fair enough, stay put until there Is.

When I was on housing, there were three elderly people In one street we were trying to get to downsize and they are still there now. All three are In large 3 bed family homes with large gardens, huge kitchens and lounge diners etc etc. All three were failing to maintain the property because their kids had moved out of the area and rarely visited. Meanwhile, a mile away, a half way house Is packed to the rafters with families and children, waiting and waiting.

Seriously, do you think that's a fair system.

I agree with you, Oscar.

It's a shame that some older tenants don't have a taster of living somewhere smaller. I'm a private tenant, paying my own rent but it was a really good move to go from a house to a flat...less to look after but still as homely.

Whatever way it's put there are not enough housing stock available, and we all know why.


There should be enough housing stock available, why do they have things like Census?

Why shouldn't people that rent for life have security of tenure ?

Once the housing stock is built and added to or adapted, according to the population fluctuation.

Is renting that much cheaper over a lifetime ?

I would guess not.

Bruv;1434930 wrote: There should be enough housing stock available, why do they have things like Census?

Why shouldn't people that rent for life have security of tenure ?

Once the housing stock is built and added to or adapted, according to the population fluctuation.

Is renting that much cheaper over a lifetime ?

I would guess not. The Right To Buy scheme under Thatcher certainly contributed to the shortage but so has bad management by councils and housing authorities.

Depending where you want to live, there are area's where stock Is available. In South Gloucester for eg, semi rural, there Is stock available and the wait for a house can be very short. Yet, travel 20 miles Into Bristol who have a different council to South Glou, the wait for a house can be 8 years.

People want to live In the main, where the work Is and don't want to be housed In semi rural area's.

Take Tower Hamlets for eg. A densely populated built up area with very little land for expansion and new builds unlike semi-rural where land can be acquired for new builds.

In densely populated area's, there Is a chronic shortage of housing but what can be done If It's a built up area and the only land that can be acquired Is out of town where most people don't want to live.?

In many area's, the stock Is there but the wrong tenant In the wrong accomodation causes the problem. If family houses are taken up by just one elderly person, It means families are cramped Into the two bed properties. As the new tax does not affect anyone over working age, they can not be evicted nor be forced to downsize and swap. That's when It comes down to selfishness.

We are meant to have compassion for an elderly person alone In a family house because they raised their family there, but where Is their compassion for the next generation who can't get a home? The hard truth Is, It's not their family home If their kids have moved out. It was a family home and It was a family home when they were a family not 30 years after the kids moved out. It was rented to them Initially as a family because It suited their needs at the time, not decades later.

The social housing system like any system has been abused. The 2nd generation Inheritance was a travesty. Providing the tenant's son or daughter didn't move out, they Inherited the tenancy. Yet that son or daughter could be on £80,000 a year.

Betty Boop;1434843 wrote: I hope so, thank you for the good wishes. Reality is that around ten others have viewed and one other is definitely interested. So I guess it falls to who the estate agent prefers and that person gets to pay £350 in fees for the privilege of being picked!


The house is mine... NOT.

To have the house I have to jump through twenty burning hoops, find someone who earns £22,000 per year who holds a full time work contract to guarantor me and then pay £350 admin fees.

Basically stuffed, no one I know earns that amount, this is Cornwall, wages like that are rare around here as are full time contracts.

So back to the never ending social housing list. Won't bother looking at estate agent lets again as I will never be able to reach their impossible criteria.

Betty Boop;1435354 wrote: The house is mine... NOT.

To have the house I have to jump through twenty burning hoops, find someone who earns £22,000 per year who holds a full time work contract to guarantor me and then pay £350 admin fees.

Basically stuffed, no one I know earns that amount, this is Cornwall, wages like that are rare around here as are full time contracts.

So back to the never ending social housing list. Won't bother looking at estate agent lets again as I will never be able to reach their impossible criteria.


Ouch, that's fierce! Are all of the estate agents down there that bad - I've never been asked for anything like that when renting.

The standard I've met is one month down and payment a month in advance plus references from a previous landlord (which has usually been the most difficult part to comply with).

Bryn Mawr;1435355 wrote: Ouch, that's fierce! Are all of the estate agents down there that bad - I've never been asked for anything like that when renting.

The standard I've met is one month down and payment a month in advance plus references from a previous landlord (which has usually been the most difficult part to comply with).


Deposit and one month is covered, I can get a reference no problem. It's this guarantor lark because I am on benefits. Doesn't matter that I have been in this property since 2005, doesn't matter that my brother would guarantor me along with my mum, that takes us to the amount they want. Not good enough, it has to be ONE person with a full time contract. Impossible criteria to meet when living in Cornwall. All because this agency has a head office somewhere that is not Cornwall.

Betty Boop;1435354 wrote: The house is mine... NOT.

To have the house I have to jump through twenty burning hoops, find someone who earns £22,000 per year who holds a full time work contract to guarantor me and then pay £350 admin fees.

