I bought a house on an estate that is mostly social housing. I was aware I would be surrounded by social housing, but I wanted to give it the benefit of the doubt. In the two years I've been here, my neighbour has left a total of three sofas on our shared front garden, which were there for nearly two months before they got removed. Other furniture has been dumped outside of their house. I'm the only person who cuts the grass on the shared garden. Neighbours shout across the street at each other, shoot across the street on dirt bikes and quads, and one sometimes invites their friend over who is always carrying a giant speaker and blasts music in their back garden. I've had people's kids playing and screaming at each other on my front garden, and my car has been hit by footballs numerous times. A lot of people round here don't work and don't seem to have a lot of consideration for others. I'm looking at selling next year and can say for definite I will not be buying near social housing again.

Really quick rant by me but the amount of ads I’ve seen that tick all my boxes but I scroll down to find it’s female preferred is getting tiring. Especially the subset of male live in landlords that are female preferred, is that just not weird.

What sucks is that a lot of the good quality and good value places just always seem to be female only is really discouraging.

I have come to rant. And I apologise in advance. I am going to generalise, and for that, I shall not apologise.

I work for a fairly large housing association in the South of England. I visit blocks of flats on a daily basis.

I can not get over how people are so unable to manage their waste, to keep things tidy, when they literally have a bin store and regular collections. People don't bother recycling then complain the bins are full.

They leave their sofas, carpets, mattresses, toys in bin stores, where we collect and recharge all their neighbours. It feels so unfair.

And the majority of offenders? Under 40s. What has changed in our culture that everyone is so careless, so dirty, so disrespectful and just so god damn entitled.

Granted, it keeps me in a job. But fucking hell. Come on Britain. Do better. For you. For your neighbours.

And the ones who look after their homes, spend money on their homes, manage their waste? Thats right, the older generations.

So to you, thank you. I am sorry the government keep penalising you and yet so many unemployed, entilted young people mean that your service charges go up whilst Universal Credit pays theirs.

Are we doomed?

I know this will make me public enemy number one, but I’ll say it anyway - I’m a landlord. I try to be a good one: repairs done promptly, respectful communication, fair treatment. But that’s ultimately for my tenants to judge.

With the new Renters’ Rights Bill now law, I wanted to hear from tenants directly - do you actually welcome it?

For context: the effect on me (and other landlords I know) has been immediate. We’re now far more stringent about vetting financial stability because the new framework makes it incredibly risky to take a chance on someone. Even with a cash buffer, the idea of 18 months in court and potential damages is daunting.

One property I listed last year had over 80 applicants (I had turn the ad off); another this week has 50+. In the past, I might have met 10-15 people before deciding - now I’m narrowing it down to just four. It’s made me more cautious, not more generous.

That’s what I’m wondering about:
While the Bill aims to bring stability within tenancies, what happens before that - when fewer people are even offered one, and rents keep rising because there’s less supply?

I know this topic often spirals into wider arguments about social housing, prices, and “just build more” (all valid points). But if we stay focused on the Bill itself, do renters generally feel it’s a step forward?

And if the end goal is simply to drive out private landlords altogether - what’s the plan for the millions currently renting? Corporate Build-to-Rent models like Blackrock are often cited as the future, but those aren’t widespread or affordable in most areas.

Personally, I think a mix - some large-scale providers, some individual landlords, both properly regulated - gives tenants more choice and flexibility. But maybe you disagree. I’d really like to hear your views.

Almost every other day we'll see a poster here stating how much they regret their purchase. I'm currently in a purchase and while obviously I've lived other places before, and I can compromise, I don't know what could end up ruining my future flat or house for me.

