Options

How to get a council house

1235725

Comments

  • Options
    Fairyprincess0Fairyprincess0 Posts: 30,087
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Lkjh wrote: »
    So what percentage of single mothers are single because the fathers died in Iraq?

    Wikipedia says 179.

    Doesn't mean she's not one of them. What if he did in a car crash, instead.
  • Options
    koantemplationkoantemplation Posts: 101,293
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭✭
    Condoms also exist or is it too much trouble to stick one on before sex?

    Or to have children with someone you love and know you are not going to leave in a year or two?
  • Options
    TardisSteveTardisSteve Posts: 8,077
    Forum Member
    I do feel for the fella - if you've got no kids, you've got no chance of a home.

    you may have a point there
  • Options
    ianradioianianradioian Posts: 74,941
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Service partners must recieve some sort of mod pension for them and the kids if their partner is killed I action?
  • Options
    TardisSteveTardisSteve Posts: 8,077
    Forum Member
    feel sorry for ray, no one deserves to be homeless
  • Options
    suesuesuesuesuesue Posts: 16,264
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    When this (or a similar programme about Tower Hamlets) was on before, they said they wouldn't put children in flats other than ground of lower floors. But they've shown the women on this with kids higher floors. Have they changed policy? Didn't realise councils were subsidising benefit cap until they can rehouse people. Wonder what the council tax payers of TH feel about that? Looks like the private landlords and central government are the winners at the expense of the rest.
  • Options
    koantemplationkoantemplation Posts: 101,293
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭✭
    feel sorry for ray, no one deserves to be homeless

    Thankfully he didn't end up homeless, they moved him to Northampton.
  • Options
    LkjhLkjh Posts: 333
    Forum Member
    Doesn't mean she's not one of them. What if he did in a car crash, instead.

    5% are widowed

    http://www.gingerbread.org.uk/content/365/Statistics
  • Options
    TardisSteveTardisSteve Posts: 8,077
    Forum Member
    as ray said thats how governments treat human citizens, all governments

    ps i have recorded this and am about 10 mins behind
    Thankfully he didn't end up homeless, they moved him to Northampton.

    am pleased to hear it
  • Options
    nomad2kingnomad2king Posts: 8,415
    Forum Member
    Condoms also exist or is it too much trouble to stick one on before sex?
    Women have options before and after.
  • Options
    TardisSteveTardisSteve Posts: 8,077
    Forum Member
    the present is bleak

    social cleansing is in effect
  • Options
    [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 806
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    The Fathers probably are paying csa; is automatic via the tax office if on paye, or at 6/ week via benefit office, but the parent with care doesn't recieve it if they are on benefits- its reduced off their benefit.

    That isn't true anymore. The maintenance is no longer taken into account with single parent benefits.
  • Options
    LkjhLkjh Posts: 333
    Forum Member
    the present is bleak

    social cleansing is in effect

    the present is great.

    benefits being cut for the workshy.
  • Options
    ntscuserntscuser Posts: 8,247
    Forum Member
    suesuesue wrote: »
    When this (or a similar programme about Tower Hamlets) was on before, they said they wouldn't put children in flats other than ground of lower floors. But they've shown the women on this with kids higher floors. Have they changed policy?

    It was a Circle Housing Association property rather than a council property.
    suesuesue wrote: »
    Didn't realise councils were subsidising benefit cap until they can rehouse people.

    Only for a limited period usually and the money comes from central government.

    As explained in the programme Lacey was a lucky exception in being offered temporary accommodation until a council property becomes available. It doesn't happen very often.
  • Options
    ntscuserntscuser Posts: 8,247
    Forum Member
    welwynrose wrote: »
    Welcome to the real world love £155 a week is nothing in London

    I presume you mean the 'teaching assistant' who couldn't spell "to expensive" correctly?

