Southampton City Council branded 'heartless' for kicking David 'Charlie' Wort out of home after 30 years

David Wort (centre) known as Charlie, with his supporters after he was evicted from his flat.

David Wort (centre) known as Charlie, with his supporters after he was evicted from his flat.

First published in News
Last updated
Daily Echo: Photograph of the Author by , Political reporter

COUNCIL chiefs have been branded “heartless” for evicting a man from the Southampton home he has lived in for more than 30 years.

David Wort, known as Charlie, was kicked out of his home in the Kingsland Estate yesterday after a last-ditch bid to halt the eviction failed.

He had grown up in the flat and moved back there 12 years ago to live with his mother, but the council said he had no automatic right to remain there.

The 51-year-old had lived there until he got married at the age of 22, but then moved back in 2002 after the break-up of his relationship and the death of his father.

His mother Pauline died in November, and the council said he must move out and that they would not provide an alternative flat.

Mr Wort, who works at the Tesco distribution centre in Nursling, says the situation has left him depressed.

He said: “The council has said that because it's a secure tenancy I haven’t got a leg to stand on, but they are not prepared to offer me anything other than a “homeseeker” session which is basically sending someone round to offer me rented accommodation.

“I didn’t want to leave this place, I have lived here since I was a kid.”

After Mr Wort’s last attempt to halt the eviction failed, he added: “It was just one last kick in the teeth. I will look for somewhere privately, but like many people it’s a struggle to make ends meet at the moment.”

Cllr Don Thomas, who has been supporting Mr Wort, said he believed council cuts had had an impact on the authority’s housing staff and their ability to be “compassionate”.

He added: “Mr Wort’s whole life has been turned sadly upside down through no fault of his own.

“We have empty studio flats in Southampton, surely we could make arrangements to accommodate Mr Wort rather than kick him out?

“No one wants a soulless council without a heart.”

Members of the Socialist Party had protested outside Mr Wort’s house before his eviction.

Member John Easton said: “It’s scandalous, this is a council that should be looking after its residents but instead they are kicking people out of their houses.”

A city council spokesman said: “There is no automatic right to anyone remaining in the property following the death of the tenant to retain the tenancy.

“There are more than 15,000 people on the waiting list for council accommodation in Southampton – we apply the law fairly and equitably and would not allow anyone to occupy a council property if they are not entitled to do so.”

Comments (73)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

11:02am Thu 17 Jul 14

gingerbiscuit1 says...

They have policies they have to stick too, to break the rules for one would open the floodgates for thousands of others although I was under the impression if he was on the tenancy, but not the tenancy holder he would be rehomed in a more suitable flat for one person? Unless this was just a rumour? Or was he not listed on the tenancy. So many policies.
They have policies they have to stick too, to break the rules for one would open the floodgates for thousands of others although I was under the impression if he was on the tenancy, but not the tenancy holder he would be rehomed in a more suitable flat for one person? Unless this was just a rumour? Or was he not listed on the tenancy. So many policies. gingerbiscuit1
  • Score: 13

11:04am Thu 17 Jul 14

rudolph_hucker says...

You don't own the place, you aren't entitled to it, and you are in work, so move out and pay rent or get a mortgage on a private place like most people.
Council houses should be there to help folk out for a few years until they can look after themselves, not just handed over indefinitely.
They should be a stop-gap measure for people to use until they can support themselves, otherwise where is the incentive for self improvement and standing on your own two feet eh?
You don't own the place, you aren't entitled to it, and you are in work, so move out and pay rent or get a mortgage on a private place like most people. Council houses should be there to help folk out for a few years until they can look after themselves, not just handed over indefinitely. They should be a stop-gap measure for people to use until they can support themselves, otherwise where is the incentive for self improvement and standing on your own two feet eh? rudolph_hucker
  • Score: 50

11:07am Thu 17 Jul 14

WalkingOnAWire says...

This is the same Councillor Thomas who, together with his colleague Keith Morrell, voted at the full council meeting yesterday AGAINST a motion to bring all council employees on to the Living Wage (£7.65 an hour).

The Labour council is doing its best in very difficult circumstances to improve the quality of people's lives. These councillors 'against cuts' meanwhile are a disgrace to the people they claim to represent.
This is the same Councillor Thomas who, together with his colleague Keith Morrell, voted at the full council meeting yesterday AGAINST a motion to bring all council employees on to the Living Wage (£7.65 an hour). The Labour council is doing its best in very difficult circumstances to improve the quality of people's lives. These councillors 'against cuts' meanwhile are a disgrace to the people they claim to represent. WalkingOnAWire
  • Score: 15

11:14am Thu 17 Jul 14

sotonboy84 says...

Misleading storyline really. It was not the man's home for 30 years, it was his mother's home as a council tenant and he moved back in with her 12 years ago. This whole story has come about because he wasn't the tenant.

It's sad he has had to leave but then the reality is it's not his property nor was he tenant of it. As somebody else has said, there are other people that have joined the housing list and waiting for a property. This man should do the same.
Misleading storyline really. It was not the man's home for 30 years, it was his mother's home as a council tenant and he moved back in with her 12 years ago. This whole story has come about because he wasn't the tenant. It's sad he has had to leave but then the reality is it's not his property nor was he tenant of it. As somebody else has said, there are other people that have joined the housing list and waiting for a property. This man should do the same. sotonboy84
  • Score: 52

11:19am Thu 17 Jul 14

southy says...

The council should house him in emergency housing up to 2 years before moving him into full time accomadation.
The problem here was he was a tennent but he was not named as rent payer, its an error loads of people make when looking after there parents in there old age they forget to get there name down on the rent book
The council should house him in emergency housing up to 2 years before moving him into full time accomadation. The problem here was he was a tennent but he was not named as rent payer, its an error loads of people make when looking after there parents in there old age they forget to get there name down on the rent book southy
  • Score: -20

11:21am Thu 17 Jul 14

emma38 says...

The council are quick enough to put all theses coming from over seas in houses but not very quick at looking after our own British born and bread people . he has lived in that flat most of his life. he works so he is not going to be claiming housing benefit . so why should he move ? STICK TO YOUR GUNS. and stay in that flat or your going to made homeless and then people will be moaning oh look at him sleeping ruff. you have my backing fight it don't lose it !!!
The council are quick enough to put all theses coming from over seas in houses but not very quick at looking after our own British born and bread people . he has lived in that flat most of his life. he works so he is not going to be claiming housing benefit . so why should he move ? STICK TO YOUR GUNS. and stay in that flat or your going to made homeless and then people will be moaning oh look at him sleeping ruff. you have my backing fight it don't lose it !!! emma38
  • Score: -41

11:23am Thu 17 Jul 14

Hastagger says...

Sob story of the week: - man in full time employment not entitled to cheap council house accommodation! Call the tabloids and hold the front page!

Rent a room in HMO you cheap gimp - were subsidising you to live there, surely there is a family, or a foreign criminal with a cat who deserves it more!
Sob story of the week: - man in full time employment not entitled to cheap council house accommodation! Call the tabloids and hold the front page! Rent a room in HMO you cheap gimp - were subsidising you to live there, surely there is a family, or a foreign criminal with a cat who deserves it more! Hastagger
  • Score: 21

11:24am Thu 17 Jul 14

emma38 says...

rudolph_hucker wrote:
You don't own the place, you aren't entitled to it, and you are in work, so move out and pay rent or get a mortgage on a private place like most people.
Council houses should be there to help folk out for a few years until they can look after themselves, not just handed over indefinitely.
They should be a stop-gap measure for people to use until they can support themselves, otherwise where is the incentive for self improvement and standing on your own two feet eh?
your just heartless. lets hope your never in this situation but going by your heartless comments your just another 1 of theeses over rated posh snobs !!!
[quote][p][bold]rudolph_hucker[/bold] wrote: You don't own the place, you aren't entitled to it, and you are in work, so move out and pay rent or get a mortgage on a private place like most people. Council houses should be there to help folk out for a few years until they can look after themselves, not just handed over indefinitely. They should be a stop-gap measure for people to use until they can support themselves, otherwise where is the incentive for self improvement and standing on your own two feet eh?[/p][/quote]your just heartless. lets hope your never in this situation but going by your heartless comments your just another 1 of theeses over rated posh snobs !!! emma38
  • Score: -40

11:34am Thu 17 Jul 14

Cyber__Fug says...

southy wrote:
The council should house him in emergency housing up to 2 years before moving him into full time accomadation.
The problem here was he was a tennent but he was not named as rent payer, its an error loads of people make when looking after there parents in there old age they forget to get there name down on the rent book
Why should the council house him ?

He works so therefore he can pay rent; he should not be a drain on the councils already under pressure resources.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: The council should house him in emergency housing up to 2 years before moving him into full time accomadation. The problem here was he was a tennent but he was not named as rent payer, its an error loads of people make when looking after there parents in there old age they forget to get there name down on the rent book[/p][/quote]Why should the council house him ? He works so therefore he can pay rent; he should not be a drain on the councils already under pressure resources. Cyber__Fug
  • Score: 28

11:35am Thu 17 Jul 14

rudolph_hucker says...

emma38 wrote:
rudolph_hucker wrote: You don't own the place, you aren't entitled to it, and you are in work, so move out and pay rent or get a mortgage on a private place like most people. Council houses should be there to help folk out for a few years until they can look after themselves, not just handed over indefinitely. They should be a stop-gap measure for people to use until they can support themselves, otherwise where is the incentive for self improvement and standing on your own two feet eh?
your just heartless. lets hope your never in this situation but going by your heartless comments your just another 1 of theeses over rated posh snobs !!!
Yes I am and I live in a big house in Winchester you saw right through me
[quote][p][bold]emma38[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]rudolph_hucker[/bold] wrote: You don't own the place, you aren't entitled to it, and you are in work, so move out and pay rent or get a mortgage on a private place like most people. Council houses should be there to help folk out for a few years until they can look after themselves, not just handed over indefinitely. They should be a stop-gap measure for people to use until they can support themselves, otherwise where is the incentive for self improvement and standing on your own two feet eh?[/p][/quote]your just heartless. lets hope your never in this situation but going by your heartless comments your just another 1 of theeses over rated posh snobs !!![/p][/quote]Yes I am and I live in a big house in Winchester you saw right through me rudolph_hucker
  • Score: 8

11:37am Thu 17 Jul 14

Jesus_02 says...

"There are more than 15,000 people on the waiting list for council accommodation in Southampton"

We are continually told there is no such thing as waiting list, it a needs based system?

Some years ago, my wife and I went to the council to enquire as although we both worked we had a child and it was impossible to save for a deposit as we where spending all our wages on paying someone else’s mortgage. We have been paying £900 a month ever since.

We where told that there was absolutely no point registering an interest in housing unless we where homeless, new to the country, disabled or a single parents.

The real issue is the “right to buy” especially at a discount. This (as predicted in the 80’s) has created a massive divide between those that now already own a house (or 2 ) and those that simply will never get on the ladder and therefore must live in continual insecurity in someone else’s house regardless of their desire for “self improvement”
"There are more than 15,000 people on the waiting list for council accommodation in Southampton" We are continually told there is no such thing as waiting list, it a needs based system? Some years ago, my wife and I went to the council to enquire as although we both worked we had a child and it was impossible to save for a deposit as we where spending all our wages on paying someone else’s mortgage. We have been paying £900 a month ever since. We where told that there was absolutely no point registering an interest in housing unless we where homeless, new to the country, disabled or a single parents. The real issue is the “right to buy” especially at a discount. This (as predicted in the 80’s) has created a massive divide between those that now already own a house (or 2 ) and those that simply will never get on the ladder and therefore must live in continual insecurity in someone else’s house regardless of their desire for “self improvement” Jesus_02
  • Score: 23

11:39am Thu 17 Jul 14

Jesus_02 says...

Cyber__Fug wrote:
southy wrote: The council should house him in emergency housing up to 2 years before moving him into full time accomadation. The problem here was he was a tennent but he was not named as rent payer, its an error loads of people make when looking after there parents in there old age they forget to get there name down on the rent book
Why should the council house him ? He works so therefore he can pay rent; he should not be a drain on the councils already under pressure resources.
Where does it say that he doesnt pay rent?
[quote][p][bold]Cyber__Fug[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: The council should house him in emergency housing up to 2 years before moving him into full time accomadation. The problem here was he was a tennent but he was not named as rent payer, its an error loads of people make when looking after there parents in there old age they forget to get there name down on the rent book[/p][/quote]Why should the council house him ? He works so therefore he can pay rent; he should not be a drain on the councils already under pressure resources.[/p][/quote]Where does it say that he doesnt pay rent? Jesus_02
  • Score: 4

11:51am Thu 17 Jul 14

wwozzer says...

emma38 wrote:
rudolph_hucker wrote:
You don't own the place, you aren't entitled to it, and you are in work, so move out and pay rent or get a mortgage on a private place like most people.
Council houses should be there to help folk out for a few years until they can look after themselves, not just handed over indefinitely.
They should be a stop-gap measure for people to use until they can support themselves, otherwise where is the incentive for self improvement and standing on your own two feet eh?
your just heartless. lets hope your never in this situation but going by your heartless comments your just another 1 of theeses over rated posh snobs !!!
Grow up Doris day, this isn't a twee little world where the mayor dances down st Marys street handing out council flats to lovely people.