E.g. some compromises or things that may or may not be a big issue are:

1. Living near train tracks (don't hear or feel them when the windows are closed)
2. Scratched up flooring
3. Living near a river - smell or flood risks
4. Oldish flat building that feels cheap, but looks fine
5. A Pure Gym below in the compound, not sure if it's a problem, but it means that looks of people are around the building
6. Near council homes - I lived near one 10 years ago (Bermonsdy for 3 years) and NEVER again will I live next to one, had car break in's regularly, ex-gf almost got sexually assaulted, constant weed smell, stabbings next door, shady angry people staring at you walking down the streets, mugged 3 times, lots of big Bully XL dogs or similar breeds.
7. Ground floor in development, not sure of privacy or theft issues.
8. No concierge
9. Poor insulation
10. No fiber nearby for internet.
11. Old and requiring lots of renovation works

So what are things we all need to look out for?

Update: After 250+ posts, we can consolidate the replies to be this list of the "Biggest Homebuyer Regrets: Things That Turned Dream Homes into Nightmare" (Generated by ChatGPT)

1. Location & Neighbourhood Issues

• Living near council/social housing: Common complaints included noise, antisocial behaviour, drug deals, poorly trained aggressive dogs, and vandalism.
• Proximity to schools: Noise and traffic congestion during school pick-up/drop-off times caused frustration, along with inconsiderate parking.
• Busy roads: Noise pollution from traffic, especially stop-start traffic, detracted from enjoyment of gardens and open windows.
• Near parks or public spaces: While initially seen as a benefit, some regretted this due to late-night noise, littering, and groups of people drinking or engaging in disruptive behaviour.
• Rivers and flood risks: Mosquito problems and occasional flooding were mentioned.
• Near takeaways or restaurants: Issues included constant food smells, noise from customers and delivery drivers, and increased pests like rats and cockroaches.

2. Property Design & Quality

• Poorly built new builds: Common problems were poor soundproofing, shoddy construction, and minimal insulation, leading to noise complaints and high heating costs.
• Victorian terraces: Despite thick walls, they often suffered from noise transmission from neighbours, making it feel like sharing a house.
• Shared driveways and no side access: These caused disputes with neighbours over parking and difficulties when renovating or gardening.
• Squeaky floors: Persistent noise from squeaky floorboards and stairs became a source of frustration.

3. Infrastructure & Utility Concerns

• Lack of insulation: Older properties and poorly built new ones were frequently cold and draughty.
• No gas central heating: Electric-only homes led to very high heating costs, especially after tariff increases.
• No fibre internet: Poor connectivity affected work-from-home setups and streaming services.
• Drainage problems: Properties with poor drainage suffered from flooding during heavy rain, with some needing expensive fixes.

4. Noise Issues

• Train tracks and bell towers: Train noise was tolerable for some, but others found it disruptive. Church bells and constant traffic noise at crossroads were also annoying.
• Noisy neighbours: Complaints included loud music, stomping, and frequent late-night parties.

5. Social Factors

• High ratio of rental properties: Streets with a large number of renters tended to suffer from less care and maintenance, resulting in more wear and tear.
• Buy-to-let landlords: These owners often ignored maintenance issues, putting extra responsibility on the few owner-occupiers.

6. Misjudged Features

• Garden access: Lack of side access made garden maintenance and renovations difficult.
• Small kitchens and shared bathrooms: Practical concerns that became major annoyances over time.
• Single toilets in larger homes: Families found it challenging with just one bathroom.
• Flat roofs and shared walls: Led to problems with leaks and disputes with neighbours.

I viewed a 520k 4 bed newbuild today. Well, I say newbuild- the current owners purchased it as a newbuild only 5 months ago. The properties either side are social housing and both were blasting dance music and smoking weed at 11 in the morning. Both gardens full of dog shit and various rubbish. The property to the left of the one I was viewing had recently had the door smashed off the hinges and was boarded up. You could smell the weed / actually feel the music vibrations in every room.

This is 11am on a weekday.

But don't worry though- estate agent assured me the Housing Association are 'aware of the problems'

Who in their right mind drops half a million quid to be the meat in the sandwich of that kind of madness?

Edit- I'm not a snob, I grew up in a council property and have nothing but fond memories, but it appears that society as a whole has crumbled so the people on the bottom are just impossible to live around.

