Skip to main content

The House of Lords and Overcrowding

It is a bit odd that the House of Lords have voted down a proposal that encourages unemployed people who are under occupying a council house or housing association property to downsize. There are lots of people living in overcrowded accommodation. At the same time there are people who have spare space.

It is as if those Lords voting for the amendment are not concerned about overcrowding.

These rules already apply to those people renting a private sector property.

Comments

Jerry said…
John I have to disagree with you here, which must be a first, your not looking at the wider picture, I had a two bedroom house, due to circumstances I only used one bedroom,for obvious reasons would that mean I would have to move out, then if things changed for the better what would happen then, its not about kicking people out of their homes simply because they have a spare room, build more affordable housing, the situation of hand me downs is not as common as it used to be, building more affordable housing creates jobs keeps the building industry alive, or better still devise a plan to bring back in to use the 1 million un-occupied and derelict houses, there are over ten thousand in the outskirts of Liverpool alone, the city council was going to develop them but sadly due to cuts some two years later these houses still stand empty though still in conditions to be lived in. look at the bigger picture John.
2:42 am
John Hemming said…
The point about the government's proposals is that people are not forced to move out. Currently what happens (at times) is that people are forced to move.
8:32 am
Anonymous said…
Ive just moved into a housing association property and the tenancy agreement says that if this is underoccupied in the future that they can decide not not renew my tenancy and help me downsize. So does this still apply from 2 months ago?
9:32 pm
John Hemming said…
That has been the case for some time.
9:48 pm
Anonymous said…
It cant be now if the House Of Lords has opposed it?Or are they allowed to be ignored? why is it just unemployed people?
9:59 pm
John Hemming said…
What affects you has been the law for a number of years.
10:11 pm
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Six months for recording a court hearing - Norman Scarth

The link is in Russian about the imprisonment of Norman Scarth who is actually 85. He has a complex history including a court hearing which found that he used a chainsaw to fight off bailiffs when he was 75. [a court judgment which is disputed see comments] However, that does not justify imprisoning him for 6 months for recording a court hearing (see the link and ask google to translate it if your Russian is not up to it). It has got into the Argyll News Because he has been held such that people cannot get to him to sign paperwork an application for a writ of Habeas Corpus was made today. This has been adjourned until next week. The English judicial system is really not good at responding to major abuses of human rights by the judicial system.
57 comments
Read more