He's technically been a paying squatter since november in a property needed by much worthier causes than a fully grown single bloke in full time employment who's probably lived on the cheap for years courtesy of the council and his mother #sponger
[quote][p][bold]emma38[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]rudolph_hucker[/bold] wrote: You don't own the place, you aren't entitled to it, and you are in work, so move out and pay rent or get a mortgage on a private place like most people. Council houses should be there to help folk out for a few years until they can look after themselves, not just handed over indefinitely. They should be a stop-gap measure for people to use until they can support themselves, otherwise where is the incentive for self improvement and standing on your own two feet eh?[/p][/quote]your just heartless. lets hope your never in this situation but going by your heartless comments your just another 1 of theeses over rated posh snobs !!![/p][/quote]Grow up Doris day, this isn't a twee little world where the mayor dances down st Marys street handing out council flats to lovely people. He's technically been a paying squatter since november in a property needed by much worthier causes than a fully grown single bloke in full time employment who's probably lived on the cheap for years courtesy of the council and his mother #sponger wwozzer
  • Score: 13

11:53am Thu 17 Jul 14

Cyber__Fug says...

Jesus_02 wrote:
Cyber__Fug wrote:
southy wrote: The council should house him in emergency housing up to 2 years before moving him into full time accomadation. The problem here was he was a tennent but he was not named as rent payer, its an error loads of people make when looking after there parents in there old age they forget to get there name down on the rent book
Why should the council house him ? He works so therefore he can pay rent; he should not be a drain on the councils already under pressure resources.
Where does it say that he doesnt pay rent?
It doesn't I was merely pointing out that it isn't the Councils responsibility to house him, being as he's working and earning there would be plenty of private rentals available to him... thus leaving the council accommodation to more needy people.
[quote][p][bold]Jesus_02[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Cyber__Fug[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: The council should house him in emergency housing up to 2 years before moving him into full time accomadation. The problem here was he was a tennent but he was not named as rent payer, its an error loads of people make when looking after there parents in there old age they forget to get there name down on the rent book[/p][/quote]Why should the council house him ? He works so therefore he can pay rent; he should not be a drain on the councils already under pressure resources.[/p][/quote]Where does it say that he doesnt pay rent?[/p][/quote]It doesn't I was merely pointing out that it isn't the Councils responsibility to house him, being as he's working and earning there would be plenty of private rentals available to him... thus leaving the council accommodation to more needy people. Cyber__Fug
  • Score: 9

12:02pm Thu 17 Jul 14

Jesus_02 says...

Two generations ago, the relatives of the people that are condemning council tenants would have been paying rent to the council or a housing association. In return they would received a home (indefinitely) that they could care for and in which they and their families where secure.

The council (country) would also receive a good rent for property that they owned.

Now we have a situation where the majority of tenants (not this one BTW) come at net cost to the country. We now find that we "need" to evict those that pay rent in favour of those that have rent subsidised. What happened?
Two generations ago, the relatives of the people that are condemning council tenants would have been paying rent to the council or a housing association. In return they would received a home (indefinitely) that they could care for and in which they and their families where secure. The council (country) would also receive a good rent for property that they owned. Now we have a situation where the majority of tenants (not this one BTW) come at net cost to the country. We now find that we "need" to evict those that pay rent in favour of those that have rent subsidised. What happened? Jesus_02
  • Score: -9

12:20pm Thu 17 Jul 14

Woolston ollie says...

Free it up so some foreign family can live there to which we will all subidise, if he pays full rent let him stay
Free it up so some foreign family can live there to which we will all subidise, if he pays full rent let him stay Woolston ollie
  • Score: -5

12:25pm Thu 17 Jul 14

southy says...

Cyber__Fug wrote:
southy wrote:
The council should house him in emergency housing up to 2 years before moving him into full time accomadation.
The problem here was he was a tennent but he was not named as rent payer, its an error loads of people make when looking after there parents in there old age they forget to get there name down on the rent book
Why should the council house him ?

He works so therefore he can pay rent; he should not be a drain on the councils already under pressure resources.
Its Southampton council rules to do so, I not sure but it could be all councils have to do this, He as not deem him self Homeless it was a court order and councils have to act on this and put him in emergency accomadation for 2 years then move him onto full time accomadation.
It could be a case of the council going though the motions first. The Council homes are only under pressurer because of a ruling made by the Thatcher Government that stop Council from building stock up, the following Labour government made a ruling that Councils have to apply to government to build more council homes and its the government that dictates how many can be build and it is far less than what is needed like a few years ago over a 1,000 new council homes was needed the government told this council they could only build 150 for that year, when in reality it should be 1% above the council waiting list.
If the council houses him then he will be paying rent. Working at Tesco Nursling dept do you know how much an hour he gets or how many hours a week he works, I have an idea as my nephew works there.
[quote][p][bold]Cyber__Fug[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: The council should house him in emergency housing up to 2 years before moving him into full time accomadation. The problem here was he was a tennent but he was not named as rent payer, its an error loads of people make when looking after there parents in there old age they forget to get there name down on the rent book[/p][/quote]Why should the council house him ? He works so therefore he can pay rent; he should not be a drain on the councils already under pressure resources.[/p][/quote]Its Southampton council rules to do so, I not sure but it could be all councils have to do this, He as not deem him self Homeless it was a court order and councils have to act on this and put him in emergency accomadation for 2 years then move him onto full time accomadation. It could be a case of the council going though the motions first. The Council homes are only under pressurer because of a ruling made by the Thatcher Government that stop Council from building stock up, the following Labour government made a ruling that Councils have to apply to government to build more council homes and its the government that dictates how many can be build and it is far less than what is needed like a few years ago over a 1,000 new council homes was needed the government told this council they could only build 150 for that year, when in reality it should be 1% above the council waiting list. If the council houses him then he will be paying rent. Working at Tesco Nursling dept do you know how much an hour he gets or how many hours a week he works, I have an idea as my nephew works there. southy
  • Score: -5

12:28pm Thu 17 Jul 14

bigfella777 says...

I blame his ex wife. She probably took his home and money and shacked up with somebody who was more adequately endowed. Heartless cow.
I blame his ex wife. She probably took his home and money and shacked up with somebody who was more adequately endowed. Heartless cow. bigfella777
  • Score: 3

12:31pm Thu 17 Jul 14

KSO16R says...

emma38 wrote:
The council are quick enough to put all theses coming from over seas in houses but not very quick at looking after our own British born and bread people . he has lived in that flat most of his life. he works so he is not going to be claiming housing benefit . so why should he move ? STICK TO YOUR GUNS. and stay in that flat or your going to made homeless and then people will be moaning oh look at him sleeping ruff. you have my backing fight it don't lose it !!!
Would that be gingerbread, wholemeal or plain old white bread people?
[quote][p][bold]emma38[/bold] wrote: The council are quick enough to put all theses coming from over seas in houses but not very quick at looking after our own British born and bread people . he has lived in that flat most of his life. he works so he is not going to be claiming housing benefit . so why should he move ? STICK TO YOUR GUNS. and stay in that flat or your going to made homeless and then people will be moaning oh look at him sleeping ruff. you have my backing fight it don't lose it !!![/p][/quote]Would that be gingerbread, wholemeal or plain old white bread people? KSO16R
  • Score: 14

12:41pm Thu 17 Jul 14

Cyber__Fug says...

southy wrote:
Cyber__Fug wrote:
southy wrote:
The council should house him in emergency housing up to 2 years before moving him into full time accomadation.
The problem here was he was a tennent but he was not named as rent payer, its an error loads of people make when looking after there parents in there old age they forget to get there name down on the rent book
Why should the council house him ?

He works so therefore he can pay rent; he should not be a drain on the councils already under pressure resources.
Its Southampton council rules to do so, I not sure but it could be all councils have to do this, He as not deem him self Homeless it was a court order and councils have to act on this and put him in emergency accomadation for 2 years then move him onto full time accomadation.
It could be a case of the council going though the motions first. The Council homes are only under pressurer because of a ruling made by the Thatcher Government that stop Council from building stock up, the following Labour government made a ruling that Councils have to apply to government to build more council homes and its the government that dictates how many can be build and it is far less than what is needed like a few years ago over a 1,000 new council homes was needed the government told this council they could only build 150 for that year, when in reality it should be 1% above the council waiting list.
If the council houses him then he will be paying rent. Working at Tesco Nursling dept do you know how much an hour he gets or how many hours a week he works, I have an idea as my nephew works there.
I was going to reply with a genuine reply as I have a contact within a local council who I spoke to about this - however, being as you started with you Thatcher mumblings again I simply can't be arsed !
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Cyber__Fug[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: The council should house him in emergency housing up to 2 years before moving him into full time accomadation. The problem here was he was a tennent but he was not named as rent payer, its an error loads of people make when looking after there parents in there old age they forget to get there name down on the rent book[/p][/quote]Why should the council house him ? He works so therefore he can pay rent; he should not be a drain on the councils already under pressure resources.[/p][/quote]Its Southampton council rules to do so, I not sure but it could be all councils have to do this, He as not deem him self Homeless it was a court order and councils have to act on this and put him in emergency accomadation for 2 years then move him onto full time accomadation. It could be a case of the council going though the motions first. The Council homes are only under pressurer because of a ruling made by the Thatcher Government that stop Council from building stock up, the following Labour government made a ruling that Councils have to apply to government to build more council homes and its the government that dictates how many can be build and it is far less than what is needed like a few years ago over a 1,000 new council homes was needed the government told this council they could only build 150 for that year, when in reality it should be 1% above the council waiting list. If the council houses him then he will be paying rent. Working at Tesco Nursling dept do you know how much an hour he gets or how many hours a week he works, I have an idea as my nephew works there.[/p][/quote]I was going to reply with a genuine reply as I have a contact within a local council who I spoke to about this - however, being as you started with you Thatcher mumblings again I simply can't be arsed ! Cyber__Fug
  • Score: 0

12:50pm Thu 17 Jul 14

sotonboy84 says...

Cyber__Fug wrote:
Jesus_02 wrote:
Cyber__Fug wrote:
southy wrote: The council should house him in emergency housing up to 2 years before moving him into full time accomadation. The problem here was he was a tennent but he was not named as rent payer, its an error loads of people make when looking after there parents in there old age they forget to get there name down on the rent book
Why should the council house him ? He works so therefore he can pay rent; he should not be a drain on the councils already under pressure resources.
Where does it say that he doesnt pay rent?
It doesn't I was merely pointing out that it isn't the Councils responsibility to house him, being as he's working and earning there would be plenty of private rentals available to him... thus leaving the council accommodation to more needy people.
As he lived with his mother, presumably the flat has at least two bedrooms, possibly three.

It's selfish on this point alone to want to stay in the flat and try to fight the Council's rules when there are families that live in overcrowded conditions and are finacially worse off.
[quote][p][bold]Cyber__Fug[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Jesus_02[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Cyber__Fug[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: The council should house him in emergency housing up to 2 years before moving him into full time accomadation. The problem here was he was a tennent but he was not named as rent payer, its an error loads of people make when looking after there parents in there old age they forget to get there name down on the rent book[/p][/quote]Why should the council house him ? He works so therefore he can pay rent; he should not be a drain on the councils already under pressure resources.[/p][/quote]Where does it say that he doesnt pay rent?[/p][/quote]It doesn't I was merely pointing out that it isn't the Councils responsibility to house him, being as he's working and earning there would be plenty of private rentals available to him... thus leaving the council accommodation to more needy people.[/p][/quote]As he lived with his mother, presumably the flat has at least two bedrooms, possibly three. It's selfish on this point alone to want to stay in the flat and try to fight the Council's rules when there are families that live in overcrowded conditions and are finacially worse off. sotonboy84
  • Score: 12

12:52pm Thu 17 Jul 14

southy says...

Cyber__Fug wrote:
southy wrote:
Cyber__Fug wrote:
southy wrote:
The council should house him in emergency housing up to 2 years before moving him into full time accomadation.
The problem here was he was a tennent but he was not named as rent payer, its an error loads of people make when looking after there parents in there old age they forget to get there name down on the rent book
Why should the council house him ?