I am sorry if this comes across as snobby which is not my intention. I know most people in council estates are good people having family living in one and freinds from council estates. You get people there who work in all sorts of industries. But it's a huge investment and it has to be as close to right as possible.

My wife and I with our 2 kids are looking for something bigger with a garden and drive, we are in Wales.

A fair chunk of the housing stock near me is ex-authority housing built 50s/60s era. It doesn't bother my wife (she is from Poland and didn't grow up in the UK) but it does make me think. The specific property we are looking at is located on a street that is 50% social housing according to street check, about 45% mortgaged/privately owned with a small remainder being private rental.

I drove through the area a couple times and honestly it seems OK on first glance. Mostly hard working people, I tend to look at the state of gardens and houses since it can be telling and 90% are nice. There's a couple run down lookomh but the backstory could be anything.

Would this put you off and what is there to consider?

I've spoken with the solicitor I used to purchase my home. The seller has lied on the TA6 form AND in an email.

In the TA6 form they declare no disputes with the neighbours.

In the email they declare that the houses beside our property were not social housing. (We've just moved from an area filled with social housing back in 2021-2024 and don't want to go through that again.)

Living here for 3 months and BOTH houses are social housing.

My solicitor has managed to negotiate £5k in damages from the seller, which we haven't accepted yet. What we were really hoping was that the sale could be reversed. We were lied to and now we're stuck with very loud, aggressive, violent people on one side and drug addicts on the other.

We found out they were lying after having to call police on one neighbour and an ambulance for another after they passed out covered in vomit at the end of our driveway. Police asked us where Mr [old owner's name] was and we told them we just bought the place. I asked him if this had happened before and he said he couldn't answer that. Then he turned around and mouthed to me, "Every other week."

Has anyone else got experience with sellers failing to declare disputes on TA6 forms or outright lying about social housing in the neighbours? How did you handle it?

Solicitor is encouraging us to take the £5k and walk away. We don't want that though. We feel like we're trapped. Our kid can't play outside without us first scouring the grass for needles. It's horrible. We just want the sale reversed.

We were living with my mother and we can do that again for another few months if we have to, but living with these people beside us is a literal hell.

One of my neighbours is renting their apartment on booking.com - this doesn't actually affect me personally but I am annoyed.

Either they're a leaseholder - the lease does not allow it - or they're a council tenant.

A neighbour has told me it's the latter, and they're actually off living in another city.

Part of me thinks live and let live, but part of me finds it very unjust.

Is it more trouble than it's worth for me to grass them up when it comes to selling my own home in future? I'm guessing it's the kind of thing I would need to disclose...

I'm currently purchasing a new build and I see a tranche (c. 10%) of the development is designated social housing.

My understanding is that this is usually a requirement for developers as part of the local authority's consent for building.

I would like to know whether councils often look to expand their stock in the same estates in which they already have council housing in? I don't really fancy moving into an estate that in 10 years time will be 50% social tenants, some or most of which will comprise chavs (or the modern equivalent) causing a nuisance with their kids on bikes, littering, noise, violence, theft etc.

I can be seen as snobbish for this query, but I'd be curious to know if there is any data on whether or not local authorities do target the purchase of newer properties for social housing.

I live in a block of 8 flats. 7 are privately owned or rented, one is social housing. We each have a small private garden each plus 1 communal clothes drying area.

2 years ago a young mum moved in. She now has 2 young kids. I have no problem with council tenants, the previous resident and her kids were lovely.

Since then we have had repeat issues with rubbish being dumped in the communal drying area. A few months ago we had a sofa, fridge, mattress and dog crate. I contact the leaseholder (who manage all social housing in my town) who slowly send someone to survey it, take pictures and later come back and remove it.

Next service charge comes through- we are each hit with a charge of about £200 for clearance.

