Today I walked past a local estate agents & noticed an advertisement for a 3 bedroom maisonette to let, for a rent of £1150 per month; this maisonette would absolutely have been previously owned by the council, as it is on a large council estate, where all the properties were council-owned when it was built in the 1950s/60s. I would feel very bitter if I was living there & paying that much rent, when neighbours who are council tenants would be paying about half that amount - and have better tenure security!
Would you really want to spend £1,150 a month to rent a flat on a council estate in inner London?
You could rent a house for that in outer London - and your life insurance premium would be lower too!:D
You don't have to live in zone 1 to live in London - 90% of Londoners can't afford to live in Camden.
Well here is a house in a place called Chadwell Heath in outer London. 3 bedrooms with a garden and garage and less than 5 mins walk to an overground station soon to be on Crossrail with fast links to the west end/City.
Well here is a house in a place called Chadwell Heath in outer London. 3 bedrooms with a garden and garage and less than 5 mins walk to an overground station soon to be on Crossrail with fast links to the west end/City.
Shameless - it's social cleansing of the poor and working poor and the result will be broken up social networks and families and children being taken away from their friends and moved as places that they don't know as well as having their schooling interrupted. The root cause is lack of affordable and social housing and I am sick of this and previous governments not doing anything about that issue.
London Mayor Boris Johnson has said he will not accept "Kosovo-style social cleansing" of the capital due to a government cap on housing benefits. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-11643440
They've already moved 5000 miles from their families. What difference would another 50 miles make?
Roughly £400 per person. But how many homes have 3 wage earners, let alone 3 on wages where £400 per month is not a significant proportion of their post tax income? If their gross income was around £60,000 then it would mean the rent is roughly one-third of their net income
Roughly £400 per person. But how many homes have 3 wage earners, let alone 3 on wages where £400 per month is not a significant proportion of their post tax income? If their gross income was around £60,000 then it would mean the rent is roughly one-third of their net income
These types of properties you will predominantly see them being rented with flat shares of young professionals. I currently live in a flat share with two accountants, and every flat I saw most of them were in ex council homes. Landlords make an absolutely fortune by charging at least £500 a room.
You mean a middle-aged couple & a grown-up son/daughter? What about an averagely paid man, his wife (who is a housewife/mother) & their two young children - how the hell would they be able to afford to live there?
These types of properties you will predominantly see them being rented with flat shares of young professionals. I currently live in a flat share with two accountants, and every flat I saw most of them were in ex council homes. Landlords make an absolutely fortune by charging at least £500 a room.
I know the area, & I can practically guarantee you that young professionals would not live there, it's the kind of place where the women are grannies before they're 40.
Like I said before are governments even allowed to relocate people on this scale (social cleansing) because of international laws on human rights etc just seems wrong?
Comments
Would you really want to spend £1,150 a month to rent a flat on a council estate in inner London?
You could rent a house for that in outer London - and your life insurance premium would be lower too!:D
You don't have to live in zone 1 to live in London - 90% of Londoners can't afford to live in Camden.
I house shared for donkeys years when working & living in London it was only when I moved out of London that I could afford a decent place of my own
This maisonette is in outer London.
Well here is a house in a place called Chadwell Heath in outer London. 3 bedrooms with a garden and garage and less than 5 mins walk to an overground station soon to be on Crossrail with fast links to the west end/City.
And all for £1,150 a month
http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-to-rent/property-38644265.html
and another one in (quite posh!) Gidea Park
http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-to-rent/property-37716652.html
Plenty of similar houses too in outer London within easy commuting distance - so no need to live in Camden or on a council estate or Luton!
£1150 pcm is a hell of a lot of money, it comes to £13 800 pa & that is over half the average salary.
They've already moved 5000 miles from their families. What difference would another 50 miles make?
Not if the rent is split between three earners.
Roughly £400 per person. But how many homes have 3 wage earners, let alone 3 on wages where £400 per month is not a significant proportion of their post tax income? If their gross income was around £60,000 then it would mean the rent is roughly one-third of their net income
Are governments even allowed to do social cleansing on this scale, international laws on human rights that sort of thing?
These types of properties you will predominantly see them being rented with flat shares of young professionals. I currently live in a flat share with two accountants, and every flat I saw most of them were in ex council homes. Landlords make an absolutely fortune by charging at least £500 a room.
You mean a middle-aged couple & a grown-up son/daughter? What about an averagely paid man, his wife (who is a housewife/mother) & their two young children - how the hell would they be able to afford to live there?
I know the area, & I can practically guarantee you that young professionals would not live there, it's the kind of place where the women are grannies before they're 40.