He works so therefore he can pay rent; he should not be a drain on the councils already under pressure resources.
Its Southampton council rules to do so, I not sure but it could be all councils have to do this, He as not deem him self Homeless it was a court order and councils have to act on this and put him in emergency accomadation for 2 years then move him onto full time accomadation.
It could be a case of the council going though the motions first. The Council homes are only under pressurer because of a ruling made by the Thatcher Government that stop Council from building stock up, the following Labour government made a ruling that Councils have to apply to government to build more council homes and its the government that dictates how many can be build and it is far less than what is needed like a few years ago over a 1,000 new council homes was needed the government told this council they could only build 150 for that year, when in reality it should be 1% above the council waiting list.
If the council houses him then he will be paying rent. Working at Tesco Nursling dept do you know how much an hour he gets or how many hours a week he works, I have an idea as my nephew works there.
I was going to reply with a genuine reply as I have a contact within a local council who I spoke to about this - however, being as you started with you Thatcher mumblings again I simply can't be arsed !
Thats because it true and you know it and can easy be check on, Thattcher was the start of all the problems off today and since then no government as really reverse any of the policys. As I have said in the pass today policys will still be infect in the future till some one is willing to change them.
BTW I don't have one contact in the Council or Government I have number of them.
[quote][p][bold]Cyber__Fug[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Cyber__Fug[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: The council should house him in emergency housing up to 2 years before moving him into full time accomadation. The problem here was he was a tennent but he was not named as rent payer, its an error loads of people make when looking after there parents in there old age they forget to get there name down on the rent book[/p][/quote]Why should the council house him ? He works so therefore he can pay rent; he should not be a drain on the councils already under pressure resources.[/p][/quote]Its Southampton council rules to do so, I not sure but it could be all councils have to do this, He as not deem him self Homeless it was a court order and councils have to act on this and put him in emergency accomadation for 2 years then move him onto full time accomadation. It could be a case of the council going though the motions first. The Council homes are only under pressurer because of a ruling made by the Thatcher Government that stop Council from building stock up, the following Labour government made a ruling that Councils have to apply to government to build more council homes and its the government that dictates how many can be build and it is far less than what is needed like a few years ago over a 1,000 new council homes was needed the government told this council they could only build 150 for that year, when in reality it should be 1% above the council waiting list. If the council houses him then he will be paying rent. Working at Tesco Nursling dept do you know how much an hour he gets or how many hours a week he works, I have an idea as my nephew works there.[/p][/quote]I was going to reply with a genuine reply as I have a contact within a local council who I spoke to about this - however, being as you started with you Thatcher mumblings again I simply can't be arsed ![/p][/quote]Thats because it true and you know it and can easy be check on, Thattcher was the start of all the problems off today and since then no government as really reverse any of the policys. As I have said in the pass today policys will still be infect in the future till some one is willing to change them. BTW I don't have one contact in the Council or Government I have number of them. southy
  • Score: -14

12:55pm Thu 17 Jul 14

southy says...

sotonboy84 wrote:
Cyber__Fug wrote:
Jesus_02 wrote:
Cyber__Fug wrote:
southy wrote: The council should house him in emergency housing up to 2 years before moving him into full time accomadation. The problem here was he was a tennent but he was not named as rent payer, its an error loads of people make when looking after there parents in there old age they forget to get there name down on the rent book
Why should the council house him ? He works so therefore he can pay rent; he should not be a drain on the councils already under pressure resources.
Where does it say that he doesnt pay rent?
It doesn't I was merely pointing out that it isn't the Councils responsibility to house him, being as he's working and earning there would be plenty of private rentals available to him... thus leaving the council accommodation to more needy people.
As he lived with his mother, presumably the flat has at least two bedrooms, possibly three.

It's selfish on this point alone to want to stay in the flat and try to fight the Council's rules when there are families that live in overcrowded conditions and are finacially worse off.
More likely be 2 bedroom flat as they are the most common, 3 bedroom tends to be maisonettes flats
[quote][p][bold]sotonboy84[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Cyber__Fug[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Jesus_02[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Cyber__Fug[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: The council should house him in emergency housing up to 2 years before moving him into full time accomadation. The problem here was he was a tennent but he was not named as rent payer, its an error loads of people make when looking after there parents in there old age they forget to get there name down on the rent book[/p][/quote]Why should the council house him ? He works so therefore he can pay rent; he should not be a drain on the councils already under pressure resources.[/p][/quote]Where does it say that he doesnt pay rent?[/p][/quote]It doesn't I was merely pointing out that it isn't the Councils responsibility to house him, being as he's working and earning there would be plenty of private rentals available to him... thus leaving the council accommodation to more needy people.[/p][/quote]As he lived with his mother, presumably the flat has at least two bedrooms, possibly three. It's selfish on this point alone to want to stay in the flat and try to fight the Council's rules when there are families that live in overcrowded conditions and are finacially worse off.[/p][/quote]More likely be 2 bedroom flat as they are the most common, 3 bedroom tends to be maisonettes flats southy
  • Score: -7

1:04pm Thu 17 Jul 14

sotonboy84 says...

southy wrote:
sotonboy84 wrote:
Cyber__Fug wrote:
Jesus_02 wrote:
Cyber__Fug wrote:
southy wrote: The council should house him in emergency housing up to 2 years before moving him into full time accomadation. The problem here was he was a tennent but he was not named as rent payer, its an error loads of people make when looking after there parents in there old age they forget to get there name down on the rent book
Why should the council house him ? He works so therefore he can pay rent; he should not be a drain on the councils already under pressure resources.
Where does it say that he doesnt pay rent?
It doesn't I was merely pointing out that it isn't the Councils responsibility to house him, being as he's working and earning there would be plenty of private rentals available to him... thus leaving the council accommodation to more needy people.
As he lived with his mother, presumably the flat has at least two bedrooms, possibly three.

It's selfish on this point alone to want to stay in the flat and try to fight the Council's rules when there are families that live in overcrowded conditions and are finacially worse off.
More likely be 2 bedroom flat as they are the most common, 3 bedroom tends to be maisonettes flats
However many bedrooms, it's more than the man needs but he was still trying to fight to keep them whilst many familes live in overcrowded conditions which was my point.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]sotonboy84[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Cyber__Fug[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Jesus_02[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Cyber__Fug[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: The council should house him in emergency housing up to 2 years before moving him into full time accomadation. The problem here was he was a tennent but he was not named as rent payer, its an error loads of people make when looking after there parents in there old age they forget to get there name down on the rent book[/p][/quote]Why should the council house him ? He works so therefore he can pay rent; he should not be a drain on the councils already under pressure resources.[/p][/quote]Where does it say that he doesnt pay rent?[/p][/quote]It doesn't I was merely pointing out that it isn't the Councils responsibility to house him, being as he's working and earning there would be plenty of private rentals available to him... thus leaving the council accommodation to more needy people.[/p][/quote]As he lived with his mother, presumably the flat has at least two bedrooms, possibly three. It's selfish on this point alone to want to stay in the flat and try to fight the Council's rules when there are families that live in overcrowded conditions and are finacially worse off.[/p][/quote]More likely be 2 bedroom flat as they are the most common, 3 bedroom tends to be maisonettes flats[/p][/quote]However many bedrooms, it's more than the man needs but he was still trying to fight to keep them whilst many familes live in overcrowded conditions which was my point. sotonboy84
  • Score: 12

1:30pm Thu 17 Jul 14

Big Mac says...

"It could be a case of the council going though the motions first."

Very enlightening Southy, I thought they just talked it.
"It could be a case of the council going though the motions first." Very enlightening Southy, I thought they just talked it. Big Mac
  • Score: 2

1:46pm Thu 17 Jul 14

WalkingOnAWire says...

emma38 wrote:
The council are quick enough to put all theses coming from over seas in houses but not very quick at looking after our own British born and bread people . he has lived in that flat most of his life. he works so he is not going to be claiming housing benefit . so why should he move ? STICK TO YOUR GUNS. and stay in that flat or your going to made homeless and then people will be moaning oh look at him sleeping ruff. you have my backing fight it don't lose it !!!
No - you have to have lived in Southampton for 3 years even to be considered for Council housing. The only exception to this are members of HM Forces who are returning from a posting.
[quote][p][bold]emma38[/bold] wrote: The council are quick enough to put all theses coming from over seas in houses but not very quick at looking after our own British born and bread people . he has lived in that flat most of his life. he works so he is not going to be claiming housing benefit . so why should he move ? STICK TO YOUR GUNS. and stay in that flat or your going to made homeless and then people will be moaning oh look at him sleeping ruff. you have my backing fight it don't lose it !!![/p][/quote]No - you have to have lived in Southampton for 3 years even to be considered for Council housing. The only exception to this are members of HM Forces who are returning from a posting. WalkingOnAWire
  • Score: 5

1:55pm Thu 17 Jul 14

sass says...

southy wrote:
Cyber__Fug wrote:
southy wrote:
Cyber__Fug wrote:
southy wrote:
The council should house him in emergency housing up to 2 years before moving him into full time accomadation.
The problem here was he was a tennent but he was not named as rent payer, its an error loads of people make when looking after there parents in there old age they forget to get there name down on the rent book
Why should the council house him ?

He works so therefore he can pay rent; he should not be a drain on the councils already under pressure resources.
Its Southampton council rules to do so, I not sure but it could be all councils have to do this, He as not deem him self Homeless it was a court order and councils have to act on this and put him in emergency accomadation for 2 years then move him onto full time accomadation.
It could be a case of the council going though the motions first. The Council homes are only under pressurer because of a ruling made by the Thatcher Government that stop Council from building stock up, the following Labour government made a ruling that Councils have to apply to government to build more council homes and its the government that dictates how many can be build and it is far less than what is needed like a few years ago over a 1,000 new council homes was needed the government told this council they could only build 150 for that year, when in reality it should be 1% above the council waiting list.
If the council houses him then he will be paying rent. Working at Tesco Nursling dept do you know how much an hour he gets or how many hours a week he works, I have an idea as my nephew works there.
I was going to reply with a genuine reply as I have a contact within a local council who I spoke to about this - however, being as you started with you Thatcher mumblings again I simply can't be arsed !
Thats because it true and you know it and can easy be check on, Thattcher was the start of all the problems off today and since then no government as really reverse any of the policys. As I have said in the pass today policys will still be infect in the future till some one is willing to change them.
BTW I don't have one contact in the Council or Government I have number of them.
Which pass did you say it in, Southy? The Khyber pass?
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Cyber__Fug[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Cyber__Fug[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: The council should house him in emergency housing up to 2 years before moving him into full time accomadation. The problem here was he was a tennent but he was not named as rent payer, its an error loads of people make when looking after there parents in there old age they forget to get there name down on the rent book[/p][/quote]Why should the council house him ? He works so therefore he can pay rent; he should not be a drain on the councils already under pressure resources.[/p][/quote]Its Southampton council rules to do so, I not sure but it could be all councils have to do this, He as not deem him self Homeless it was a court order and councils have to act on this and put him in emergency accomadation for 2 years then move him onto full time accomadation. It could be a case of the council going though the motions first. The Council homes are only under pressurer because of a ruling made by the Thatcher Government that stop Council from building stock up, the following Labour government made a ruling that Councils have to apply to government to build more council homes and its the government that dictates how many can be build and it is far less than what is needed like a few years ago over a 1,000 new council homes was needed the government told this council they could only build 150 for that year, when in reality it should be 1% above the council waiting list. If the council houses him then he will be paying rent. Working at Tesco Nursling dept do you know how much an hour he gets or how many hours a week he works, I have an idea as my nephew works there.[/p][/quote]I was going to reply with a genuine reply as I have a contact within a local council who I spoke to about this - however, being as you started with you Thatcher mumblings again I simply can't be arsed ![/p][/quote]Thats because it true and you know it and can easy be check on, Thattcher was the start of all the problems off today and since then no government as really reverse any of the policys. As I have said in the pass today policys will still be infect in the future till some one is willing to change them. BTW I don't have one contact in the Council or Government I have number of them.[/p][/quote]Which pass did you say it in, Southy? The Khyber pass? sass
  • Score: 4

1:59pm Thu 17 Jul 14

southy says...

sotonboy84 wrote:
southy wrote:
sotonboy84 wrote:
Cyber__Fug wrote:
Jesus_02 wrote:
Cyber__Fug wrote:
southy wrote: The council should house him in emergency housing up to 2 years before moving him into full time accomadation. The problem here was he was a tennent but he was not named as rent payer, its an error loads of people make when looking after there parents in there old age they forget to get there name down on the rent book
Why should the council house him ? He works so therefore he can pay rent; he should not be a drain on the councils already under pressure resources.
Where does it say that he doesnt pay rent?
It doesn't I was merely pointing out that it isn't the Councils responsibility to house him, being as he's working and earning there would be plenty of private rentals available to him... thus leaving the council accommodation to more needy people.
As he lived with his mother, presumably the flat has at least two bedrooms, possibly three.

It's selfish on this point alone to want to stay in the flat and try to fight the Council's rules when there are families that live in overcrowded conditions and are finacially worse off.
More likely be 2 bedroom flat as they are the most common, 3 bedroom tends to be maisonettes flats
However many bedrooms, it's more than the man needs but he was still trying to fight to keep them whilst many familes live in overcrowded conditions which was my point.
Agreed but the council is going for evition with out offering other places first the Council is meant to offer 3 other alternative homes, weather if this was done or not I do not know
[quote][p][bold]sotonboy84[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]sotonboy84[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Cyber__Fug[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Jesus_02[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Cyber__Fug[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: The council should house him in emergency housing up to 2 years before moving him into full time accomadation. The problem here was he was a tennent but he was not named as rent payer, its an error loads of people make when looking after there parents in there old age they forget to get there name down on the rent book[/p][/quote]Why should the council house him ? He works so therefore he can pay rent; he should not be a drain on the councils already under pressure resources.[/p][/quote]Where does it say that he doesnt pay rent?[/p][/quote]It doesn't I was merely pointing out that it isn't the Councils responsibility to house him, being as he's working and earning there would be plenty of private rentals available to him... thus leaving the council accommodation to more needy people.[/p][/quote]As he lived with his mother, presumably the flat has at least two bedrooms, possibly three. It's selfish on this point alone to want to stay in the flat and try to fight the Council's rules when there are families that live in overcrowded conditions and are finacially worse off.[/p][/quote]More likely be 2 bedroom flat as they are the most common, 3 bedroom tends to be maisonettes flats[/p][/quote]However many bedrooms, it's more than the man needs but he was still trying to fight to keep them whilst many familes live in overcrowded conditions which was my point.[/p][/quote]Agreed but the council is going for evition with out offering other places first the Council is meant to offer 3 other alternative homes, weather if this was done or not I do not know southy
  • Score: -9

2:02pm Thu 17 Jul 14

Hastagger says...

wwozzer wrote:
emma38 wrote:
rudolph_hucker wrote:
You don't own the place, you aren't entitled to it, and you are in work, so move out and pay rent or get a mortgage on a private place like most people.
Council houses should be there to help folk out for a few years until they can look after themselves, not just handed over indefinitely.
They should be a stop-gap measure for people to use until they can support themselves, otherwise where is the incentive for self improvement and standing on your own two feet eh?
your just heartless. lets hope your never in this situation but going by your heartless comments your just another 1 of theeses over rated posh snobs !!!
Grow up Doris day, this isn't a twee little world where the mayor dances down st Marys street handing out council flats to lovely people.