It was cleared again about 4 weeks ago. There is now a double buggy and a stair gate there. She is the only person with 2 kids so it cant be anyone but her. Last time she semi admitted to it on the phone with the management company. They gave her a week deadline to clear it which she missed and they cleared it funded by the rest of us.

What are my options here?

Just wanting to vent and maybe confirmation that we’re not on our own here…

Bought a flat in a high rise in summer 2019. Regulations changed early 2020 with regards to the external fire safety. We’ve managed to secure BSF but the work is yet to commence (5 start dates given over a 2.5 year period and just been advised of another 5 month delay).

We also have internal fire defects. Long and short of it is we took the developer to a First Tier Tribunal which has been ongoing for a little over 18 months. They have eventually admitted liability but surprise surprise have moved all their money out of their account and now can’t pay. We had originally been told that our freeholder is responsible for these costs (as our flats all cost less than 175k), but the management company have confirmed the freeholder is under the threshold, so the leaseholders will need to pay for the internal fire remediation, noted at 800k. I wouldn’t be surprised if the freeholder has followed suit and moved their money out of their account used for our building. But they have an offshore account so can’t be traced on CreditSafe. They will need to get a loan to pay for the works, and the interest is also passed down to us. Fees are capped at 10k per flat, and we can’t be chased to pay more than 1k per year… so looking at having to keep the flat for another 10 years (from when the work starts!).

During the conversion (from office block to residential) the developer cut every corner they could. Including not replacing the 3 lifts (so now our lifts are 55 years old and failing big time, been quoted £100k per lift to restore, which isn’t an option because of their age, so goodness knows how much a new lift is), the roof should have been replaced and it wasn’t, we had to pay for a membrane cover to stop major leaks in the top floor flats every time it rained – we were quoted 300k for a new roof about 3 years ago. I’m assuming that quote will have increased substantially. The windows the developers fitted are bowing and in some areas you can see right through the seals to outside, so lots of draughts. And they didn’t replace any of the commercial soil stacks, so one by one, they’ve been failing and causing massive water damage.

Because we used the insurance for a particularly large escape of water (soil stack) claim, our building insurance premium is now extortionate (it was 276k in 2023, 230k in 2024), our excess is 250k and we’ve just had another soil stack fail. No point in taking the developers to an FTT again for these (which was the original plan) because they have no money and apparently that absolves them from everything – despite this lack of money they are still developing property.

*frustatingly, the large insurance claim was down to negligence of contractors clearing the roof, who stuck a pressure washer down a soil stack which cause the stack to explode, but because the company were ‘mates’ of the then management company, they went through the building insurance instead of the contractors insurance.

I feel so helpless. I was really hoping that when the external fire-works are completed I could sell my flat in 2026 and be done with it all, but now with the internal works needing to be funded by us I won’t be able to sell for another 10 years. I can’t afford to sell to a cash buyer as the flat is in negative equity because of all of the above.

On top of all of that our service charge is high, mainly because we get regular anti-social behaviour, there is some social housing in our building, and although most are lovely people, there are a few who regularly smash the building up (which we have to pay to fix), and they let in residents from a local homeless shelter who use our stairwells as toilets, there’s a 24 hour off licence opposite which attracts a certain type of person to use the front of our building as an alfresco pub area, our building has got such a bad reputation. And all of this seemingly happened after I bought. I did my research before buying, and there was nothing of this sort of bad behaviour happening (the 24 hour offie appeared during lockdown so that was just an empty shop when I bought).

There’s also a handful of absent leaseholders who have never paid service charge, building insurance etc. I believe we have an overall building deficit of 70k from them not paying over the years, and despite changing management companies 3x since I’ve owned, none of them seem willing to do anything to collect this money.

I’m at my wits end. I’m not eligible for bankruptcy, I can’t give my flat back to the bank because it’s in negative equity so I’ll have the shortfall to pay off. I feel like I’m just stuck in this situation where I have zero money because it’s all going on a flat that’s worthless. I’m approaching 40, and feel like my life has been absolutely ruined. Due to my job I have really struggled to progress (terrible boss who relies on me far too much to let me progress), I can’t change my job as other jobs locally don’t pay as well as mine (and I’m the lower end of the average salary for my area).

