Shelter reveals that social rents are 60% cheaper than in the PRS

Reply to the comment left by DAMIEN RAFFERTY at 03/06/2024 - 12:25
So is that flat that your dad is in social housing or PRS?

Reply to the comment left by Beaver at 03/06/2024 - 12:02I remember about 18 years ago a council tenant where I have an ex local 2 bed flat was complaining because when she enquired about purchasing her flat (which was a two bed or possible a three bed) Hammersmith & Fulham council wanted £70,000
My 2 bed flat was valued around the same time at Circa £150,000
She thought that it was very expensive.
These people do not live in the real world!

Reply to the comment left by Beaver at 03/06/2024 - 12:27
My Dad lives in a housing association property
24 hour call system

I have just checked the local Social Housing website for 3-bed properties. There are only 5 properties available to bid on within a 10 mile radius of my hometown. They range in price from £485 to £710 per calendar month.
The LHA rate for the area is £550.
I also have a 4 bedroom property let at £575. There is only one similar property within a 50 mile radius of my hometown. It is available at £540 per month but is in an area where good people don’t want to live.
I charge my tenants up to £500 per month for a 3 bed property and for that they get carpets, curtains, EICR, EPC Rated properties, gas safety checks.
When I review the rents next time, maybe I should make sure my rents are 2.5 times the SH rents for similar properties. That way, Shelter’s figures will be about right.
If my tenants complain, I’ll point them towards Shelter’s news article.

Shelter are saying that 90,000 new social homes a year for ten years, so fewer than a million, will fix housing. How? That's far less than immigration let alone the decades of under building. It would leave a larger not smaller prs. Am I missing something or are shelter's claims here even stranger that usual?

this is a non story - stating the obvious.

State provided accommodation is expected (by the users/tenants) to be lower than market rate. Its taxpayers funded basic provision but I bet 99% of tenants don't see it as this.

How low the rent is, is up for interpretation, but it whatever it is, it should still ensure that it covers all costs of providing that accommodation plus maintenance so it complies to the very same housing standards that should be UNIVERSALLY APPLIED across all housing equally. Councils should be making sure maintenance is done in house for best possible value and so they can keep a track of every single property. They should run it like a standalone business - just as a PRS landlord does.

The PRS is there to provide a CHOICE to social housing, and with that comes variance in the types of property, location, size and what it includes (furnished, more modern kitchens/ bathrooms, flooring included etc). The price is reflective.

It's not rocket science that if there are not enough social homes, then the cost of what is left will rise. Supply and demand.

No one disagrees there should be more social accommodation, but the stumbling block will be where it is to be built AND how much it costs to build in the first place. That is why the emphasis is on 'affordable rent' because you simply can't build homes and let them at 'social' rent levels unless something gives like quality or standards etc.

Everyone wants a 4 bed house at the rental price of a studio but the reality is this is not going to happen! It's probably as much the councils fault as it is the tenants themselves. Expectations are too high and they need to be levelled.

A lot of councils are coming unstuck charging very low social rents and now don't have the money for basic maintenance - so forget building further units. The days of really low social rents can only be coming to an inevitable end.

Reply to the comment left by Reluctant Landlord at 03/06/2024 - 15:51
"Everyone wants a 4 bed house at the rental price of a studio..."

That's true. And if you sold one of the council houses in our area that has 3 beds and houses one person (I can think of a few examples local to me) but not at a discount then you'd probably be able to buy or build 2-3 flats and house 3 families.

It isn't just a question of the number of properties in the social housing sector. It's also a question of the efficiency with which those public assets are used. And a question of whether they are being given away or not.

I think that there is some value in social housing being at arms length from Councils as when they sell their housing stock unless you've got very good controls in place you don't know for sure that the Council is actually going to build any new houses, or whether that money will go on gold-plated pensions, flexi-time and other benefits for public sector workers. If the government gives councils extra money for fixing pot-holes in roads then you want them to fix the roads; if the government gives councils extra money for housing then you want them to put a roof over somebody's head (unlike shelter).

At least housing associations are focused on housing people, but they should be held to the same standards that the PRS is held to.

Imagine a world where Shelter actually used their massive income to help instead of hounding landlords out of the business.

I put a hefty bet that people who donate to this sham charity believe they provide housing or (er) shelter.

Reply to the comment left by Martin Roberts at 03/06/2024 - 17:44
I bet the people who donate don't know how much government money Shelter has had.

Councils building more Council Houses spells even more financial disaster for Councils. Current Building Regulations make building new properties extremely expensive, excluding the land costs. The behaviour of some tenants lead to expensive repair and maintenance. As many Councils are nearly bankrupt, borrowing money is very expensive and there is an absolute guarantee that the Council will experience a substantial loss on every house that is built, making bankruptcy even more certain.

There are many terraced houses that are able to be split into two or more flats but planning restrictions hamper this. However, income from two properties make renting viable for both the landlord and the tenant in most cases.

When there were too few properties to house everyone before the wars, home owners and tenants were forced to take in lodgers so that everyone could have a roof over their own head.

I would love to buy more property, which I am able to do but am reluctant to do. Why? Because 4% extra Land Tax in Wales, double Council Tax on properties being developed or renovated, high gas and electric standing charges, etc, etc,. This doesn't even cover the difficulty in selling on existing property to finance new developments to provide additional accommodation because I have to pay capital gains tax which then depletes my capital so that I can't even afford to replace the existing property with the remaining capital. The 3 person HMO rules , also don't help young people sharing in order to make property affordable.

Just yesterday, my son and I were discussing property prices and rents back in 1980. In our area, there was a similar relationship between property prices and rents back then, as apply now. Realistically, I haven't made any capital gain in real terms. It is just an inflation illusion.

I believe, back in the 70's , the original capital invested was index linked to the time of sale and any capital gain was calculated after index linking. I seem to remember that all or part of this was negated with the application of roll over relief following reinvestment in another rental property.

If more properties could be converted into two or three flats and property developers and landlords were taxed more fairly, then this would go very far towards easing the costs on rents and housing desperate (good) tenants.

Last week we advertised a flat and had more than 50 enquiries in the first 5 days. Even good standard prospective tenants offered £50 a month more than the advertised rent. Previous to that we had more than 150 enquiries on a three bed terraced house, driven partially by a local hospital bringing in an influx of 500 immigrant nurses, doctors and their families to help solve our NHS crisis. I just don't know where they are all expected to live, unless Shelter can help out!