He's technically been a paying squatter since november in a property needed by much worthier causes than a fully grown single bloke in full time employment who's probably lived on the cheap for years courtesy of the council and his mother #sponger
Totally agree and great use of the hashtag!

#anothertagger
#dontbashthehash
#hugahashtagger
[quote][p][bold]wwozzer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]emma38[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]rudolph_hucker[/bold] wrote: You don't own the place, you aren't entitled to it, and you are in work, so move out and pay rent or get a mortgage on a private place like most people. Council houses should be there to help folk out for a few years until they can look after themselves, not just handed over indefinitely. They should be a stop-gap measure for people to use until they can support themselves, otherwise where is the incentive for self improvement and standing on your own two feet eh?[/p][/quote]your just heartless. lets hope your never in this situation but going by your heartless comments your just another 1 of theeses over rated posh snobs !!![/p][/quote]Grow up Doris day, this isn't a twee little world where the mayor dances down st Marys street handing out council flats to lovely people. He's technically been a paying squatter since november in a property needed by much worthier causes than a fully grown single bloke in full time employment who's probably lived on the cheap for years courtesy of the council and his mother #sponger[/p][/quote]Totally agree and great use of the hashtag! #anothertagger #dontbashthehash #hugahashtagger Hastagger
  • Score: 0

2:13pm Thu 17 Jul 14

Kirsty666 says...

Shared housing comes to mind.... Why should he keep what's likely a 2 bed flat when there are people in emergency accommodation with children who need a permanent place
Shared housing comes to mind.... Why should he keep what's likely a 2 bed flat when there are people in emergency accommodation with children who need a permanent place Kirsty666
  • Score: 5

2:15pm Thu 17 Jul 14

mickey01 says...

maybe if he was a Pole , Romanian, Muslim, things would be different
maybe if he was a Pole , Romanian, Muslim, things would be different mickey01
  • Score: -6

2:21pm Thu 17 Jul 14

sarfhamton says...

When will the echo ban people that use every story to bash immigrants?

This is a story about a man who was living in a house he was not entitled to, he needs to move or buy it off the council. However, the council should due to his time there offer him a more suitable alternative. It has nothing to do with immigration or indeed benefits as this man works.
When will the echo ban people that use every story to bash immigrants? This is a story about a man who was living in a house he was not entitled to, he needs to move or buy it off the council. However, the council should due to his time there offer him a more suitable alternative. It has nothing to do with immigration or indeed benefits as this man works. sarfhamton
  • Score: 4

2:27pm Thu 17 Jul 14

sarfhamton says...

mickey01 wrote:
maybe if he was a Pole , Romanian, Muslim, things would be different
How would it be different?

What extra points do you get for being from another EU country? That cant be true, if it was it would be against European Law and he could take SCC to court.

If being a Muslim gives you extra points then why doesn't he convert to Islam?
[quote][p][bold]mickey01[/bold] wrote: maybe if he was a Pole , Romanian, Muslim, things would be different[/p][/quote]How would it be different? What extra points do you get for being from another EU country? That cant be true, if it was it would be against European Law and he could take SCC to court. If being a Muslim gives you extra points then why doesn't he convert to Islam? sarfhamton
  • Score: 3

2:31pm Thu 17 Jul 14

IronLady2010 says...

The attitude towards Council housing needs to change. Surely in this modern day they should be for emergency situations and whilst they have reduced rent can save up for something better in the future.

Too many people seem to think a Council house is for life and they have no aspiration to move on.

Come on people, be proud!
The attitude towards Council housing needs to change. Surely in this modern day they should be for emergency situations and whilst they have reduced rent can save up for something better in the future. Too many people seem to think a Council house is for life and they have no aspiration to move on. Come on people, be proud! IronLady2010
  • Score: 6

2:36pm Thu 17 Jul 14

sarfhamton says...

IronLady2010 wrote:
The attitude towards Council housing needs to change. Surely in this modern day they should be for emergency situations and whilst they have reduced rent can save up for something better in the future.

Too many people seem to think a Council house is for life and they have no aspiration to move on.

Come on people, be proud!
I think for some people then a renting is the only option, perhaps people with insecure employment or health needs etc.

But your right people should be encouraged to buy, the barrier is often the deposit. If people could buy 90% their council house after say 5 years that would remove the need for a deposit, give the council an investment and the money used to build another council home. That any shared ownership and the banning of people having multiple buy to let mortgages is the way forward.
[quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: The attitude towards Council housing needs to change. Surely in this modern day they should be for emergency situations and whilst they have reduced rent can save up for something better in the future. Too many people seem to think a Council house is for life and they have no aspiration to move on. Come on people, be proud![/p][/quote]I think for some people then a renting is the only option, perhaps people with insecure employment or health needs etc. But your right people should be encouraged to buy, the barrier is often the deposit. If people could buy 90% their council house after say 5 years that would remove the need for a deposit, give the council an investment and the money used to build another council home. That any shared ownership and the banning of people having multiple buy to let mortgages is the way forward. sarfhamton
  • Score: 0

2:53pm Thu 17 Jul 14

Rob444 says...

Perhaps a kind neighbour who has to pay the disgraceful bedroom tax will offer to take him in as a paying lodger.
Perhaps a kind neighbour who has to pay the disgraceful bedroom tax will offer to take him in as a paying lodger. Rob444
  • Score: 4

2:57pm Thu 17 Jul 14

sarfhamton says...

Rob444 wrote:
Perhaps a kind neighbour who has to pay the disgraceful bedroom tax will offer to take him in as a paying lodger.
Its a good point, spare rooms can be let and that would mean that people would not have to pay bedroom tax.

I have rented rooms when working away, its not ideal but its a way for one to cover thier rent / mortgage and the other to save on rental / hotel costs.
[quote][p][bold]Rob444[/bold] wrote: Perhaps a kind neighbour who has to pay the disgraceful bedroom tax will offer to take him in as a paying lodger.[/p][/quote]Its a good point, spare rooms can be let and that would mean that people would not have to pay bedroom tax. I have rented rooms when working away, its not ideal but its a way for one to cover thier rent / mortgage and the other to save on rental / hotel costs. sarfhamton
  • Score: 3

3:07pm Thu 17 Jul 14

IronLady2010 says...

Cllr Don Thomas, who has been supporting Mr Wort, said he believed council cuts had had an impact on the authority’s housing staff and their ability to be “compassionate”.


Wake up Don! This man has been renting off his mother for 12 years and no doubt paying a pittance in rent compared to most people, surely by now he should of saved enough to put a deposit down on a private let. I admit private lets are more expensive, but then if he can't afford it the Council Benefits will kick in.

There is no reason to be in a Council house when you have housing benefits if you can't afford the private rent.
Cllr Don Thomas, who has been supporting Mr Wort, said he believed council cuts had had an impact on the authority’s housing staff and their ability to be “compassionate”. Wake up Don! This man has been renting off his mother for 12 years and no doubt paying a pittance in rent compared to most people, surely by now he should of saved enough to put a deposit down on a private let. I admit private lets are more expensive, but then if he can't afford it the Council Benefits will kick in. There is no reason to be in a Council house when you have housing benefits if you can't afford the private rent. IronLady2010
  • Score: 5

4:43pm Thu 17 Jul 14

Higginz says...

Ungrateful bloke throws unmotivated tantrum with no reasonable basis. Narrow-minded people support the Big Baby. Sense prevails.
Ungrateful bloke throws unmotivated tantrum with no reasonable basis. Narrow-minded people support the Big Baby. Sense prevails. Higginz
  • Score: 2

5:04pm Thu 17 Jul 14

pod says...

to quote Cllr Thomas 'his world has been turned upside down through no fault of his own' , I was not aware that is the criteria for being rehoused, my daughter and her 3 children has had their world turned upside down through no fault of their own', since january she has been living with us in our 3 bed house, sharing 3 single beds, no sign of being rehoused in the near future. Ironically, we had put in to downsize from our 3bed ha house last year as we felt it should be given to a family, now we have had to take our name off as I refuse to make my daughter and grandchildren homeless.
This man has been living in his mums flat for the last 12 years, no doubt not paying any rent to the council, he must be made to move, he has no right to be living their when there are people on the housing list.
to quote Cllr Thomas 'his world has been turned upside down through no fault of his own' , I was not aware that is the criteria for being rehoused, my daughter and her 3 children has had their world turned upside down through no fault of their own', since january she has been living with us in our 3 bed house, sharing 3 single beds, no sign of being rehoused in the near future. Ironically, we had put in to downsize from our 3bed ha house last year as we felt it should be given to a family, now we have had to take our name off as I refuse to make my daughter and grandchildren homeless. This man has been living in his mums flat for the last 12 years, no doubt not paying any rent to the council, he must be made to move, he has no right to be living their when there are people on the housing list. pod
  • Score: 6

5:16pm Thu 17 Jul 14

thinklikealocal says...

southy wrote:
The council should house him in emergency housing up to 2 years before moving him into full time accomadation.
The problem here was he was a tennent but he was not named as rent payer, its an error loads of people make when looking after there parents in there old age they forget to get there name down on the rent book
I suspect doing so would have resulted in the removal oh her Housing Benefit.... Cake and eat it comes to mind....
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: The council should house him in emergency housing up to 2 years before moving him into full time accomadation. The problem here was he was a tennent but he was not named as rent payer, its an error loads of people make when looking after there parents in there old age they forget to get there name down on the rent book[/p][/quote]I suspect doing so would have resulted in the removal oh her Housing Benefit.... Cake and eat it comes to mind.... thinklikealocal
  • Score: 2

5:24pm Thu 17 Jul 14

IronLady2010 says...

pod wrote:
to quote Cllr Thomas 'his world has been turned upside down through no fault of his own' , I was not aware that is the criteria for being rehoused, my daughter and her 3 children has had their world turned upside down through no fault of their own', since january she has been living with us in our 3 bed house, sharing 3 single beds, no sign of being rehoused in the near future. Ironically, we had put in to downsize from our 3bed ha house last year as we felt it should be given to a family, now we have had to take our name off as I refuse to make my daughter and grandchildren homeless.
This man has been living in his mums flat for the last 12 years, no doubt not paying any rent to the council, he must be made to move, he has no right to be living their when there are people on the housing list.
Can I ask a question?

Why, haven't you found your daughter a nice home in private rent?

She has 3 children so the Council would pay Housing Benefit to top up any amount she was short of.

I only ask as I don't get why people rely on Council Housing so much, when there are benefits available to everyone who qualifies.
[quote][p][bold]pod[/bold] wrote: to quote Cllr Thomas 'his world has been turned upside down through no fault of his own' , I was not aware that is the criteria for being rehoused, my daughter and her 3 children has had their world turned upside down through no fault of their own', since january she has been living with us in our 3 bed house, sharing 3 single beds, no sign of being rehoused in the near future. Ironically, we had put in to downsize from our 3bed ha house last year as we felt it should be given to a family, now we have had to take our name off as I refuse to make my daughter and grandchildren homeless. This man has been living in his mums flat for the last 12 years, no doubt not paying any rent to the council, he must be made to move, he has no right to be living their when there are people on the housing list.[/p][/quote]Can I ask a question? Why, haven't you found your daughter a nice home in private rent? She has 3 children so the Council would pay Housing Benefit to top up any amount she was short of. I only ask as I don't get why people rely on Council Housing so much, when there are benefits available to everyone who qualifies. IronLady2010
  • Score: 3

5:32pm Thu 17 Jul 14

IronLady2010 says...

I find it shameful that people are proud to live in a Council House personally.

What should be an emergency housing situation has got out of control.

More needs to be done to encourage people to aspire to be better.
I find it shameful that people are proud to live in a Council House personally. What should be an emergency housing situation has got out of control. More needs to be done to encourage people to aspire to be better. IronLady2010
  • Score: -6

5:39pm Thu 17 Jul 14

Linesman says...

southy wrote:
The council should house him in emergency housing up to 2 years before moving him into full time accomadation.
The problem here was he was a tennent but he was not named as rent payer, its an error loads of people make when looking after there parents in there old age they forget to get there name down on the rent book
You are WRONG this time southy.

His mother was the tenant not him. Although he was her son, technically he was her lodger.

No mention that he was looking after his mother in her old age, just moved in, as a matter of convenience for him, when his marriage broke up.

This must be a 2 bedroomed flat, and so would be suitable for a young couple with a child, or maybe two, who have been waiting their turn on the council waiting list.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: The council should house him in emergency housing up to 2 years before moving him into full time accomadation. The problem here was he was a tennent but he was not named as rent payer, its an error loads of people make when looking after there parents in there old age they forget to get there name down on the rent book[/p][/quote]You are WRONG this time southy. His mother was the tenant not him. Although he was her son, technically he was her lodger. No mention that he was looking after his mother in her old age, just moved in, as a matter of convenience for him, when his marriage broke up. This must be a 2 bedroomed flat, and so would be suitable for a young couple with a child, or maybe two, who have been waiting their turn on the council waiting list. Linesman
  • Score: 7

5:44pm Thu 17 Jul 14

loosehead says...