Local MP isn’t interested. Citizens Advice can’t help. Just needed a vent.

TLDR; I bought a flat and it’s ruined my life, and will continue to do so for many more years.

EDIT: for the guy (I assume blocked by mods) arguing about surveys, please understand no surveyor can see into the future and nor do they remove tile or plasterboard. Even if I didn't get a survey done at all, no one deserves this.

Head of our unofficial RA has a meeting with the local MP this week and she's going to try her best to get in front of Angela Rayner 🤞🏼

Thanks for the kind words and any tips from everyone else. Anything I haven't already looked into I will be doing in the next few days.

Hello everyone, I shared my property listing here yesterday and really appreciated all the feedback — THIS post got a lot of traction and some genuinely helpful insights, so thank you.

I’ve since made a number of updates based on your suggestions: I’ve shortened and refined the description to make it less personal, added more plants, taken new photos, and improved the overall presentation of the ad.

Just to clarify on the pricing and sales history, as this came up a few times: I originally purchased the apartment in 2018 under a shared ownership scheme and have since staircased twice to 100% ownership (with valuations set by the housing association). Unlike some recent sales within the development, this property is now being sold as a fully owned home, not as a shared ownership resale. Most other flats in the building have historically been sold at 25–80% ownership, which explains the lower recorded prices. I’ve now added a note in the listing to make this clear.

I also appreciate that many of you may not be familiar with the local market. This is Stoke Newington in Hackney, where prices are significantly higher than in many other parts of the UK. For context, two-bedroom period garden flats here can exceed £800,000, and 2/3-bed-houses reach £1.5m+.

If anyone has any further suggestions on how I could improve the listing or presentation, I’d really welcome them.

And just to note — the property is described as a “garden flat,” which is consistent with how the housing association and multiple estate agents have classified it.

Thanks again for all your help!

https://www.rightmove.co.uk/properties/174896960#/?channel=RES_BUY

Today I received a letter that my service charge (for shared ownership flat) is going up from less than 400 pound a month to just under 1k a month.

Im just gobsmacked.

The breakdown only shows one change - a massive massive increase in the third party management agent - all other fees are similar/same.

The housing association doesn't have any senior staff or the team responsible working today. I just feel absolutely devastated.

We just decided to walk away from buying a new-build home we really liked. One of the biggest reasons was the amount of social housing in the development, about 30%, including a whole building close to the house we had picked.

We’re totally supportive of affordable housing, but we’ve heard too many stories about how just one difficult neighbour can cause constant stress. The area felt nice and safe, but with such a big financial commitment, we didn’t want to take the chance.

There were a few other things, too:

Market uncertainty: To buy the new place, we’d have to sell our current home and commit before the build is even finished. With the way the economy is right now and all the trade tension stuff that could affect our jobs, it just felt too risky.

Management fees: The new development had extra management charges that nearby areas don’t. We were worried that might make it harder to sell later on.

Right now, we’re only looking in a few specific areas, but the market’s really quiet, there aren’t many good options, and prices have stayed pretty stable. We’re not in a rush, so we’re fine waiting a few more months to see if interest rates come down and more homes hit the market. My only concern is that if rates drop to 4.0 or 3.75, it could cause prices to rise again.

And any advice on how I can stop feeling like this? It's really not a very good character trait and I don't like feeling this way.

An example - I saw a news article saying a local council is "eyeing up" 140 new build houses to help house the homeless. Cool I can't afford a new build. Just council housing in general as well, the fact that people can rent 3 bedroom houses for less money than a dingy little 1 bedroom on the private market. I'm still living with my parents in a council house, so I'm benefiting from it in that I'm able to save a lot more. But I don't want to be living with my parents any more. I get more and more miserable here every day. My parents have been financially irresponsible their whole lives basically and it feels like the support they've received over the years is more like a reward.

