# Cork City Council publishes reasons for turning down offers of social housing



## Brendan Burgess (6 Sep 2021)

Lack of private parking and garden size among reasons Cork council homes were rejected
					

More than a quarter of the 542 offers of housing were turned down in the first seven months of this year




					www.irishexaminer.com
				




Cork City Council said that common reasons they are given for rejecting a property include:

The applicant changes their area preferences; 
They want larger accommodation; 
They want a detached or semi-detached house, not mid-terrace; 
They want a house, not an apartment; 
The applicant fails to contact the council about the offer for an extended period; and the applicant deemed the property unsuitable once they viewed it.


----------



## Brendan Burgess (6 Sep 2021)

A lack of private parking, the location of a boiler, and a garden that was too small are just some of the reasons people have turned down permanent homes offered by Cork City Council.

A brand new, three-bedroom house was also rejected because there were only one-and-a-half bathrooms.


----------



## Thirsty (6 Sep 2021)

Brendan Burgess said:


> A lack of private parking, the location of a boiler, and a garden that was too small are just some of the reasons people have turned down permanent homes offered by Cork City Council.
> 
> A brand new, three-bedroom house was also rejected because there were only one-and-a-half bathrooms.


Whilst I'm not defending the applicants here; this is very much a 'half-story'.

Were I, for example, a wheelchair user, private parking might be a serious issue.

So called 1.5 bathrooms means there's one family bathroom upstairs and a loo downstairs.

If you purchase your first home, you may compromise on garden space or bathrooms on the basis that in a few years time you can trade up to get more space / another bathroom etc.

From the social housing applicants point of view, they only get one shot at this, so they are prepared to hold out.

There's an element of 'cheeky for a beggar' in publishing this.


----------



## NoRegretsCoyote (6 Sep 2021)

> A brand new, three-bedroom house was also rejected because there were only one-and-a-half bathrooms.




I think I'd reject a house with half a bathroom too!


----------



## Firefly (6 Sep 2021)

Thirsty said:


> From the social housing applicants point of view, they only get one shot at this, so they are prepared to hold out.


I agree and think this is a big problem. Get a house and it's yours for life, even if you have spare bedrooms and other families with kids are in hostels, you get to keep it. Madness. 
I think anyone rejecting a decent offering should be put to the back of the housing list.


----------



## Peanuts20 (6 Sep 2021)

To be honest, there are parts of Cork City where some of these houses are that I'd be in no rush to park a car on the road either. Likewise, hard to know what the "position of the boiler" means. 

There is an element of CCC trying to put a spin on things here, "look at us, it's not our fault" so I'd take this story with a pinch of salt. No argument that some people have notions as to what they want from the Council but it's also quite possible an offer was made for the sake of making an offer. 

Another headline could have read, "vast majority of council houses offered are accepted"


----------



## noproblem (6 Sep 2021)

There's a lot of people living on their own in 3 and 4 bedroom houses provided by the council. Surely an annual check would sort this.


----------



## Firefly (6 Sep 2021)

Peanuts20 said:


> To be honest, there are parts of Cork City where some of these houses are that I'd be in no rush to park a car on the road either. Likewise, hard to know what the "position of the boiler" means.
> 
> There is an element of CCC trying to put a spin on things here, "look at us, it's not our fault" so I'd take this story with a pinch of salt.


I am a bit slow in recommending this, but how about the RTP is expanded to review social houses for offer by a council? Once approved by the RTP, they are good to go and anyone refusing an offer be put at the back of the list?


----------



## Gervan (6 Sep 2021)

*There were 396 successful new tenancies out of 542 up to the end of July this year in Cork City. The remaining 146 units were not picked up by prospective tenants, Cork City Council said.*

That is a huge rejection percentage! The wording is a little ambiguous, but could it mean absolutely nobody on the list of prospective tenants was prepared to accept those properties to live in?
Doesn't it mean many applicants on the list are living elsewhere quite comfortably, and are not really in need of accommodation, if they are happy to reject a place? It is a huge financial saving to be paying the council an affordable rent, rather than a private landlord's rate.


----------



## Brendan Burgess (6 Sep 2021)

Hi Gervan

I am not familiar with the process, but apparently they have quite a while to make a decision.  Not sure how long.

So we end up with empty houses while they are thinking. 

Then if they reject them, the Council has to go back to the process again. So a house can be vacant for over a year.

They could redesign the system.  If they have 50 houses,  invite 70 people to register an interest in them a bit like the CAO.  1st Preference, 2nd preference, 3rd preference.   

Then have a second round of offers, etc. 

Brendan


----------



## Shirazman (6 Sep 2021)

Can't speak for the City, but Cork County Council operates a policy of three refusals and you're off the housing list.


