Fw: Condem UK Housing Policy = Social Cleansing

[david bangs]

Below is a reply from the ex-secretary of Brighton DCH to my query about this issue of the social housing rent rise to the 80%-of-market-rents ceiling

(I've deleted her/his name)

Dave Bangs


----- Original Message ----- 
From: 
To: Dave 
Sent: Monday, September 24, 2012 10:12 AM
Subject: RE: Condem UK Housing Policy = Social Cleansing


I don't think it's spelt out anywhere, for obvious reasons, but for example when you read this sort of thing it's clear where it's all heading.


'Raising rents for better-off tenants and converting social homes to shared ownership could generate £5.6 billion a year to build new affordable homes, according to a report due to be published next week.

Under the proposed new model social landlords would raise rents for 5 per cent of better off, non-benefit dependent tenants as properties become void.
The social equity fund was outlined in London & Quadrant and Pricewaterhouse Coopers’ report, The numbers game: increasing housing supply and funding in hard times, seen exclusively by Inside Housing ahead of its launch on Monday. 
Rents would be increased by the maximum retail price index plus 0.5 per cent plus £2 a week each year until they reach average affordable rent level. Average L&Q affordable rents are around 65 per cent of market rent.' (from Inside Housing 21/12/9)
(I think that should say currently  65%.  The average is already 68 I read somewhere, and of course it'll be a slippery slope once it gets going and 'affordable' rents are much more common.)


Logically also, if council rents are still being raised by more than inflation to equate them with housing association rents, (mine certainly still is, big time) and both sectors rent averages are increasing because of the imput of (in)affordable rents to the stats to calculate that average, how else will my rent ever catch up to that average unless the process is allowed to continue?  I looked at the material that the council send to me justifying the rent hike every year (they call it rent re-restructuring) and there's nothing to suggest there's any limit on the process at all! 



 



> From: dave.bangs at virgin.net
> To: 
> Subject: Fw: Condem UK Housing Policy = Social Cleansing
> Date: Sun, 23 Sep 2012 20:51:00 +0100
> 
> Who's right ?
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "david bangs" <dave.bangs at virgin.net>
> To: "marksimonbrown" <mark at tlio.org.uk>
> Sent: Sunday, September 23, 2012 8:50 PM
> Subject: Re: Condem UK Housing Policy = Social Cleansing
> 
> 
> > That's not the case, Mark. All council and HA rents are earmarked to go up 
> > to 80% of market rents, I think,
> > Dave
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message ----- 
> > From: "marksimonbrown" <mark at tlio.org.uk>
> > To: "david bangs" <dave.bangs at virgin.net>
> > Sent: Sunday, September 23, 2012 3:43 PM
> > Subject: Re: Condem UK Housing Policy = Social Cleansing
> >
> >
> > When I said "Just came across the following (copied below). New social 
> > housing tenants are to pay 80% of 'market rates under the new 80% 
> > affordable housing scheme - which will make rents unaffordable to 
> > lower-income families.", I didn't mean I just came across the info the the 
> > new 80% affordable housing scheme (which I already knew about, I just 
> > meant I just came across the interesting commentary of someone from Mum's 
> > net which highlights the issues, where she cites experiences on her own 
> > council estate which is being knocked down.
> >
> > Interesting, she seems to think that she will be forced to pay the 80% 
> > despite the fact that the 80% rate is only meant to be charged to 'new 
> > social housing tenants. I think she is unduelly fearful for her own 
> > situation in that she was already a tenant in social housing. There will 
> > now be two rent levels charged by housing providers: social rent, and 
> > affordable rent.
> >
> > Dave is right to say that rents in social housing have been going 
> > incrementally up over years, and a friend of mine who once lived in a 
> > housing association once told me that when the estate transferred over to 
> > the private sector from council ownership, in the small print, it stated 
> > that rent levels would not increase above inflation each year for only a 
> > specified period of time (I think 10 years in this case), and thereafter, 
> > the cost of renovations/renewal of housing stock would have to be taken 
> > into consideration in future annual rent settlements. Irrespective of 
> > this, that estate's resident's service charges went up within that first 
> > ten year period
> >
> > M
> >
> >
> > --- In Diggers350 at yahoogroups.com, "david bangs" <dave.bangs at ...> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> On 2012-09-22 10:37, mark at ... wrote:
> >> > Just came across the following (copied below).new 80% affordable
> >> > housing scheme - which will make rents unaffordable to lower-income
> >> > families.
> >>
> >>
> >> Good stuff...However, this is nothing new. Local councils have been 
> >> obliged to move their rents towards a target of 80% of market rents for a 
> >> decade or more now...and do so by a series of annual increments.
> >>
> >> If TLIO's core group had implemented the vote (made by acclaim) of last 
> >> October's Gathering to affiliate to Defend Council Housing (DCH) they 
> >> might have more detailed knowledge of housing issues by now...
> >>
> >> Dave Bangs
> >>
> >>
> >> ----- Original Message ----- 
> >> From: Ram Selva
> >> To: marksimonbrown
> >> Cc: diggers350 at yahoogroups.com ; thelandisours at yahoogroups.com
> >> Sent: Saturday, September 22, 2012 4:29 PM
> >> Subject: [Diggers350] Re: [TheLandIsOurs] Condem UK Housing Policy = 
> >> Social Cleansing
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 2012-09-22 10:37, mark at ... wrote:
> >> > Just came across the following (copied below).new 80% affordable
> >> > housing scheme - which will make rents unaffordable to lower-income
> >> > families. Recall that Policy Exchange, an influential think tank set 
> >> New social housing
> >> > tenants are to pay 80% of 'market rates under the
> >> > up by Conservative MP Nick Boles (now Planning Minister) - an ally of
> >> > prime minister David Cameron - said in its report 'Ending Expensive
> >> > Social Tenancies' the UK could afford to build 170,000 social homes a
> >> > year by putting the highest-value properties on the market when they
> >> > become vacant.
> >>
> >> This is was part of the Localism Act as it was drafted and debated.
> >> FoE was the only group I noticed that tried to do something about
> >> Localism Act going through parlianment without being challenged but as
> >> we can all imagine FoE and Soical Housing are miles apart not to say
> >> they were successful in enacting any change to the Bill as it went
> >> through the mill.
> >>
> >> Mark, as you posted then the Mayor of London being able to overule any
> >> London Borough Council over this rent manipulation was largely sneaked
> >> in during the Olympics.
> >>
> >> 80% of Market rate probably only affects people in inner London most
> >> adversely but if there are any other instances of social cleansing due
> >> to this rule I'd like to know more.
> >>
> >> > Together with the capping of benefits at £500 a week,
> >> > it is a policy which will have the effect of pushing the lower income
> >> > households out of wealthy areas, which we have known was happening
> >> > and
> >> > in the pipeline 2 years ago.
> >>
> >> All of Localism Act is being piloted in few selected places and party
> >> political freaks have been set up on the case some time prior to the
> >> Localism Bill becoming an Act.
> >>
> >> I am un/fortunate to observe few pilots closely so if anyone needs
> >> feedback please contact me directly.
> >>
> >> (May I suggest that we discuss this on one particular list than cross
> >> post to TLIO and D350 ... I prefer D350 as its been full of related
> >> content. Its also good to see Dave Bangs active on the D350 list)
> >>
> >> Ram
> >>
> >
> > 
> 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mailman.gn.apc.org/mailman/private/diggers350/attachments/20120924/9bd43d6e/attachment.html>