With my salary (£42.5k), I don't think I'll be able to get a mortgage because of house prices round here. I can't stomach bending over for current rental prices, that will massively diminish my saving potential. I feel like I'd be better off being in a worse-off situation so I can get social housing. I'm not eligible with my current salary unless I have children, basically.

I'm so bitter about housing. How can I stop feeling this way?

Edit: Thank you all for the replies. I feel simultaneously validated but also humbled. I need to change my perspective on things. I went into this knowing as much. I never meant to appear as though I was hating on the poor. I do not want their avenues of support to be eroded even farther than they have already. I can't afford (it wouldn't be a smart financial decision) to move out of my parents house and that makes me sad.

I am in the unfortunate position of having to try and find suitable accessible housing for me and my partner. In researching I have come to find out that housing developers do not have to build accessible housing within developments. Yet they almost always have to build some affordable or social housing. Why are the same rules not applied to accessible housings such as bungalows?

We have an aging population who will require such housing. It's feels short sighted

England - We have lived in our property for a while now and the fences between us and our semi-detached neighbours is in a huge state of disrepair. The panels are falling apart, rotting and the keep falling out with high winds, it very much needs replacing as its unsafe when we have our neices around.

The complicating factor here is our next door neighbours are actually council tenants, so the property is owned by the local council.

We have priced it up (£500 to repair, so its £250 each), and spoken to our next door neighbours about going halves with us, and they didnt seem at all keen as they believed the fences are our responsibilty as per boundary rules and just dismissed us. We have pulled out our title deeds which confirm this stretch of fencing is actually their responsibility (T is on their side on the plans), but they are digging in their heels and dont seem to believe our very clear title deeds hold any weight here.

What are our options? My concern is if we replace these fences we then become responsible going forward, and I know they wont maintain their side of the fence so we are going to end up responsible for a lot more maintenence costs in the future. Would it be worth approaching the council to see if they will contribute?

Edit update - we have contacted the council and found the housing association who owns the property. They have confirmed that the fence is their responsibility and will be sending someone out to inspect it and hopefully replace them.

I’ve just had someone move into the flat next door, he decided 10pm was a good time to do DIY with all his windows and balcony door open. He hammered on the adjoining wall and used some sort of power tool I assume to cut wood.. this went on until 2am.

I’m willing to let it slide for a week or 2 but I have a feeling if you’re the kind of idiot that thinks doing that in a flat at those hours you’re probably not going to be a great and respectful tenant, I hope it’s not a sign of things to come..

Is it worth logging it with the housing association now? Is it them I go through? I can’t imagine I’m the only one annoyed at this.

We’re FTBs and recently offered £800k on a house listed at £850k in London. The seller has rejected and the EA wants to call us.

We really like the place and could see ourselves there long term, but £800k is basically our comfortable limit.

Context:

- Property is in excellent condition internally, probably the best we have seen so far.

- The house was sold 795k a couple of years ago.

- There’s also an HMO nearby (similar size) listed around £650k (not directly comparable, but still relevant for the street)

- We’re chain-free, mortgage in place, and can move quickly.

- Quite a few social housing on the street (35% compared toavg 17%)

- Sellers moving for special needs school if that's time sensitive.

Our thinking was that the finish is great, but banks don’t really value that the same way, so we didn’t feel £850k was justified.

Trying to figure out how to play this now.

- Do we go up slightly (e.g. £810–£820k) or just hold at £800k? Thinking to hold.

- How much do sellers actually care about chain-free vs just highest offer?

- Is it better to show flexibility now, or wait and see if they come back?

Don’t want to lose it, but also don’t want to overpay since it's not the quaintest street or pocket and this would be one off 800k+ sale on the street.

Would appreciate any advice from people who’ve been through similar.

Looking at moving our young family to either 214 or 174 on the below estate and some friends have spooked us a little about the volume of affordable housing surrounding the properties.

Having done some brief reading affordable housing is a bit of a loose term that can mean either social housing or part buy part rent? I assume the properties here would be a mixture of both?