Basically stuffed, no one I know earns that amount, this is Cornwall, wages like that are rare around here as are full time contracts.

So back to the never ending social housing list. Won't bother looking at estate agent lets again as I will never be able to reach their impossible criteria. I'm sorry you didn't get the house Betty but can I ask, are you working?

If not, I'm afraid that criteria Is standard these days If someone Is not working.

There are two sides to every coin and believe It or not, there are people who make a proffesion out of renting properties and then never paying any rent until they are eventually evicted costing the landlord thousands.

oscar;1435369 wrote: I'm sorry you didn't get the house Betty but can I ask, are you working?

If not, I'm afraid that criteria Is standard these days If someone Is not working.

There are two sides to every coin and believe It or not, there are people who make a proffesion out of renting properties and then never paying any rent until they are eventually evicted costing the landlord thousands.


If we all lived somewhere else then my brother no doubt would be earning more to cover the criteria.

If I worked I would still need a guarantor, I ALSO would not be earning enough money, even if I worked full time to reach the £22,000 they want. This is a Cornwall problem, the rents are incredibly high but our wages are incredibly low.

Betty Boop;1435372 wrote: If we all lived somewhere else then my brother no doubt would be earning more to cover the criteria.

If I worked I would still need a guarantor, I ALSO would not be earning enough money, even if I worked full time to reach the £22,000 they want. This is a Cornwall problem, the rents are incredibly high but our wages are incredibly low.


I can understand private landlords being cautious. I watched a doc recently about some who were brought to the point of bankrupcy by unscrupulous tenants but In your case, the criteria seems unreasonable... I hope they get dry rot.

Betty Boop;1435372 wrote: If we all lived somewhere else then my brother no doubt would be earning more to cover the criteria.

If I worked I would still need a guarantor, I ALSO would not be earning enough money, even if I worked full time to reach the £22,000 they want. This is a Cornwall problem, the rents are incredibly high but our wages are incredibly low.


Well well well, an estate agent who went out of his way to get us through this and we managed to reach the criteria! Seems we're moving closer to town and closer to all my family. There will be no need to use the car every day and both children will be in walking distance of college and school.

Will still keep bidding for social housing, won't hold my breath though!

Betty Boop;1436049 wrote: Well well well, an estate agent who went out of his way to get us through this and we managed to reach the criteria! Seems we're moving closer to town and closer to all my family. There will be no need to use the car every day and both children will be in walking distance of college and school.

Will still keep bidding for social housing, won't hold my breath though!


Congratulations, every step up is a step in the right direction.

Bryn Mawr;1436146 wrote: Congratulations, every step up is a step in the right direction.


Still packing and jumping through hoops to please the Council and their bond requirements now. I'd packed all my paperwork, had to unpack it all last night to find birth certificates and evidence of this that and the ducks backside. Hey ho, an hours worth of form filling is now completed so fingers crossed I am entitled to a bond for the deposit.

Amazed at how much the post office charges for postal re-direction! Daylight robbery!

Betty Boop;1436528 wrote:

Amazed at how much the post office charges for postal re-direction! Daylight robbery!


Why on earth would you want anything redirecting? Any accounts you have you'll notify of the new address. What else is there that you want to reed?

Betty Boop;1436528 wrote: Still packing and jumping through hoops to please the Council and their bond requirements now. I'd packed all my paperwork, had to unpack it all last night to find birth certificates and evidence of this that and the ducks backside. Hey ho, an hours worth of form filling is now completed so fingers crossed I am entitled to a bond for the deposit.

Amazed at how much the post office charges for postal re-direction! Daylight robbery!


I am so pleased for you and congratulations on getting the new house. May you be very happy there.

I am pleased for you especially now you can cut back on fuel due to those draughty windows.

Yes, re-directing mail through the Royal Mail Is daylight robbery. Of course you'll want all mail re-directed as there will always be someone you forget to Inform of the new address. Always best to be safe and sure. You don't want to risk missing anything posted to you In future months.

oscar;1436534 wrote: I am so pleased for you and congratulations on getting the new house. May you be very happy there.

I am pleased for you especially now you can cut back on fuel due to those draughty windows.

Yes, re-directing mail through the Royal Mail Is daylight robbery. Of course you'll want all mail re-directed as there will always be someone you forget to Inform of the new address. Always best to be safe and sure. You don't want to risk missing anything posted to you In future months.


Thank you, be good to be five minutes away from Mum so we'll be able to keep an eye on her more easily and pop round twenty times a week when she messes up her digibox by pressing too many buttons :wah:

Betty Boop;1436542 wrote: Thank you, be good to be five minutes away from Mum so we'll be able to keep an eye on her more easily and pop round twenty times a week when she messes up her digibox by pressing too many buttons :wah:


I cheated - persuaded dad to move closer to me