Lambeth Council taking back "right to buy homes"

Lambeth Council taking back "right to buy homes"

Author
Discussion

Slow.Patrol

Original Poster:

1,807 posts

28 months

Saturday 21st June
quotequote all
I was reading this article yesterday

https://www.bigissue.com/news/housing/lambeth-rent...

Two people being evicted as Lambeth Council are taking back 163 homes that were sold under the right to buy and then let out.

"A High Court judge dismissed an appeal following Lambeth Council’s decision to take back 163 council homes from across six council estates being rented out in the private rented sector.

The council argued that the homes, which were previously lost through the Right to Buy scheme and were let out at close to market rate as assured shorthold tenancies, are needed to house homeless families in urgent need of support."

The article doesn't really explain the detail, but it sounds like these homes were sold with covenants preventing the properties being let.

Is this the case?

Earthdweller

15,984 posts

140 months

Saturday 21st June
quotequote all
I seem to recall reading that these homes are council owned but the renting of them has been managed by a housing association and now the council has decided to end the relationship with the HA and take them back under their own control


Slow.Patrol

Original Poster:

1,807 posts

28 months

Saturday 21st June
quotequote all
Earthdweller said:
I seem to recall reading that these homes are council owned but the renting of them has been managed by a housing association and now the council has decided to end the relationship with the HA and take them back under their own control
AHH

Thank you. That makes sense.

Earthdweller

15,984 posts

140 months

Saturday 21st June
quotequote all
It was a few months back when it was in the news I'm sure it's a bit more complicated than my reply but I think that was the jist of it

They certainly aren't "seizing" privately owned property iirc

Slow.Patrol

Original Poster:

1,807 posts

28 months

Saturday 21st June
quotequote all
Having done a bit more digging, it looks like it is possibly properties that were sublet.

So not really the Right to Buy scheme.


Good Plan Ted

2,146 posts

245 months

Saturday 21st June
quotequote all
Earthdweller said:
It was a few months back when it was in the news I'm sure it's a bit more complicated than my reply but I think that was the jist of it

They certainly aren't "seizing" privately owned property iirc
Not yet but in the next 10 years.

vaud

54,940 posts

169 months

Saturday 21st June
quotequote all
Good Plan Ted said:
Not yet but in the next 10 years.
There are already powers under the compulsory purchase act 1965.

ChevronB19

7,722 posts

177 months

Saturday 21st June
quotequote all
Good Plan Ted said:
Earthdweller said:
It was a few months back when it was in the news I'm sure it's a bit more complicated than my reply but I think that was the jist of it

They certainly aren't "seizing" privately owned property iirc
Not yet but in the next 10 years.
Oh for gods sake.

Gerradi

1,777 posts

134 months

Thursday
quotequote all
Clickbait Hysteria
comes to PH...

z4RRSchris

11,921 posts

193 months

Thursday
quotequote all
Homes sold at a discount under right to buy, then bought back at market value on estates ready to be regenerated. Let out on ASTs short term before they will be demolished.

Not sure whats wrong, apart from the delta / cash lots in the right to buy bit.



""That review recommended that Homes for Lambeth operations were to be brought back into the council as soon as possible. Following a review, the authority decided property previously let on the private market could be repurposed for people with the most extreme housing need.

Lambeth Council said there was never any intention for the homes to be let on the private market in the long-term but tenants have accused them of a lack of transparency over their plans, leaving them in limbo.

The council said the homes are former council properties sold off through Right to Buy that have been bought back by the local authority.""

Earthdweller

15,984 posts

140 months

Thursday
quotequote all
z4RRSchris said:
The council said the homes are former council properties sold off through Right to Buy that have been bought back by the local authority.""
Presumably bought from the owners with sitting tenants that the Council then decided to evict ?

z4RRSchris

11,921 posts

193 months

Thursday
quotequote all
Earthdweller said:
Presumably bought from the owners with sitting tenants that the Council then decided to evict ?
i think they just rented them out on ASTs short term because they knew they needed VP, and so easy to just serve a s21 and not renew when you want to develop.

they are not being evicted are they? they are just not having their tenancy renewed.

Sir Bagalot

6,768 posts

195 months

Yesterday (22:15)
quotequote all
Homes for Lambeth, a council owned company, rents some of their housing stock on the private rental market at market rents.

They have just issued S21 notices to over 160 households. Reason? Because they want to house the homeless

Crazy

I do hope they're taken to task over this idiotic idea

BikeBikeBIke

11,604 posts

129 months

Yesterday (22:29)
quotequote all
It's genius!

They can free up space in schools by expelling pupils, make space for more tube passengers by kicking passengers off.

I can turn my car into an 8 seater by kicking my family out to make space for 4 more.

This is the kind of thinking outside the box Britain needs.

Mandat

4,222 posts

252 months

The optics of this looks bad, and it is being spun to make it look like that.

The reality is that AST's are not indefinite, and if a landlord wants their property back for whatever reason, then there is a legal process to follow to end the AST, such as is happening in this case.

Ian Geary

4,987 posts

206 months

Lambeth, like most London councils, are facing significant financial pressures.

They urgently need to secure housing to discharge their legal requirement to house the homeless.

People renting in the private market can still presumably rent in the private market - just elsewhere.

People who are homeless could go and be homeless elsewhere i guess?

But then those "optics" won't be so good either...


Ultimately housing is broken in London, and Lambeth just have to play the cards they've been dealt.

This also highlights that council decisions often trade one set of interests against another (ie politics), and there is usually someone "unhappy" who can make more noise than the person who is "happy".

Ian Geary

4,987 posts

206 months

98elise

29,673 posts

175 months

Mandat said:
The reality is that AST's are not indefinite, and if a landlord wants their property back for whatever reason, then there is a legal process to follow to end the AST, such as is happening in this case.
They soon will be.

The Renters Rights Bill will end AST's and Section 21's, so that you can't just end the Tenacy when you want the propert back.

If the tenant wants to stay, they will be staying!

98elise

29,673 posts

175 months

Ian Geary said:
Lambeth, like most London councils, are facing significant financial pressures.

They urgently need to secure housing to discharge their legal requirement to house the homeless.

People renting in the private market can still presumably rent in the private market - just elsewhere.

People who are homeless could go and be homeless elsewhere i guess?

But then those "optics" won't be so good either...


Ultimately housing is broken in London, and Lambeth just have to play the cards they've been dealt.

This also highlights that council decisions often trade one set of interests against another (ie politics), and there is usually someone "unhappy" who can make more noise than the person who is "happy".
The rental market is buggered at the moment. 20+ people chasing each rental. When you evict someone and they don't have another property to go to, they become homeless and the council are obliged to house them.

As you can't fit more then one family in a home they are just shuffling people around and hoping some will go elsewhere and be someone else's problem.

Mandat

4,222 posts

252 months

98elise said:
They soon will be.

The Renters Rights Bill will end AST's and Section 21's, so that you can't just end the Tenacy when you want the propert back.

If the tenant wants to stay, they will be staying!
I'm not a renter or a landlord so haven't kept up to speed on the proposed changes.

However, having just looked at the gov.uk site for the details of the new Bill, it looks there will be a whole host of legitimate reasons where a property can be recovered by the landlord.

The proposed changes will increase the general notice period to 4 months, and it will try to make it more difficult for unscrupulous landlords to hold their tenants to ransom. How this will work in reality will be interesting to see, once the new Bill makes it to law.

Based on my very brief look at the gov.uk site, I don't think that Lambeth's proposals would be affected all that much, apart from perhaps adding a few more legal hoops to jump through, and extending the notice period that needs to be given.