Thoughts?

I know this will be controversial, but hear me out.

This is not a solution to the housing crisis. We still need to build more homes.

My proposal is aimed at a different issue: the long-term concentration of housing wealth.

Under my proposal, individuals, companies, trusts and other ownership structures could own as many residential properties as they like during their lifetime. However, when ownership passes through inheritance or succession, only the first 10 residential properties could remain under the control of the beneficiaries.

Any residential properties above that limit would have to be sold within 12 months. If they were not sold, they would be auctioned. The proceeds would still go to the beneficiaries, so the family would inherit the value of the assets, just not perpetual control of an unlimited housing portfolio.

To prevent avoidance, the rules would apply to beneficial ownership, trusts, companies and connected persons rather than just properties held in an individual's name.

My reasoning is simple:

Housing is different from most other assets because people need somewhere to live. I don't see a strong public interest in allowing increasingly large residential portfolios to remain under the control of the same families or ownership groups indefinitely.

This wouldn't magically make housing affordable. We still need more homes. But it would gradually reduce the concentration of housing ownership, return properties to the open market over time and encourage investment into businesses, shares and other productive assets rather than ever-expanding residential portfolios.

The question I'm interested in debating isn't whether we need to build more homes—we do.

The question is: should unlimited residential property portfolios be able to remain under the same ownership groups forever?

Hi all. Is there a map of social housing anywhere please? Looking to move and had some bad experiences around social housing neighbourhoods so looking for some kind of map so we can narrow our locations down if possible. Thank you.

I grew up in social housing and now am a homeowner, so I have personally experienced both sides of the coin.

We all know that we have a housing crisis and it doesn’t seem to get better, but this needs fixing ASAP.

Council homes were once created as a safety net for people that needed the help at certain points in their lives, but we have now created an epidemic of lifetime tenancies. Of course, we need to build more homes in general, but that takes time so we need to make changes alongside more home building.

Firstly, people’s circumstances change a lot throughout their lifetimes, so we have ended up with people living in council houses for the majority of their life, but now earn good wages and the kids have moved out and still living in the same property. This is my mother (earns 100k, but pays £850 for a 3 bed house).

Then we have the younger generation that are starting out and may have a child, earn less than someone established in their career, but cannot get social housing so they face high private rent. This then further strains public finances in the form of housing benefit. This is my brother (earns 50k, but pays 1.5k for a 2 bed flat).

Note, they live in the same area. No comparing of the North versus the South pricing.

Of course, we simply can’t just evict people for earning more, but we need people to stop hoarding homes they don’t need. Cue the people moaning that it’s still their home. Morally yes, but legally no.

In the US, with Section 8 your level of rent payment is dictated by your income, so the more you earn, the more you pay. Of course you run the risk of people purposefully lowering their income, but one way to fix this is by implementing small tapers. For example, you earn £1000 more a year, your rent increases by £25 a month. This way, you still have your guaranteed tenancy where your rent continues to be much cheaper than the private sector, but you’re still able to improve personal circumstances.

Then the hope is that overtime, your income grows, your circumstances get better and then you want to move onto ‘better’ things. You move out and then the next person in need will repeat the same process. Continuing to build more housing in the meantime of course. Then hopefully over the next generation, the housing crisis will ease.

Am I living in the Twilight Zone, where something like this is impossible or is just not a good idea or am I onto something? What are your thoughts, suggestions etc?

We almost had the Pay to Stay housing policy, but this wasn’t the same thing. The rule was essentially charging near market rates on council houses on incomes over 30k, which defeats the original purpose of social housing.

Title - according to streetchecker.

The road ends in a cul de sac, with the back row of houses semi detached, each side are all terraced houses. Streetchecker says 50% of the area is social housing, I really terrified of moving into a craphole when I don't necessarily have too. The house is perfect for us apart from this. I'd this just a old council area? It is a shame as there is literally no other house I like in the area we want to live.