----------



## Firefly (6 Sep 2021)

Brendan Burgess said:


> They could redesign the system.  If they have 50 houses,  invite 70 people to register an interest in them a bit like the CAO.  1st Preference, 2nd preference, 3rd preference.
> 
> Then have a second round of offers, etc.
> 
> Brendan


I think that's a great idea


----------



## Clamball (6 Sep 2021)

My sister in law, got offered an affordable house many years ago in Cork county.  She lived alone and she loved it.  But it had been rejected several times by couples as being too small.  And I would agree, while there was a large double bedroom, and a very decent bathroom, the living, kitchen, laundry, dining space was badly designed and laid out.  No room for an oven for example.  I could see a couple tripping over each other every day in the living space. 

So I would agree that the reasons for rejection list sounds bad, there is probably a lot going on under the surface that could be delved into.  And I agree, as painful as it sounds, once a family council home is down to one or 2 adults they need to be moved on to a smaller unit to make way for new families.  I would not say it is easy at all working in a housing unit in a council, but the stock of social housing is too valuable for it not to be used to its full potential.

I missed this quote

 “All of these properties had been chosen originally by the applicants after viewing them on the online Choice Based Letting System (CBL) which includes the address, a description of facilities, photographs, and a Google Map link showing the exact location of the property.”

So they had been selected by the candidate originally but ultimately 25% of them rejected the choice they made themselves.


----------



## Purple (6 Sep 2021)

Clamball said:


> And I agree, as painful as it sounds, once a family council home is down to one or 2 adults they need to be moved on to a smaller unit to make way for new families. I would not say it is easy at all working in a housing unit in a council, but the stock of social housing is too valuable for it not to be used to its full potential.


So we need smaller units in areas where there is already social housing. I think there should be a needs assessment every 5 years and people should be moved as their family grows up and moved out but people should not be moved out of the area they have lived in all their life.


----------



## Clamball (6 Sep 2021)

Agree Purple, and the cork city FAQ says “If you refuse a property offered to you under CBL, you will be deferred for one year off both social housing support waiting lists.” So there are real consequences for the people if they reject a house they selected.


----------



## NoRegretsCoyote (6 Sep 2021)

Thirsty said:


> From the social housing applicants point of view, they only get one shot at this, so they are prepared to hold out.


This is dead right.

Tenure for life and a differential rent is a great deal.

But no one wants to live somewhere that's too small or with anti-social neighbours.

It makes sense to hold out for a better offer.


----------



## Purple (6 Sep 2021)

NoRegretsCoyote said:


> This is dead right.
> 
> Tenure for life and a differential rent is a great deal.
> 
> ...


From the tenants point of view they are completely correct in what they are doing.
The same applied to what many consider to be the 'abuse' of the HAPS system. If you have no realistic prospect of ever being able to afford to buy your own house because of economic policies that concentrate wealth amongst old people and those who own Capital (mainly old people) then why not use the system?


----------



## time to plan (8 Sep 2021)

It reads like a tabloid poor-baiting article to me.



> One home was turned down because the property had no private, offroad parking, although onstreet parking was available.



One home? What does that really tell us?


----------



## Shirazman (8 Sep 2021)

time to plan said:


> It reads like a tabloid poor-baiting article to me.
> 
> 
> 
> One home? What does that really tell us?



It "really" tells us that one applicant regarded private offroad parking as more important to them than getting a home.


----------



## Purple (8 Sep 2021)

time to plan said:


> It reads like a tabloid poor-baiting article to me.


The income threshold to qualify for social housing in Dublin is €35,000 for a single person and up to €42,000 for a large family. €673 a week is hardly poor. It's certainly not enough to buy a house but it's far more than a family in Dublin, Cork or Galway earning €100,000 a year will be left with after they pay a mortgage on their first house.


----------



## time to plan (8 Sep 2021)

Shirazman said:


> It "really" tells us that one applicant regarded private offroad parking as more important to them than getting a home.


That's what it tells you.


----------



## mtk (8 Sep 2021)

As someone who grew up in social housing got grant to go to Ucd  etc.  and subsequently went on to be relatively well off through lots of study and hard work I would say the last bastion of allowed bias is anti “lower class people “ by accent / address / occupation .
This article feeds into this in my opinion.


----------



## time to plan (8 Sep 2021)

Purple said:


> The income threshold to qualify for social housing in Dublin is €35,000 for a single person and up to €42,000 for a large family. €673 a week is hardly poor. It's certainly not enough to buy a house but it's far more than a family in Dublin, Cork or Galway earning €100,000 a year will be left with after they pay a mortgage on their first house.


But what is the average income of somebody on the waiting list? Picking the threshold (i.e. highest possible income) and saying that the threshold does not represent poverty hardly helps move the discussion on.


