2,000 offers of social housing turned down last year

There will always be excuses some valid some not as to why people turn down offers of social housing,however figures of up to 50% refusing offers is simply quite shocking, it all can't be down to being offered housing next door to the neighbours from hell or being four miles from the nearest schools. I would guess that the majority of these serial decliners are simply looking for the plushest pad in the nicest neighbourhood all at the expense of the suffering taxpayer.
 

With regards to the interior, I'm sure a few cans of paint could have helped... but as for whats going on next door and outside of the property, I'd say we all accept thats another matter and action needs to be taken to address that sort of problem (perhaps the person you know could have got local politicans or the gardai involved, to help deal with the issues).

Having said that, if it's a toss up between sleeping on the street, or in a house in an area with social problems, I think I'd still rather take the house.

STEINER said:
....Some people are offered 2 bed houses when they want a 3 bed. If they take the 2 bed, its the start of endless waiting again.
Click to expand...

Bunk beds, are better than no beds ....
 
When I signed my rental property onto the RAS scheme 7 years ago, I was anxious to have the house occupied as soon as possible. The council told me that any prospective tenants get three housing offers (yes, three!!) before they have to accept one of them. This country beggars belief sometimes......
 
There seems to be a misconception about who gets offered council housing in Ireland.

With all the coverage of homelessness recently and the lack of housing people seem to think that council housing is offered to those in need. Not really.

People are put in a position on a Council housing waiting list based on a complex points structure. One of the most significant elements of this points system is the length of time a person has been on the list.

Many families automatically put their children on the list as soon as they turn 18. With no dependants and a place to live at home with mammy they dont get an offer. Roll on 10 years, married with one or two kids they stroll into a house because they have been on the list 10 years, which trumps any other applicant with otherwise similar circumstances.

Any system can be gamed and the council housing system is systematically gamed by those in the know.

I know several people in this position, one of them in fact drives a very expensive car, why wouldn't he he has a good job and very low housing costs.
 
In England there are two types of social housing. "Affordable housing" where the tenant pays 80% of the market rent and, "Social housing" where the tenant pays 50% of market rent.

In Ireland the tenant's rent is means tested with the basic rent being €35 a week (not sure if that is nationwide) far less I would think than 50% of market rent for many properties.
 
In Ireland a council house is for life, once you get a house there is no ongoing test to see if you continue to qualify.

In England if you have a council house that is bigger than your needs, say where a house was originally for a family with children, but now the children have left, you can be offered a new more suitable house or you have to pay an additional rent for the extra space
 
MrEarl said:
Please tell me that is not true... anyone ?
Click to expand...
From the people I know in Council houses, both rural and urban, it is indeed for life. Unless they voluntarily move on themselves i.e. buy a new house. No matter how their financial circumstances change over the years, their are no reviews by the Council.
And when the original occupants die/go into nursing homes, the last remaining child gets to stay on if they so wish
 
Surely the social housing/social welfare systems are being taken advantage/abused by those who are 'in the know' - that really sickens and frustrates me (and my husband, aged 73). Both of us are permanently disabled since birth/early age and had faced countless barriers since the 1970s, due to negative attitudes in society/workplace, in gaining employment/promotion (or lack of), applying for car insurance / mortgages (some banks refused our applications despite our references/P60s/payslips), etc. Yet both of us never, ever seek 'freebies' - Free Travel Pass, Household Benefits, Medical Card (which my husband received when he reached the age of 70). One of my friends (now no longer) applied to her local CoCo for a house several years ago, just because she couldn't get on with her father (a retired GP) residing in an affluent area, and once she got a bungalow in an estate a few years ago, she moaned about children running wild and throwing stones at her house. I told her that that's what she asked for - and she can't be so choosy! End of rant.....
 
The house might be for life but the rent is subject to review. Rent is based on income. 15% of the earnings of €32/€64 per week of the highest earning person or couple in the property plus an amount for other earners in the property. The maximum monthly rent in Dublin City Council is €1833 per month.
 
Families turn down social housing due to 'lack of space, garden or parking'



Department officials have compiled a full list of reasons behind the high level of refusals after the Irish Independent revealed many families were turning down offers because they didn't like the area.

In some parts of the country, such as Cork county, almost one in every two social houses was rejected over a 12-month period.

A report, which is due to be sent to the Oireachtas Environment Committee, confirms homes are rejected because they are located in areas which already house people the applicants "do not feel compatible with".

Other reasons given for refusing offers of social houses include:

  • No garden or parking facilities;
  • property not located in 'area of choice';
  • a high level of anti-social behaviour;
  • property unsuitable to the applicant's needs;
  • accommodation was an upper floor apartment.
 
I would contend that apart from the first point above, the rest are legimate reasons for not accepting. Points 2 and 3 are probably the same thing quite often. For instance, Darndale would not be my area of choice because of the anti-social behaviour.
 
I agree with you that points 2 & 3 are probably one in the same just a differnent way of naming it so as to avoid being called racist or some other name which the applicant may deem unfair..

Property unsuitable to the applicant's needs covers a multitude of possibilities and the allocating officer should know what the applicants needs rather than what the applicant wants.

Accomodation on an upper floor flat should only affect a person with a disability if there is no lift (which is in good working order). I'm 70 and walk with a stick, the result of medication for cancer) but live on the 2nd floor. I can make it up and down the stairs 3 times carrying items) but no more without a sit down for 15-20 minutes; no lifts but not really a problem as I rarely do more than 1 down and 1 up within a few minutes (mainly leaving out the rubbish).

Property not located in area of choice., in this case, until a person/people get back on their feet, in my opinion, 'beggars can't be choosers'.
 

I would have thought that the option of sleeping on the street would help me get past everything on that list. If there are not enough bedrooms, get bunk beds, if the accomodation consisted of an upper floor apartment, either get the lift or use the stairs and get fit...

That said, the issue about anti social behaviour cannot be ignored. If our Government is telling us that people who desparately need housing won't stay in certain properties for fear of anti social behaviour, then we must ask what our Government is doing to sort out that particular problem ?
 
According to a report on the radio on this during the week, a lot of folk are happy in the rented houses (paid for by rent allowance) they are in at the minute and thus they turn houses down. A lot of TD's and Councillors, esp on the FG side, are now saying that RA is a welfare trap and has to be tackled
 
I know of locations that even the police fear to go. These need to be sorted out so that the homeless can be moved in as there are quite a few empty houses available but these anti-socialites won't have anyone who doesn't meet their 'standards' or way of life. Throughout the country there must be a good thousand properties in such areas (and most large towns have them and even some smaller ones). Certainly, we can't expect the desperately needy to be faced with this type of situation.
 

I agree entirely and hold our Minister for Justice responsible, in the first instance. If the Gardai can't sort it out by themselves, then send the army in alongside them. I'd far rather see our army help out with law enforcement, than have half of them doing nothing all day (aside from having to turn up for the occassional roll call, or get to go for a spin in a jeep following a van full of money).

That said, we could also look to the various deserted rural developments, be they completed or partially completed... again, massive numbers of properties which could be put to good use at a reasonable cost.

Then we move on to look at the likes of the Section 23 properties that have been empty for years on end.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register