He had grown up in the flat and moved back there 12 years ago to live with his mother,
So he hadn't lived there all his live had he?
Did he get the rent book transferred to his name?
His mother was ill so did he get paid as a carer as well as work for Tesco's?
Why didn't he put his name forward in the Councils homebid?
As a single man he's only entitled to a studio flat so why does he think he's entitled to a two bedroomed flat?
I want to live ion a country mansion will the council let me live in one rent free then on £75 a week?
He had grown up in the flat and moved back there 12 years ago to live with his mother, So he hadn't lived there all his live had he? Did he get the rent book transferred to his name? His mother was ill so did he get paid as a carer as well as work for Tesco's? Why didn't he put his name forward in the Councils homebid? As a single man he's only entitled to a studio flat so why does he think he's entitled to a two bedroomed flat? I want to live ion a country mansion will the council let me live in one rent free then on £75 a week? loosehead
  • Score: -1

5:46pm Thu 17 Jul 14

loosehead says...

WalkingOnAWire wrote:
This is the same Councillor Thomas who, together with his colleague Keith Morrell, voted at the full council meeting yesterday AGAINST a motion to bring all council employees on to the Living Wage (£7.65 an hour).

The Labour council is doing its best in very difficult circumstances to improve the quality of people's lives. These councillors 'against cuts' meanwhile are a disgrace to the people they claim to represent.
Does that mean all those above the living wage will take a cut to pay for the increases?
Or are they going to cut jobs & services to pay for it?
Then what? blame the Government?
[quote][p][bold]WalkingOnAWire[/bold] wrote: This is the same Councillor Thomas who, together with his colleague Keith Morrell, voted at the full council meeting yesterday AGAINST a motion to bring all council employees on to the Living Wage (£7.65 an hour). The Labour council is doing its best in very difficult circumstances to improve the quality of people's lives. These councillors 'against cuts' meanwhile are a disgrace to the people they claim to represent.[/p][/quote]Does that mean all those above the living wage will take a cut to pay for the increases? Or are they going to cut jobs & services to pay for it? Then what? blame the Government? loosehead
  • Score: 0

5:47pm Thu 17 Jul 14

IronLady2010 says...

Linesman wrote:
southy wrote:
The council should house him in emergency housing up to 2 years before moving him into full time accomadation.
The problem here was he was a tennent but he was not named as rent payer, its an error loads of people make when looking after there parents in there old age they forget to get there name down on the rent book
You are WRONG this time southy.

His mother was the tenant not him. Although he was her son, technically he was her lodger.

No mention that he was looking after his mother in her old age, just moved in, as a matter of convenience for him, when his marriage broke up.

This must be a 2 bedroomed flat, and so would be suitable for a young couple with a child, or maybe two, who have been waiting their turn on the council waiting list.
Blimey, we agree ;-) x
[quote][p][bold]Linesman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: The council should house him in emergency housing up to 2 years before moving him into full time accomadation. The problem here was he was a tennent but he was not named as rent payer, its an error loads of people make when looking after there parents in there old age they forget to get there name down on the rent book[/p][/quote]You are WRONG this time southy. His mother was the tenant not him. Although he was her son, technically he was her lodger. No mention that he was looking after his mother in her old age, just moved in, as a matter of convenience for him, when his marriage broke up. This must be a 2 bedroomed flat, and so would be suitable for a young couple with a child, or maybe two, who have been waiting their turn on the council waiting list.[/p][/quote]Blimey, we agree ;-) x IronLady2010
  • Score: 1

5:49pm Thu 17 Jul 14

loosehead says...

Jesus_02 wrote:
"There are more than 15,000 people on the waiting list for council accommodation in Southampton"

We are continually told there is no such thing as waiting list, it a needs based system?

Some years ago, my wife and I went to the council to enquire as although we both worked we had a child and it was impossible to save for a deposit as we where spending all our wages on paying someone else’s mortgage. We have been paying £900 a month ever since.

We where told that there was absolutely no point registering an interest in housing unless we where homeless, new to the country, disabled or a single parents.

The real issue is the “right to buy” especially at a discount. This (as predicted in the 80’s) has created a massive divide between those that now already own a house (or 2 ) and those that simply will never get on the ladder and therefore must live in continual insecurity in someone else’s house regardless of their desire for “self improvement”
If you live in Southampton you fill out a form you are assessed & then given points which you then use to bid on a property so who did you talk to?
[quote][p][bold]Jesus_02[/bold] wrote: "There are more than 15,000 people on the waiting list for council accommodation in Southampton" We are continually told there is no such thing as waiting list, it a needs based system? Some years ago, my wife and I went to the council to enquire as although we both worked we had a child and it was impossible to save for a deposit as we where spending all our wages on paying someone else’s mortgage. We have been paying £900 a month ever since. We where told that there was absolutely no point registering an interest in housing unless we where homeless, new to the country, disabled or a single parents. The real issue is the “right to buy” especially at a discount. This (as predicted in the 80’s) has created a massive divide between those that now already own a house (or 2 ) and those that simply will never get on the ladder and therefore must live in continual insecurity in someone else’s house regardless of their desire for “self improvement”[/p][/quote]If you live in Southampton you fill out a form you are assessed & then given points which you then use to bid on a property so who did you talk to? loosehead
  • Score: 0

5:58pm Thu 17 Jul 14

loosehead says...

If a person is a refugee/asylum seeker they can apply for council accommodation & will be given maximum points to bid with if I'm wrong on this please some one tell me the format the housing department works by PLEASE!
Southy this guy wasn't a legitimate tenant he was a squatter did his mother inform the council he was living there? did they pay full council tax or single persons tax?
The council doesn't have to house Squatters & as he has made no attempt to find alternative accommodation in the private sector he has made himself homeless.
If a person is a refugee/asylum seeker they can apply for council accommodation & will be given maximum points to bid with if I'm wrong on this please some one tell me the format the housing department works by PLEASE! Southy this guy wasn't a legitimate tenant he was a squatter did his mother inform the council he was living there? did they pay full council tax or single persons tax? The council doesn't have to house Squatters & as he has made no attempt to find alternative accommodation in the private sector he has made himself homeless. loosehead
  • Score: 0

5:59pm Thu 17 Jul 14

pod says...

IronLady2010 wrote:
pod wrote:
to quote Cllr Thomas 'his world has been turned upside down through no fault of his own' , I was not aware that is the criteria for being rehoused, my daughter and her 3 children has had their world turned upside down through no fault of their own', since january she has been living with us in our 3 bed house, sharing 3 single beds, no sign of being rehoused in the near future. Ironically, we had put in to downsize from our 3bed ha house last year as we felt it should be given to a family, now we have had to take our name off as I refuse to make my daughter and grandchildren homeless.
This man has been living in his mums flat for the last 12 years, no doubt not paying any rent to the council, he must be made to move, he has no right to be living their when there are people on the housing list.
Can I ask a question?

Why, haven't you found your daughter a nice home in private rent?

She has 3 children so the Council would pay Housing Benefit to top up any amount she was short of.

I only ask as I don't get why people rely on Council Housing so much, when there are benefits available to everyone who qualifies.
simple answer to that................
.
if she goes into private housing again, the same thing could happen, (landlord had to sell his house) she is holding out for social housing, not for the cheaper rent, but for a secure tenancy until the children are older.
In the three years since her marriage broke up she has had to leave private rented housing twice through no fault of her own.
You see Iron Lady, it does not matter nowadays, if you try to live a decent life, pay your rent and bills on time, bring your children up properly, work for a living, those that live beyond the law and society still seem to come out on top. Please do not ask me about the ex husband, that will really get me started!!!!!!!!
[quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pod[/bold] wrote: to quote Cllr Thomas 'his world has been turned upside down through no fault of his own' , I was not aware that is the criteria for being rehoused, my daughter and her 3 children has had their world turned upside down through no fault of their own', since january she has been living with us in our 3 bed house, sharing 3 single beds, no sign of being rehoused in the near future. Ironically, we had put in to downsize from our 3bed ha house last year as we felt it should be given to a family, now we have had to take our name off as I refuse to make my daughter and grandchildren homeless. This man has been living in his mums flat for the last 12 years, no doubt not paying any rent to the council, he must be made to move, he has no right to be living their when there are people on the housing list.[/p][/quote]Can I ask a question? Why, haven't you found your daughter a nice home in private rent? She has 3 children so the Council would pay Housing Benefit to top up any amount she was short of. I only ask as I don't get why people rely on Council Housing so much, when there are benefits available to everyone who qualifies.[/p][/quote]simple answer to that................ . if she goes into private housing again, the same thing could happen, (landlord had to sell his house) she is holding out for social housing, not for the cheaper rent, but for a secure tenancy until the children are older. In the three years since her marriage broke up she has had to leave private rented housing twice through no fault of her own. You see Iron Lady, it does not matter nowadays, if you try to live a decent life, pay your rent and bills on time, bring your children up properly, work for a living, those that live beyond the law and society still seem to come out on top. Please do not ask me about the ex husband, that will really get me started!!!!!!!! pod
  • Score: 3

6:03pm Thu 17 Jul 14

pod says...

oh, and before anyone asks, we have enquired about signing our tenancy over to her and to be rehoused to a one bed ourselves but we were told
by doing that we would have contributed to making ourselves homeless and the ha would rehouse us.
oh, and before anyone asks, we have enquired about signing our tenancy over to her and to be rehoused to a one bed ourselves but we were told by doing that we would have contributed to making ourselves homeless and the ha would rehouse us. pod
  • Score: 1

6:09pm Thu 17 Jul 14

bumblerose1701 says...

Funnily enough, I know someone who moved in to take care of their sick mother. Yet when she died, they got to stay in the house without any trouble at all, even though council houses are in high demand and they now live in a house all on their own with more bedrooms than they need.
Funnily enough, I know someone who moved in to take care of their sick mother. Yet when she died, they got to stay in the house without any trouble at all, even though council houses are in high demand and they now live in a house all on their own with more bedrooms than they need. bumblerose1701
  • Score: 1

6:11pm Thu 17 Jul 14

IronLady2010 says...

pod wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
pod wrote:
to quote Cllr Thomas 'his world has been turned upside down through no fault of his own' , I was not aware that is the criteria for being rehoused, my daughter and her 3 children has had their world turned upside down through no fault of their own', since january she has been living with us in our 3 bed house, sharing 3 single beds, no sign of being rehoused in the near future. Ironically, we had put in to downsize from our 3bed ha house last year as we felt it should be given to a family, now we have had to take our name off as I refuse to make my daughter and grandchildren homeless.
This man has been living in his mums flat for the last 12 years, no doubt not paying any rent to the council, he must be made to move, he has no right to be living their when there are people on the housing list.
Can I ask a question?

Why, haven't you found your daughter a nice home in private rent?

She has 3 children so the Council would pay Housing Benefit to top up any amount she was short of.

I only ask as I don't get why people rely on Council Housing so much, when there are benefits available to everyone who qualifies.
simple answer to that................

.
if she goes into private housing again, the same thing could happen, (landlord had to sell his house) she is holding out for social housing, not for the cheaper rent, but for a secure tenancy until the children are older.
In the three years since her marriage broke up she has had to leave private rented housing twice through no fault of her own.
You see Iron Lady, it does not matter nowadays, if you try to live a decent life, pay your rent and bills on time, bring your children up properly, work for a living, those that live beyond the law and society still seem to come out on top. Please do not ask me about the ex husband, that will really get me started!!!!!!!!
So basically you want a free ride for your daughter?

Council Housing is not a right to secure housing. Maybe this is where we are going wrong.

I'd be ashamed to be in a Council House!
[quote][p][bold]pod[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pod[/bold] wrote: to quote Cllr Thomas 'his world has been turned upside down through no fault of his own' , I was not aware that is the criteria for being rehoused, my daughter and her 3 children has had their world turned upside down through no fault of their own', since january she has been living with us in our 3 bed house, sharing 3 single beds, no sign of being rehoused in the near future. Ironically, we had put in to downsize from our 3bed ha house last year as we felt it should be given to a family, now we have had to take our name off as I refuse to make my daughter and grandchildren homeless. This man has been living in his mums flat for the last 12 years, no doubt not paying any rent to the council, he must be made to move, he has no right to be living their when there are people on the housing list.[/p][/quote]Can I ask a question? Why, haven't you found your daughter a nice home in private rent? She has 3 children so the Council would pay Housing Benefit to top up any amount she was short of. I only ask as I don't get why people rely on Council Housing so much, when there are benefits available to everyone who qualifies.[/p][/quote]simple answer to that................ . if she goes into private housing again, the same thing could happen, (landlord had to sell his house) she is holding out for social housing, not for the cheaper rent, but for a secure tenancy until the children are older. In the three years since her marriage broke up she has had to leave private rented housing twice through no fault of her own. You see Iron Lady, it does not matter nowadays, if you try to live a decent life, pay your rent and bills on time, bring your children up properly, work for a living, those that live beyond the law and society still seem to come out on top. Please do not ask me about the ex husband, that will really get me started!!!!!!!![/p][/quote]So basically you want a free ride for your daughter? Council Housing is not a right to secure housing. Maybe this is where we are going wrong. I'd be ashamed to be in a Council House! IronLady2010
  • Score: -3

6:17pm Thu 17 Jul 14

southy says...