----------



## time to plan (8 Sep 2021)

mtk said:


> As someone who grew up in social housing got grant to go to Ucd  etc.  and subsequently went on to be relatively well off through lots of study and hard work I would say the last bastion of allowed bias is anti “lower class people “ by accent / address / occupation .
> This article feeds into this in my opinion.


It helps inadequate people feel better to have someone to look down on.


----------



## Purple (8 Sep 2021)

time to plan said:


> But what is the average income of somebody on the waiting list? Picking the threshold (i.e. highest possible income) and saying that the threshold does not represent poverty hardly helps move the discussion on.


I agree but the issue is that people on considerably higher incomes are just as excluded from the housing market. The whole 'squeezed middle' thing is really about housing costs and when something like this is published it is very disheartening for that cohort.
I keep saying that we need to stop treating income as if it is wealth. It isn't.


----------



## Purple (8 Sep 2021)

mtk said:


> I would say the last bastion of allowed bias is anti “lower class people “ by accent / address / occupation .


Members of the Traveller community would probably disagree with you.


----------



## time to plan (8 Sep 2021)

Purple said:


> I agree but the issue is that people on considerably higher incomes are just as excluded from the housing market. The whole 'squeezed middle' thing is really about housing costs and when something like this is published it is very disheartening for that cohort.
> I keep saying that we need to stop treating income as if it is wealth. It isn't.


Articles like this try to drive a wedge between the squeezed middle and people on lower incomes. Their interests are not opposed to each other's, but it suits some people to make it appear as if they are.


----------



## Purple (8 Sep 2021)

time to plan said:


> Articles like this try to drive a wedge between the squeezed middle and people on lower incomes. Their interests are not opposed to each other's, but it suits some people to make it appear as if they are.


I don't think there's some conspiracy but this is simple and easy to understand so journalists can churn it out rather than trying to underhand the root causes of the problem and communicate them. 
We usually ask the wrong questions in this country.


----------



## time to plan (8 Sep 2021)

Purple said:


> I don't think there's some conspiracy but this is simple and easy to understand so journalists can churn it out rather than trying to underhand the root causes of the problem and communicate them.
> We usually ask the wrong questions in this country.


It isn't a conspiracy. Simply an expression of the interests of those who benefit from the situation. 

This isn't an Ireland-specific problem. I spent most of my life in the UK and in my opinion it is much worse for shoddy divisive journalism.


----------



## Purple (8 Sep 2021)

time to plan said:


> It isn't a conspiracy. Simply an expression of the interests of those who benefit from the situation.


I find journalism in this country very left-wing populist. The agenda is driven by RTE and they are a pillar of the left-wing establishment so journalism certainly isn't in the pocket of those who benefit from the situation.
It's an interesting question though; who does benefit from it?
I'd say it's pension and investment funds (which are mainly funded with pension money), banks and a small cohort of developers.


----------



## time to plan (8 Sep 2021)

Purple said:


> I fin journalism in this country very left-wing populist. The agenda is driven by RTE and they are a pillar of the left-wing establishment so journalism certainly isn't in the pocket of those who benefit from the situation.
> It's an interesting question though; who does benefit from it?
> I'd say it's pension and investment funds (which are mainly funded with pension money), banks and a small cohort of developers.


Left wing? Who are you kidding? It reads to me as economically right wing and socially progressive. But I doubt we’ll agree.


----------



## time to plan (8 Sep 2021)

Purple said:


> Members of the Traveller community would probably disagree with you.


Let's just call that racism. But still a fair enough point.


----------



## Purple (8 Sep 2021)

time to plan said:


> Left wing? Who are you kidding? It reads to me as economically right wing and socially progressive. But I doubt we’ll agree.


That reads as click-bait but in general terms the media is a bunch of left-wing pearl clutching populists.


----------



## Purple (8 Sep 2021)

time to plan said:


> Let's just call that racism.


True, but many people who are aghast at what they consider racism and homophobia are perfectly fine with saying the same things about Travellers.


----------



## time to plan (8 Sep 2021)

Purple said:


> That reads as click-bait but in general terms the media is a bunch of left-wing pearl clutching populists.


This reads like those US Republicans who call anyone right of centre who believes that maybe poor people should get decent healthcare 'a socialist'.


----------



## time to plan (8 Sep 2021)

Purple said:


> True, but many people who are aghast at what they consider racism and homophobia are perfectly fine with saying the same things about Travellers.


They don't understand the full scope of what is racist. I imagine they are equally confused by buffalo wings,


----------



## Purple (8 Sep 2021)

time to plan said:


> This reads like those US Republicans who call anyone right of centre who believes that maybe poor people should get decent healthcare 'a socialist'.


I think the right wing and left wing populists are two sides of the same coin. Both are looking for easy answers to complex issues and some nefarious ploy by some cabal who is to blame for the world's ills.


----------