    That's exactly what I thought too. Who does have anything left over after paying the rent and bills each month?
  • Options
    TardisSteveTardisSteve Posts: 8,077
    Forum Member
    Lkjh wrote: »
    the present is great.

    benefits being cut for the workshy.

    except it isnt just the workshy being affected by the con-dems war on benefits, its the genuine cases aswell
  • Options
    koantemplationkoantemplation Posts: 101,293
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭✭
    except it isnt just the workshy being affected by the con-dems war on benefits, its the genuine cases aswell

    The coalition doesn't care about collateral damage in the war on benefits.

    If a few innocent victims lose out but they get the majority of benefit claimants then all the better.
  • Options
    daisydeedaisydee Posts: 39,651
    Forum Member
    nomad2king wrote: »
    Why should the fathers be expected to pay for something they probably had no say in? Anyone would think that female contraception, the morning after pill, abortion or adoption didn't exist.

    ........... or durex or self restraint........ it takes 2 to make a baby and 2 to be responsible for it.
  • Options
    nomad2kingnomad2king Posts: 8,415
    Forum Member
    daisydee wrote: »
    ........... or durex or self restraint........ it takes 2 to make a baby and 2 to be responsible for it.
    As I keep point out, women have options after the act AND before. Why are they NEVER held accountable or responsible.
  • Options
    daisydeedaisydee Posts: 39,651
    Forum Member
    nomad2king wrote: »
    As I keep point out, women have options after the act AND before. Why are they NEVER held accountable or responsible.

    They are ALWAYS held accountable - they are the ones who end up bringing them up.
  • Options
    tghe-retfordtghe-retford Posts: 26,449
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Lkjh wrote: »
    the present is great.

    benefits being cut for the workshy.
    Funny then how the vast majority of new housing benefit claimants are IN WORK.

    I fear this programme alongside Benefits Street, the BBC Panorama special and others will have negative effects for Labour and the Tories come their 2015 manifestos. Any party which promises the abolition of working age benefits will get a ton of votes. The ones which also add immigration into the mix also fuels xenophobia, racism and helps grow support for parties and groups to the far right. :(

    I wonder how long it will be before the consistent incitement to hatred against welfare recipients will result in someone doing something stupid and real harm is made against a benefit claimants and it makes the news? Anyone advocating the abolition of working age benefits had better hope they can afford private security when society collapses.
  • Options
    MuzeMuze Posts: 2,225
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    You get council property if you NEED one.

    I got my flat and was in band A because I was deemed vulnerable, before that I was given suitably emergency accommodation when necessary.

    If you are fit and healthy and choose to have kids instead of work, then I have little sympathy.

    I do think think there is a hint of social cleansing in the benefits cap, get the poor out of London.

    But ultimately, if you want a home, a place be safe, to sleep, it's not that important where it is.
    I'd ask some of the picky ones to spend a few weeks on the street before dismissing a 'less thatn perfect' home :(
  • Options
    StykerStyker Posts: 49,882
    Forum Member
    Programmes like this just show what sell outs successive Governments have been on housing in general and when it comes to not building council homes!

    Governments fall at the feet of the "have's" in housing. After giving them council houses with massive discounts they have done everything to keep the "have's" house prices high while expecting the poorest people to either come up with rent way beyond what they earn or expect them to go right down to the wire in becoming homeless unintentionally before they do anything for them!

    If the useless Governments that get into power are ok with house prices to be as expensive as they are, they should have wages high enough for people to be able to pay these prices as well as all their other bills, disposable income too or pay the housing benefit so people can afford a place or the best option would be to build the flaming council homes needed again!!!!! >:(
  • Options
    bspacebspace Posts: 14,303
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    what a crap programme

    a whole hour and they didn't tell us how to get one :(
  • Options
    conceptasconceptas Posts: 739
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    I'd love to be able to 'live' on 300 quid a month....

    As would I, I live on £5 a day, no sky, no mobile phone, no alcohol, no ****, no lottery.
    Would be nice to go out and get a take-away now and again instead of eating in all the time.
    And another sleepless night worrying about the interrogation I'm going to get today at gestapo h.q. for my benefits.. it's not just a struggle in London.
Sign In or Register to comment.