IronLady2010 wrote:
Linesman wrote:
southy wrote:
The council should house him in emergency housing up to 2 years before moving him into full time accomadation.
The problem here was he was a tennent but he was not named as rent payer, its an error loads of people make when looking after there parents in there old age they forget to get there name down on the rent book
You are WRONG this time southy.

His mother was the tenant not him. Although he was her son, technically he was her lodger.

No mention that he was looking after his mother in her old age, just moved in, as a matter of convenience for him, when his marriage broke up.

This must be a 2 bedroomed flat, and so would be suitable for a young couple with a child, or maybe two, who have been waiting their turn on the council waiting list.
Blimey, we agree ;-) x
He was living there he was a tenant but what he was not was the rentee tenant , he was registered living there but he was not on the rent book (you can check that out for your self on the electrol list to be on that list you have to be paying council tax). No the Echo don't mention that part about his mum, yes it has to be a 2 bedroom home because he was living there 22 years before getting married
[quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Linesman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: The council should house him in emergency housing up to 2 years before moving him into full time accomadation. The problem here was he was a tennent but he was not named as rent payer, its an error loads of people make when looking after there parents in there old age they forget to get there name down on the rent book[/p][/quote]You are WRONG this time southy. His mother was the tenant not him. Although he was her son, technically he was her lodger. No mention that he was looking after his mother in her old age, just moved in, as a matter of convenience for him, when his marriage broke up. This must be a 2 bedroomed flat, and so would be suitable for a young couple with a child, or maybe two, who have been waiting their turn on the council waiting list.[/p][/quote]Blimey, we agree ;-) x[/p][/quote]He was living there he was a tenant but what he was not was the rentee tenant , he was registered living there but he was not on the rent book (you can check that out for your self on the electrol list to be on that list you have to be paying council tax). No the Echo don't mention that part about his mum, yes it has to be a 2 bedroom home because he was living there 22 years before getting married southy
  • Score: -5

6:25pm Thu 17 Jul 14

IronLady2010 says...

southy wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
Linesman wrote:
southy wrote:
The council should house him in emergency housing up to 2 years before moving him into full time accomadation.
The problem here was he was a tennent but he was not named as rent payer, its an error loads of people make when looking after there parents in there old age they forget to get there name down on the rent book
You are WRONG this time southy.

His mother was the tenant not him. Although he was her son, technically he was her lodger.

No mention that he was looking after his mother in her old age, just moved in, as a matter of convenience for him, when his marriage broke up.

This must be a 2 bedroomed flat, and so would be suitable for a young couple with a child, or maybe two, who have been waiting their turn on the council waiting list.
Blimey, we agree ;-) x
He was living there he was a tenant but what he was not was the rentee tenant , he was registered living there but he was not on the rent book (you can check that out for your self on the electrol list to be on that list you have to be paying council tax). No the Echo don't mention that part about his mum, yes it has to be a 2 bedroom home because he was living there 22 years before getting married
He wasn't a Tenant of the Council, he was a Tenant of his Mother.

What's your point?
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Linesman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: The council should house him in emergency housing up to 2 years before moving him into full time accomadation. The problem here was he was a tennent but he was not named as rent payer, its an error loads of people make when looking after there parents in there old age they forget to get there name down on the rent book[/p][/quote]You are WRONG this time southy. His mother was the tenant not him. Although he was her son, technically he was her lodger. No mention that he was looking after his mother in her old age, just moved in, as a matter of convenience for him, when his marriage broke up. This must be a 2 bedroomed flat, and so would be suitable for a young couple with a child, or maybe two, who have been waiting their turn on the council waiting list.[/p][/quote]Blimey, we agree ;-) x[/p][/quote]He was living there he was a tenant but what he was not was the rentee tenant , he was registered living there but he was not on the rent book (you can check that out for your self on the electrol list to be on that list you have to be paying council tax). No the Echo don't mention that part about his mum, yes it has to be a 2 bedroom home because he was living there 22 years before getting married[/p][/quote]He wasn't a Tenant of the Council, he was a Tenant of his Mother. What's your point? IronLady2010
  • Score: -1

6:28pm Thu 17 Jul 14

pod says...

I was going to type a proper reply, but you will only twist it, so there is no point.
I would be ashamed to such a snob that I would look down my nose at others who have worked all their lives in low paid jobs, you know the type of job, carers, cleaners, the frontline jobs that most women have to take whilst bringing up their children. I could not have a decent job until children grow up, worked in pubs, shops, care homes to help pay the rent and bills.
I would start a decent job and hubby would come home and say 'our shifts are changing' so I would have to find another that fitted in with him.
When my parents bought their first house in the 60s most of the family stopped speaking to them cos 'people like us do not own houses'.
IronLady you have a very twisted view of the world and the people in it,
most of us do not want a free ride, we just want to bring up the next generation with a work ethic and morals, I make no apology for not being well off enough to own a property and I certainly do not have to answer to you, just to be sneered at.
I do make one apology, I did reply to you, could not stop once I got started, however I am going out now, cos I have a life. May I suggest that you find something better to do that turn up your pretty little nose at the rest of us peasants.
I was going to type a proper reply, but you will only twist it, so there is no point. I would be ashamed to such a snob that I would look down my nose at others who have worked all their lives in low paid jobs, you know the type of job, carers, cleaners, the frontline jobs that most women have to take whilst bringing up their children. I could not have a decent job until children grow up, worked in pubs, shops, care homes to help pay the rent and bills. I would start a decent job and hubby would come home and say 'our shifts are changing' so I would have to find another that fitted in with him. When my parents bought their first house in the 60s most of the family stopped speaking to them cos 'people like us do not own houses'. IronLady you have a very twisted view of the world and the people in it, most of us do not want a free ride, we just want to bring up the next generation with a work ethic and morals, I make no apology for not being well off enough to own a property and I certainly do not have to answer to you, just to be sneered at. I do make one apology, I did reply to you, could not stop once I got started, however I am going out now, cos I have a life. May I suggest that you find something better to do that turn up your pretty little nose at the rest of us peasants. pod
  • Score: 7

6:34pm Thu 17 Jul 14

IronLady2010 says...

pod wrote:
I was going to type a proper reply, but you will only twist it, so there is no point.
I would be ashamed to such a snob that I would look down my nose at others who have worked all their lives in low paid jobs, you know the type of job, carers, cleaners, the frontline jobs that most women have to take whilst bringing up their children. I could not have a decent job until children grow up, worked in pubs, shops, care homes to help pay the rent and bills.
I would start a decent job and hubby would come home and say 'our shifts are changing' so I would have to find another that fitted in with him.
When my parents bought their first house in the 60s most of the family stopped speaking to them cos 'people like us do not own houses'.
IronLady you have a very twisted view of the world and the people in it,
most of us do not want a free ride, we just want to bring up the next generation with a work ethic and morals, I make no apology for not being well off enough to own a property and I certainly do not have to answer to you, just to be sneered at.
I do make one apology, I did reply to you, could not stop once I got started, however I am going out now, cos I have a life. May I suggest that you find something better to do that turn up your pretty little nose at the rest of us peasants.
Ahhhhh so you have children knowing you can't afford them?
[quote][p][bold]pod[/bold] wrote: I was going to type a proper reply, but you will only twist it, so there is no point. I would be ashamed to such a snob that I would look down my nose at others who have worked all their lives in low paid jobs, you know the type of job, carers, cleaners, the frontline jobs that most women have to take whilst bringing up their children. I could not have a decent job until children grow up, worked in pubs, shops, care homes to help pay the rent and bills. I would start a decent job and hubby would come home and say 'our shifts are changing' so I would have to find another that fitted in with him. When my parents bought their first house in the 60s most of the family stopped speaking to them cos 'people like us do not own houses'. IronLady you have a very twisted view of the world and the people in it, most of us do not want a free ride, we just want to bring up the next generation with a work ethic and morals, I make no apology for not being well off enough to own a property and I certainly do not have to answer to you, just to be sneered at. I do make one apology, I did reply to you, could not stop once I got started, however I am going out now, cos I have a life. May I suggest that you find something better to do that turn up your pretty little nose at the rest of us peasants.[/p][/quote]Ahhhhh so you have children knowing you can't afford them? IronLady2010
  • Score: -10

6:56pm Thu 17 Jul 14

tracker says...

IronLady2010 wrote:
pod wrote:
I was going to type a proper reply, but you will only twist it, so there is no point.
I would be ashamed to such a snob that I would look down my nose at others who have worked all their lives in low paid jobs, you know the type of job, carers, cleaners, the frontline jobs that most women have to take whilst bringing up their children. I could not have a decent job until children grow up, worked in pubs, shops, care homes to help pay the rent and bills.
I would start a decent job and hubby would come home and say 'our shifts are changing' so I would have to find another that fitted in with him.
When my parents bought their first house in the 60s most of the family stopped speaking to them cos 'people like us do not own houses'.
IronLady you have a very twisted view of the world and the people in it,
most of us do not want a free ride, we just want to bring up the next generation with a work ethic and morals, I make no apology for not being well off enough to own a property and I certainly do not have to answer to you, just to be sneered at.
I do make one apology, I did reply to you, could not stop once I got started, however I am going out now, cos I have a life. May I suggest that you find something better to do that turn up your pretty little nose at the rest of us peasants.
Ahhhhh so you have children knowing you can't afford them?
Somebody I know once said that people who live in council houses should not be allowed to own a car, ten years later they ended up living in a tower block. You never know what's around the corner...
[quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pod[/bold] wrote: I was going to type a proper reply, but you will only twist it, so there is no point. I would be ashamed to such a snob that I would look down my nose at others who have worked all their lives in low paid jobs, you know the type of job, carers, cleaners, the frontline jobs that most women have to take whilst bringing up their children. I could not have a decent job until children grow up, worked in pubs, shops, care homes to help pay the rent and bills. I would start a decent job and hubby would come home and say 'our shifts are changing' so I would have to find another that fitted in with him. When my parents bought their first house in the 60s most of the family stopped speaking to them cos 'people like us do not own houses'. IronLady you have a very twisted view of the world and the people in it, most of us do not want a free ride, we just want to bring up the next generation with a work ethic and morals, I make no apology for not being well off enough to own a property and I certainly do not have to answer to you, just to be sneered at. I do make one apology, I did reply to you, could not stop once I got started, however I am going out now, cos I have a life. May I suggest that you find something better to do that turn up your pretty little nose at the rest of us peasants.[/p][/quote]Ahhhhh so you have children knowing you can't afford them?[/p][/quote]Somebody I know once said that people who live in council houses should not be allowed to own a car, ten years later they ended up living in a tower block. You never know what's around the corner... tracker
  • Score: 13

9:11pm Thu 17 Jul 14

loosehead says...

When I was young it was the low paid working class who were given council homes & as most of them would never be in the position to be able to buy one they lived there until old age.
Back then it was extremely hard to get a mortgage you had to sit & talk to the bank manager & have a large deposit which most working people never had.
Being after the war large families were encouraged(even in 57) so meaning they could never afford to buy but at no time was my family told it was the family home & generation after generation had the right to live there.
Now we have families quite capable of buying renting council homes why are they allowed to do this?
under homebid/council housing laws if your situation changes you must notify the council but they don't.
If you live in a two bedroomed house & your single & a council tenant no matter if you're earning or on welfare you should be re homed to a studio flat if you don't want that you have the option of buying or renting from the private sector.
I'm not the present council's greatest supporter but on this they are right.
When I was young it was the low paid working class who were given council homes & as most of them would never be in the position to be able to buy one they lived there until old age. Back then it was extremely hard to get a mortgage you had to sit & talk to the bank manager & have a large deposit which most working people never had. Being after the war large families were encouraged(even in 57) so meaning they could never afford to buy but at no time was my family told it was the family home & generation after generation had the right to live there. Now we have families quite capable of buying renting council homes why are they allowed to do this? under homebid/council housing laws if your situation changes you must notify the council but they don't. If you live in a two bedroomed house & your single & a council tenant no matter if you're earning or on welfare you should be re homed to a studio flat if you don't want that you have the option of buying or renting from the private sector. I'm not the present council's greatest supporter but on this they are right. loosehead
  • Score: 0

9:59pm Thu 17 Jul 14

concerned24 says...

Hastagger wrote:
Sob story of the week: - man in full time employment not entitled to cheap council house accommodation! Call the tabloids and hold the front page!

Rent a room in HMO you cheap gimp - were subsidising you to live there, surely there is a family, or a foreign criminal with a cat who deserves it more!
I know a few of these. One family bring in about 100,000 a year and have just been given one !!!!!!!
[quote][p][bold]Hastagger[/bold] wrote: Sob story of the week: - man in full time employment not entitled to cheap council house accommodation! Call the tabloids and hold the front page! Rent a room in HMO you cheap gimp - were subsidising you to live there, surely there is a family, or a foreign criminal with a cat who deserves it more![/p][/quote]I know a few of these. One family bring in about 100,000 a year and have just been given one !!!!!!! concerned24
  • Score: -3

11:58pm Thu 17 Jul 14

southy says...

IronLady2010 wrote:
southy wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
Linesman wrote:
southy wrote:
The council should house him in emergency housing up to 2 years before moving him into full time accomadation.
The problem here was he was a tennent but he was not named as rent payer, its an error loads of people make when looking after there parents in there old age they forget to get there name down on the rent book
You are WRONG this time southy.

His mother was the tenant not him. Although he was her son, technically he was her lodger.

No mention that he was looking after his mother in her old age, just moved in, as a matter of convenience for him, when his marriage broke up.

This must be a 2 bedroomed flat, and so would be suitable for a young couple with a child, or maybe two, who have been waiting their turn on the council waiting list.
Blimey, we agree ;-) x
He was living there he was a tenant but what he was not was the rentee tenant , he was registered living there but he was not on the rent book (you can check that out for your self on the electrol list to be on that list you have to be paying council tax). No the Echo don't mention that part about his mum, yes it has to be a 2 bedroom home because he was living there 22 years before getting married
He wasn't a Tenant of the Council, he was a Tenant of his Mother.

What's your point?
A ruling, now that council as evicted him they now should house him in emergency accomdation for 2 years by which at the end off he will be house in more suitable accomadation.
He was an tentant he was registered living there, but what he was not a rentee and that was his error not being a rentee.
I do know of this happening a number of times and the results have all ways been the same.
As long as he as not made him self homeless and going to court deems that he have not, the council must now offer him 2 year emergency accomadation
[quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Linesman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: The council should house him in emergency housing up to 2 years before moving him into full time accomadation. The problem here was he was a tennent but he was not named as rent payer, its an error loads of people make when looking after there parents in there old age they forget to get there name down on the rent book[/p][/quote]You are WRONG this time southy. His mother was the tenant not him. Although he was her son, technically he was her lodger. No mention that he was looking after his mother in her old age, just moved in, as a matter of convenience for him, when his marriage broke up. This must be a 2 bedroomed flat, and so would be suitable for a young couple with a child, or maybe two, who have been waiting their turn on the council waiting list.[/p][/quote]Blimey, we agree ;-) x[/p][/quote]He was living there he was a tenant but what he was not was the rentee tenant , he was registered living there but he was not on the rent book (you can check that out for your self on the electrol list to be on that list you have to be paying council tax). No the Echo don't mention that part about his mum, yes it has to be a 2 bedroom home because he was living there 22 years before getting married[/p][/quote]He wasn't a Tenant of the Council, he was a Tenant of his Mother. What's your point?[/p][/quote]A ruling, now that council as evicted him they now should house him in emergency accomdation for 2 years by which at the end off he will be house in more suitable accomadation. He was an tentant he was registered living there, but what he was not a rentee and that was his error not being a rentee. I do know of this happening a number of times and the results have all ways been the same. As long as he as not made him self homeless and going to court deems that he have not, the council must now offer him 2 year emergency accomadation southy
  • Score: 0

1:32am Fri 18 Jul 14

deepheat says...

I know some tenancies are only allowed one succession if wife or husband dies. But in this case he could have still taken over the tenancy legally while his mother was still alive and avoid all this just by notifying the council of his intention but only while his mother was alive and not after she passed away.

Or he could have purchased the property on behalf of his mother the tenant, at a huge discount, got a mortgage and he would have been a home owner now.

I could be wrong but if he didn't attempt either of the above to secure a home for himself maybe it was because his mum was claiming benefit (nothing wrong with that) which she was entitled to including housing benefit and he didn't see the point as he was living there rent free. This is not uncommon when a sole tenant who happens to be an elderly mother/father that have an only son/daughter living with them in social housing but do nothing to change over the tenancy when they are still alive.
I know some tenancies are only allowed one succession if wife or husband dies. But in this case he could have still taken over the tenancy legally while his mother was still alive and avoid all this just by notifying the council of his intention but only while his mother was alive and not after she passed away. Or he could have purchased the property on behalf of his mother the tenant, at a huge discount, got a mortgage and he would have been a home owner now. I could be wrong but if he didn't attempt either of the above to secure a home for himself maybe it was because his mum was claiming benefit (nothing wrong with that) which she was entitled to including housing benefit and he didn't see the point as he was living there rent free. This is not uncommon when a sole tenant who happens to be an elderly mother/father that have an only son/daughter living with them in social housing but do nothing to change over the tenancy when they are still alive. deepheat
  • Score: 5

11:53am Fri 18 Jul 14

sotonboy84 says...

IronLady2010 wrote:
pod wrote:
I was going to type a proper reply, but you will only twist it, so there is no point.
I would be ashamed to such a snob that I would look down my nose at others who have worked all their lives in low paid jobs, you know the type of job, carers, cleaners, the frontline jobs that most women have to take whilst bringing up their children. I could not have a decent job until children grow up, worked in pubs, shops, care homes to help pay the rent and bills.
I would start a decent job and hubby would come home and say 'our shifts are changing' so I would have to find another that fitted in with him.
When my parents bought their first house in the 60s most of the family stopped speaking to them cos 'people like us do not own houses'.
IronLady you have a very twisted view of the world and the people in it,
most of us do not want a free ride, we just want to bring up the next generation with a work ethic and morals, I make no apology for not being well off enough to own a property and I certainly do not have to answer to you, just to be sneered at.
I do make one apology, I did reply to you, could not stop once I got started, however I am going out now, cos I have a life. May I suggest that you find something better to do that turn up your pretty little nose at the rest of us peasants.
Ahhhhh so you have children knowing you can't afford them?
I can see both sides of the story.

Personally I feel people should take more responsibility and only have children once they're properly planned for and when a parent knows that they can provide for them. Having children should be a privilege and not a right and the responsibility of them should not be passed to others. There are a minority of people that have an attitude that they're owed something, a birth right entitles them to be housed and entitled to a taxpayer funded income for their family. It's the attitudes of these few that are wrong and not the benefits system and council housing system.

However, people often find themselves in a situation that they didn't intend to be in, such as be a single parent of a few children and unsuitable accommodation to live in. Nobody would plan to be in this situation so I think the answer is to have compassion and to try and educate people and future generations rather than snubbing them.
[quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pod[/bold] wrote: I was going to type a proper reply, but you will only twist it, so there is no point. I would be ashamed to such a snob that I would look down my nose at others who have worked all their lives in low paid jobs, you know the type of job, carers, cleaners, the frontline jobs that most women have to take whilst bringing up their children. I could not have a decent job until children grow up, worked in pubs, shops, care homes to help pay the rent and bills. I would start a decent job and hubby would come home and say 'our shifts are changing' so I would have to find another that fitted in with him. When my parents bought their first house in the 60s most of the family stopped speaking to them cos 'people like us do not own houses'. IronLady you have a very twisted view of the world and the people in it, most of us do not want a free ride, we just want to bring up the next generation with a work ethic and morals, I make no apology for not being well off enough to own a property and I certainly do not have to answer to you, just to be sneered at. I do make one apology, I did reply to you, could not stop once I got started, however I am going out now, cos I have a life. May I suggest that you find something better to do that turn up your pretty little nose at the rest of us peasants.[/p][/quote]Ahhhhh so you have children knowing you can't afford them?[/p][/quote]I can see both sides of the story. Personally I feel people should take more responsibility and only have children once they're properly planned for and when a parent knows that they can provide for them. Having children should be a privilege and not a right and the responsibility of them should not be passed to others. There are a minority of people that have an attitude that they're owed something, a birth right entitles them to be housed and entitled to a taxpayer funded income for their family. It's the attitudes of these few that are wrong and not the benefits system and council housing system. However, people often find themselves in a situation that they didn't intend to be in, such as be a single parent of a few children and unsuitable accommodation to live in. Nobody would plan to be in this situation so I think the answer is to have compassion and to try and educate people and future generations rather than snubbing them. sotonboy84
  • Score: 4

12:55pm Fri 18 Jul 14

southy says...

deepheat wrote:
I know some tenancies are only allowed one succession if wife or husband dies. But in this case he could have still taken over the tenancy legally while his mother was still alive and avoid all this just by notifying the council of his intention but only while his mother was alive and not after she passed away.

Or he could have purchased the property on behalf of his mother the tenant, at a huge discount, got a mortgage and he would have been a home owner now.

I could be wrong but if he didn't attempt either of the above to secure a home for himself maybe it was because his mum was claiming benefit (nothing wrong with that) which she was entitled to including housing benefit and he didn't see the point as he was living there rent free. This is not uncommon when a sole tenant who happens to be an elderly mother/father that have an only son/daughter living with them in social housing but do nothing to change over the tenancy when they are still alive.
Thank you for confirming what I been saying
[quote][p][bold]deepheat[/bold] wrote: I know some tenancies are only allowed one succession if wife or husband dies. But in this case he could have still taken over the tenancy legally while his mother was still alive and avoid all this just by notifying the council of his intention but only while his mother was alive and not after she passed away. Or he could have purchased the property on behalf of his mother the tenant, at a huge discount, got a mortgage and he would have been a home owner now. I could be wrong but if he didn't attempt either of the above to secure a home for himself maybe it was because his mum was claiming benefit (nothing wrong with that) which she was entitled to including housing benefit and he didn't see the point as he was living there rent free. This is not uncommon when a sole tenant who happens to be an elderly mother/father that have an only son/daughter living with them in social housing but do nothing to change over the tenancy when they are still alive.[/p][/quote]Thank you for confirming what I been saying southy
  • Score: -1

1:02pm Fri 18 Jul 14

PrincessPea says...

southy wrote:
Cyber__Fug wrote:
southy wrote:
The council should house him in emergency housing up to 2 years before moving him into full time accomadation.
The problem here was he was a tennent but he was not named as rent payer, its an error loads of people make when looking after there parents in there old age they forget to get there name down on the rent book
Why should the council house him ?

He works so therefore he can pay rent; he should not be a drain on the councils already under pressure resources.
Its Southampton council rules to do so, I not sure but it could be all councils have to do this, He as not deem him self Homeless it was a court order and councils have to act on this and put him in emergency accomadation for 2 years then move him onto full time accomadation.
It could be a case of the council going though the motions first. The Council homes are only under pressurer because of a ruling made by the Thatcher Government that stop Council from building stock up, the following Labour government made a ruling that Councils have to apply to government to build more council homes and its the government that dictates how many can be build and it is far less than what is needed like a few years ago over a 1,000 new council homes was needed the government told this council they could only build 150 for that year, when in reality it should be 1% above the council waiting list.
If the council houses him then he will be paying rent. Working at Tesco Nursling dept do you know how much an hour he gets or how many hours a week he works, I have an idea as my nephew works there.
He would only be assisted with housing if he were to have a 'priority need' which he doesn't appear to have. The council do not place people in temporary accommodation simply because they are homeless.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Cyber__Fug[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: The council should house him in emergency housing up to 2 years before moving him into full time accomadation. The problem here was he was a tennent but he was not named as rent payer, its an error loads of people make when looking after there parents in there old age they forget to get there name down on the rent book[/p][/quote]Why should the council house him ? He works so therefore he can pay rent; he should not be a drain on the councils already under pressure resources.[/p][/quote]Its Southampton council rules to do so, I not sure but it could be all councils have to do this, He as not deem him self Homeless it was a court order and councils have to act on this and put him in emergency accomadation for 2 years then move him onto full time accomadation. It could be a case of the council going though the motions first. The Council homes are only under pressurer because of a ruling made by the Thatcher Government that stop Council from building stock up, the following Labour government made a ruling that Councils have to apply to government to build more council homes and its the government that dictates how many can be build and it is far less than what is needed like a few years ago over a 1,000 new council homes was needed the government told this council they could only build 150 for that year, when in reality it should be 1% above the council waiting list. If the council houses him then he will be paying rent. Working at Tesco Nursling dept do you know how much an hour he gets or how many hours a week he works, I have an idea as my nephew works there.[/p][/quote]He would only be assisted with housing if he were to have a 'priority need' which he doesn't appear to have. The council do not place people in temporary accommodation simply because they are homeless. PrincessPea
  • Score: 0

1:04pm Fri 18 Jul 14

PrincessPea says...

mickey01 wrote:
maybe if he was a Pole , Romanian, Muslim, things would be different
You clearly know nothing about the housing allocations system.
[quote][p][bold]mickey01[/bold] wrote: maybe if he was a Pole , Romanian, Muslim, things would be different[/p][/quote]You clearly know nothing about the housing allocations system. PrincessPea
  • Score: 2

1:15pm Fri 18 Jul 14

PrincessPea says...

loosehead wrote:
If a person is a refugee/asylum seeker they can apply for council accommodation & will be given maximum points to bid with if I'm wrong on this please some one tell me the format the housing department works by PLEASE!
Southy this guy wasn't a legitimate tenant he was a squatter did his mother inform the council he was living there? did they pay full council tax or single persons tax?
The council doesn't have to house Squatters & as he has made no attempt to find alternative accommodation in the private sector he has made himself homeless.
Asylum seekers have no right to housing if they have no recourse to public funds, the only way they get helped with housing is through social services until the apply to the home office and get their status of leave to remain etc.
[quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: If a person is a refugee/asylum seeker they can apply for council accommodation & will be given maximum points to bid with if I'm wrong on this please some one tell me the format the housing department works by PLEASE! Southy this guy wasn't a legitimate tenant he was a squatter did his mother inform the council he was living there? did they pay full council tax or single persons tax? The council doesn't have to house Squatters & as he has made no attempt to find alternative accommodation in the private sector he has made himself homeless.[/p][/quote]Asylum seekers have no right to housing if they have no recourse to public funds, the only way they get helped with housing is through social services until the apply to the home office and get their status of leave to remain etc. PrincessPea
  • Score: 0

1:21pm Fri 18 Jul 14

sarfhamton says...

IronLady2010 wrote:
I find it shameful that people are proud to live in a Council House personally.

What should be an emergency housing situation has got out of control.

More needs to be done to encourage people to aspire to be better.
it is not emergency housing, it was designed to lift people out of the slums after the war. It still has a vital role as many working people cannot afford private rent or buy
[quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: I find it shameful that people are proud to live in a Council House personally. What should be an emergency housing situation has got out of control. More needs to be done to encourage people to aspire to be better.[/p][/quote]it is not emergency housing, it was designed to lift people out of the slums after the war. It still has a vital role as many working people cannot afford private rent or buy sarfhamton
  • Score: 0

1:24pm Fri 18 Jul 14

IronLady2010 says...

sotonboy84 wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
pod wrote:
I was going to type a proper reply, but you will only twist it, so there is no point.
I would be ashamed to such a snob that I would look down my nose at others who have worked all their lives in low paid jobs, you know the type of job, carers, cleaners, the frontline jobs that most women have to take whilst bringing up their children. I could not have a decent job until children grow up, worked in pubs, shops, care homes to help pay the rent and bills.
I would start a decent job and hubby would come home and say 'our shifts are changing' so I would have to find another that fitted in with him.
When my parents bought their first house in the 60s most of the family stopped speaking to them cos 'people like us do not own houses'.
IronLady you have a very twisted view of the world and the people in it,
most of us do not want a free ride, we just want to bring up the next generation with a work ethic and morals, I make no apology for not being well off enough to own a property and I certainly do not have to answer to you, just to be sneered at.
I do make one apology, I did reply to you, could not stop once I got started, however I am going out now, cos I have a life. May I suggest that you find something better to do that turn up your pretty little nose at the rest of us peasants.
Ahhhhh so you have children knowing you can't afford them?
I can see both sides of the story.

Personally I feel people should take more responsibility and only have children once they're properly planned for and when a parent knows that they can provide for them. Having children should be a privilege and not a right and the responsibility of them should not be passed to others. There are a minority of people that have an attitude that they're owed something, a birth right entitles them to be housed and entitled to a taxpayer funded income for their family. It's the attitudes of these few that are wrong and not the benefits system and council housing system.

However, people often find themselves in a situation that they didn't intend to be in, such as be a single parent of a few children and unsuitable accommodation to live in. Nobody would plan to be in this situation so I think the answer is to have compassion and to try and educate people and future generations rather than snubbing them.
You put it far better than me.

I just get frustrated when people simply rely on Council Housing.

Don't get me wrong, I feel POD has done what they felt was best at the time, but to be fair has the best decision been made. They are living a cramped life in a house not suited to them all when all they need to do is go and rent a private let, so at least the children have some space rather than being cooped up waiting for a Council House to come free.

I'm not looking down my nose at anybody, because no-one is forcing people to be in any situation. Even those who work full time can have help toward rent and Council Tax.

I can't see the reliance on a Council House.
[quote][p][bold]sotonboy84[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pod[/bold] wrote: I was going to type a proper reply, but you will only twist it, so there is no point. I would be ashamed to such a snob that I would look down my nose at others who have worked all their lives in low paid jobs, you know the type of job, carers, cleaners, the frontline jobs that most women have to take whilst bringing up their children. I could not have a decent job until children grow up, worked in pubs, shops, care homes to help pay the rent and bills. I would start a decent job and hubby would come home and say 'our shifts are changing' so I would have to find another that fitted in with him. When my parents bought their first house in the 60s most of the family stopped speaking to them cos 'people like us do not own houses'. IronLady you have a very twisted view of the world and the people in it, most of us do not want a free ride, we just want to bring up the next generation with a work ethic and morals, I make no apology for not being well off enough to own a property and I certainly do not have to answer to you, just to be sneered at. I do make one apology, I did reply to you, could not stop once I got started, however I am going out now, cos I have a life. May I suggest that you find something better to do that turn up your pretty little nose at the rest of us peasants.[/p][/quote]Ahhhhh so you have children knowing you can't afford them?[/p][/quote]I can see both sides of the story. Personally I feel people should take more responsibility and only have children once they're properly planned for and when a parent knows that they can provide for them. Having children should be a privilege and not a right and the responsibility of them should not be passed to others. There are a minority of people that have an attitude that they're owed something, a birth right entitles them to be housed and entitled to a taxpayer funded income for their family. It's the attitudes of these few that are wrong and not the benefits system and council housing system. However, people often find themselves in a situation that they didn't intend to be in, such as be a single parent of a few children and unsuitable accommodation to live in. Nobody would plan to be in this situation so I think the answer is to have compassion and to try and educate people and future generations rather than snubbing them.[/p][/quote]You put it far better than me. I just get frustrated when people simply rely on Council Housing. Don't get me wrong, I feel POD has done what they felt was best at the time, but to be fair has the best decision been made. They are living a cramped life in a house not suited to them all when all they need to do is go and rent a private let, so at least the children have some space rather than being cooped up waiting for a Council House to come free. I'm not looking down my nose at anybody, because no-one is forcing people to be in any situation. Even those who work full time can have help toward rent and Council Tax. I can't see the reliance on a Council House. IronLady2010
  • Score: 0

1:33pm Fri 18 Jul 14

southy says...

PrincessPea wrote:
southy wrote:
Cyber__Fug wrote:
southy wrote:
The council should house him in emergency housing up to 2 years before moving him into full time accomadation.
The problem here was he was a tennent but he was not named as rent payer, its an error loads of people make when looking after there parents in there old age they forget to get there name down on the rent book
Why should the council house him ?

He works so therefore he can pay rent; he should not be a drain on the councils already under pressure resources.
Its Southampton council rules to do so, I not sure but it could be all councils have to do this, He as not deem him self Homeless it was a court order and councils have to act on this and put him in emergency accomadation for 2 years then move him onto full time accomadation.
It could be a case of the council going though the motions first. The Council homes are only under pressurer because of a ruling made by the Thatcher Government that stop Council from building stock up, the following Labour government made a ruling that Councils have to apply to government to build more council homes and its the government that dictates how many can be build and it is far less than what is needed like a few years ago over a 1,000 new council homes was needed the government told this council they could only build 150 for that year, when in reality it should be 1% above the council waiting list.
If the council houses him then he will be paying rent. Working at Tesco Nursling dept do you know how much an hour he gets or how many hours a week he works, I have an idea as my nephew works there.
He would only be assisted with housing if he were to have a 'priority need' which he doesn't appear to have. The council do not place people in temporary accommodation simply because they are homeless.
They do if they don't make them selfs Homeless, they will not help those who make them selfs homeless
[quote][p][bold]PrincessPea[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Cyber__Fug[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: The council should house him in emergency housing up to 2 years before moving him into full time accomadation. The problem here was he was a tennent but he was not named as rent payer, its an error loads of people make when looking after there parents in there old age they forget to get there name down on the rent book[/p][/quote]Why should the council house him ? He works so therefore he can pay rent; he should not be a drain on the councils already under pressure resources.[/p][/quote]Its Southampton council rules to do so, I not sure but it could be all councils have to do this, He as not deem him self Homeless it was a court order and councils have to act on this and put him in emergency accomadation for 2 years then move him onto full time accomadation. It could be a case of the council going though the motions first. The Council homes are only under pressurer because of a ruling made by the Thatcher Government that stop Council from building stock up, the following Labour government made a ruling that Councils have to apply to government to build more council homes and its the government that dictates how many can be build and it is far less than what is needed like a few years ago over a 1,000 new council homes was needed the government told this council they could only build 150 for that year, when in reality it should be 1% above the council waiting list. If the council houses him then he will be paying rent. Working at Tesco Nursling dept do you know how much an hour he gets or how many hours a week he works, I have an idea as my nephew works there.[/p][/quote]He would only be assisted with housing if he were to have a 'priority need' which he doesn't appear to have. The council do not place people in temporary accommodation simply because they are homeless.[/p][/quote]They do if they don't make them selfs Homeless, they will not help those who make them selfs homeless southy
  • Score: -1

5:21pm Fri 18 Jul 14

loosehead says...

PrincessPea wrote:
loosehead wrote:
If a person is a refugee/asylum seeker they can apply for council accommodation & will be given maximum points to bid with if I'm wrong on this please some one tell me the format the housing department works by PLEASE!
Southy this guy wasn't a legitimate tenant he was a squatter did his mother inform the council he was living there? did they pay full council tax or single persons tax?
The council doesn't have to house Squatters & as he has made no attempt to find alternative accommodation in the private sector he has made himself homeless.
Asylum seekers have no right to housing if they have no recourse to public funds, the only way they get helped with housing is through social services until the apply to the home office and get their status of leave to remain etc.
I meant those who've already been given permission to stay but thank you.
[quote][p][bold]PrincessPea[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: If a person is a refugee/asylum seeker they can apply for council accommodation & will be given maximum points to bid with if I'm wrong on this please some one tell me the format the housing department works by PLEASE! Southy this guy wasn't a legitimate tenant he was a squatter did his mother inform the council he was living there? did they pay full council tax or single persons tax? The council doesn't have to house Squatters & as he has made no attempt to find alternative accommodation in the private sector he has made himself homeless.[/p][/quote]Asylum seekers have no right to housing if they have no recourse to public funds, the only way they get helped with housing is through social services until the apply to the home office and get their status of leave to remain etc.[/p][/quote]I meant those who've already been given permission to stay but thank you. loosehead
  • Score: 0

10:11pm Fri 18 Jul 14

PrincessPea says...

southy wrote:
PrincessPea wrote:
southy wrote:
Cyber__Fug wrote:
southy wrote:
The council should house him in emergency housing up to 2 years before moving him into full time accomadation.
The problem here was he was a tennent but he was not named as rent payer, its an error loads of people make when looking after there parents in there old age they forget to get there name down on the rent book
Why should the council house him ?

He works so therefore he can pay rent; he should not be a drain on the councils already under pressure resources.
Its Southampton council rules to do so, I not sure but it could be all councils have to do this, He as not deem him self Homeless it was a court order and councils have to act on this and put him in emergency accomadation for 2 years then move him onto full time accomadation.
It could be a case of the council going though the motions first. The Council homes are only under pressurer because of a ruling made by the Thatcher Government that stop Council from building stock up, the following Labour government made a ruling that Councils have to apply to government to build more council homes and its the government that dictates how many can be build and it is far less than what is needed like a few years ago over a 1,000 new council homes was needed the government told this council they could only build 150 for that year, when in reality it should be 1% above the council waiting list.
If the council houses him then he will be paying rent. Working at Tesco Nursling dept do you know how much an hour he gets or how many hours a week he works, I have an idea as my nephew works there.
He would only be assisted with housing if he were to have a 'priority need' which he doesn't appear to have. The council do not place people in temporary accommodation simply because they are homeless.
They do if they don't make them selfs Homeless, they will not help those who make them selfs homeless
Again only if they have a priority need. Single people without children or serious medical conditions would not be assisted with temporary accommodation
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]PrincessPea[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Cyber__Fug[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: The council should house him in emergency housing up to 2 years before moving him into full time accomadation. The problem here was he was a tennent but he was not named as rent payer, its an error loads of people make when looking after there parents in there old age they forget to get there name down on the rent book[/p][/quote]Why should the council house him ? He works so therefore he can pay rent; he should not be a drain on the councils already under pressure resources.[/p][/quote]Its Southampton council rules to do so, I not sure but it could be all councils have to do this, He as not deem him self Homeless it was a court order and councils have to act on this and put him in emergency accomadation for 2 years then move him onto full time accomadation. It could be a case of the council going though the motions first. The Council homes are only under pressurer because of a ruling made by the Thatcher Government that stop Council from building stock up, the following Labour government made a ruling that Councils have to apply to government to build more council homes and its the government that dictates how many can be build and it is far less than what is needed like a few years ago over a 1,000 new council homes was needed the government told this council they could only build 150 for that year, when in reality it should be 1% above the council waiting list. If the council houses him then he will be paying rent. Working at Tesco Nursling dept do you know how much an hour he gets or how many hours a week he works, I have an idea as my nephew works there.[/p][/quote]He would only be assisted with housing if he were to have a 'priority need' which he doesn't appear to have. The council do not place people in temporary accommodation simply because they are homeless.[/p][/quote]They do if they don't make them selfs Homeless, they will not help those who make them selfs homeless[/p][/quote]Again only if they have a priority need. Single people without children or serious medical conditions would not be assisted with temporary accommodation PrincessPea
  • Score: 0

9:57am Sat 19 Jul 14

Charlie Bucket says...

emma38 wrote:
The council are quick enough to put all theses coming from over seas in houses but not very quick at looking after our own British born and bread people . he has lived in that flat most of his life. he works so he is not going to be claiming housing benefit . so why should he move ? STICK TO YOUR GUNS. and stay in that flat or your going to made homeless and then people will be moaning oh look at him sleeping ruff. you have my backing fight it don't lose it !!!
bread people? These sound terrifying.
[quote][p][bold]emma38[/bold] wrote: The council are quick enough to put all theses coming from over seas in houses but not very quick at looking after our own British born and bread people . he has lived in that flat most of his life. he works so he is not going to be claiming housing benefit . so why should he move ? STICK TO YOUR GUNS. and stay in that flat or your going to made homeless and then people will be moaning oh look at him sleeping ruff. you have my backing fight it don't lose it !!![/p][/quote]bread people? These sound terrifying. Charlie Bucket
  • Score: 1

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree