**MOD NOTE UPDATED**Limerick woman complains about living in 3 bed house with 4 kids

El Weirdo

micropig wrote: »

What your suggesting is if you love your children you will give up your mortgage and applying for LA housing...seriously:D:D:D

I don't see the problem. If you're paying a mortgage on a property that is unsuitable for your needs due to ill health or disability or some other reason, and you are unable to trade-up or carry out the required works to your home, then social housing is there for that very reason.

micropig

El Weirdo wrote: »

I don't see the problem. If you're paying a mortgage on a property that is unsuitable for your needs due to ill health or disability or some other reason, and you are unable to trade-up or carry out the required works to your home, then social housing is there for that very reason.

Yes, but I don't think you can just walk away from a mortgage;)


Why can't she re-arrange the beds as suggested earlier?

Problem solved

Thrill

micropig wrote: »

What your suggesting is if you love your children you will give up your mortgage and applying for LA housing...seriously:D:D:D

If the health and welfare of your child depended on it then yes, I believe parents would.

Unless the health and welfare of your mortgage is more important to you.

At point did she realise her children would have to share bedrooms?

I dont know. maybe she has no problem with them sharing a room. The health department however has said one of them should have a room of his own


.

micropig

Thrill wrote: »

If the health and welfare of your child depended on it then yes, I believe parents would.

Unless the health and welfare of your mortgage is more important to you.




I dont know. maybe she has no problem with them sharing a room. The health department however, has said one of the should have a room of his own

This?

El Weirdo

micropig wrote: »

Yes, but I don't think you can just walk away from a mortgage;)

Please point out to me where exactly I said to "walk away" from the mortgage.

micropig wrote: »

Why can't she re-arrange the beds as suggested earlier?

Problem solved

I'm not necessarily talking about this woman.

I was replying to this particular comment:

micropig wrote: »

What your suggesting is if you love your children you will give up your mortgage and applying for LA housing...seriously:D:D:D

micropig

El Weirdo wrote: »

Please point out to me where exactly I said to "walk away" from the mortgage.

Here Maybe I'm misunderstanding what you are suggesting they do with the mortgage

Thrill

micropig wrote: »

Yes, but I don't think you can just walk away from a mortgage;)


Why can't she re-arrange the beds as suggested earlier?

Problem solved

Don't you think it would be irresponsible of her not to follow the advice of the health department?

micropig

Thrill wrote: »

Don't you think it would be irresponsible of her not to follow the advice of the health department?

Advice of Health department: Child needs own room

Solution proposed: Child has own room


What seems to be the issue?

El Weirdo

micropig wrote: »

Here Maybe I'm misunderstanding what you are suggesting they do with the mortgage

Clearly. Could they not sell the property and clear the outstanding mortgage?

suicide_circus

El Weirdo wrote: »

I don't see the problem. If you're paying a mortgage on a property that is unsuitable for your needs due to ill health or disability or some other reason, and you are unable to trade-up or carry out the required works to your home, then social housing is there for that very reason.

my bad! i thought social housing was there for people who havnt worked or paid there own way in well over a decade and whose only contribution to society is more and more kids they cant afford to support!
maybe someone else can use her free 3 bed gaf while she's off in disneyland?

dj jarvis

Dudess wrote: »

But a person in private rented accommodation wouldn't either...

generally a person in private rented accommodation tends to be working and paying rent , not getting the state to do it

my point was that some people work very hard for very little , and some do nothing and gain greatly
why are people surprised that the people close to the edge , who are working , being screwed left and right , are starting to get angry and despise a certain section of SW recipients

since when is it a **** thing to stand up and say no more of this,
the genuine people should be helped - the long term , habitual life timer SW junkies should be tackled with - how, i have no idea

Thrill

micropig wrote: »

Advice of Health department: Child needs own room

Solution proposed: Child has own room


What seems to be the issue?

She stated she is happy where she lives. She loves her current home,

If you believe that your arrangement is the better option than trying for a 4 bedroom house then that is up to you. You're entitled to your opinion.

Dudess

DJ Jarvis, I can't see much evidence of people saying her behaviour is ok or that it's wrong to object to it - some people just consider other elements too to have the full picture, but not to defend her.

The person who thought social housing was just for those on benefits: surely not? Plenty of people in local authority housing work.

You'd swear all council estates are paradises, yet I doubt those who have a problem with those in local authority housing would move there. All the problems and intimidation in some estates - plenty of folks living there would live somewhere else if they had the option.

dj jarvis

dark crystal wrote: »

No, but you chose to buy a house. If it was such a hardship, why not rent instead.




No, she doesn't pay the household tax. However, neither do private tenants or homeowners in certain ghost estates or those in receipt of mortgage interest supplement. The government decided who was eligible for the charge, not her.
There's been no announcements about any waiver schemes for water charges as of yet, afaik, so how do you know whether she will or won't be liable.
As for maintenance, private landlords are also responsible for such services for their tenants.




You really seem to have a major downer on people who rent LA housing. I'm a LA tenant and pay a lot more than just a nominal fee. I'm also a tax payer and am grateful that when I was down on my luck, I was offered housing when there was no way I would have been able to afford a private mortgage.

I'm not fleecing anyone and I pay my way. I don't get why you are so incredibly angry at this woman, who is, after all, not doing anything illegal. Perhaps your anger would be better directed towards the government who, in many ways, discourage people from working for a living.

you are really missing the point

im talking about the section of SW recipients who never have and never will ad ANYTHING to the community
im not talking about normal working people or people who have worked living in LA housing , if you had read the thread i stated i grew up in LA housing so why would i be damming my own family ???

you know the type of person im targeting , please dont to pretend otherwise
read my previous posts and you shall clearly see i have said repeatedly my ire is at habitual lazy SW pros , nobody else .

token101

dark crystal wrote: »

No, but you chose to buy a house. If it was such a hardship, why not rent instead.




No, she doesn't pay the household tax. However, neither do private tenants or homeowners in certain ghost estates or those in receipt of mortgage interest supplement. The government decided who was eligible for the charge, not her.
There's been no announcements about any waiver schemes for water charges as of yet, afaik, so how do you know whether she will or won't be liable.
As for maintenance, private landlords are also responsible for such services for their tenants.

You really seem to have a major downer on people who rent LA housing. I'm a LA tenant and pay a lot more than just a nominal fee. I'm also a tax payer and am grateful that when I was down on my luck, I was offered housing when there was no way I would have been able to afford a private mortgage.

I'm not fleecing anyone and I pay my way. I don't get why you are so incredibly angry at this woman, who is, after all, not doing anything illegal. Perhaps your anger would be better directed towards the government who, in many ways, discourage people from working for a living.

There's a big difference between someone who is working renting from the state using their own earnings and someone who is given a house and who is given benefits to pay rent, yet still feels entitled to more. Yeah she's not doing anything illegal, but neither did Ivor Callely. Does that make his actions morally correct?

token101

El Weirdo wrote: »

Clearly. Could they not sell the property and clear the outstanding mortgage?

And the negative equity?

El Weirdo

token101 wrote: »

And the negative equity?

First, you're assuming everyone is in negative equity.

Secondly, I'm just giving an example of how it may work and how someone could go from having a mortgaged property to requiring social housing as micropig seemed almost incredulous at the suggestion that anyone might be in a position to actually need to do that.

micropig

El Weirdo wrote: »

First, you're assuming everyone is in negative equity.

Secondly, I'm just giving an example of how it may work and how someone could go from having a mortgaged property to requiring social housing as micropig seemed almost incredulous at the suggestion that anyone might be in a position to actually need to do that.

People can be in a position where they need to do it, this does not mean that it will happen

Most people think along the lines of I will plan for children, work hard, ensure I an stable and then only have the number I can afford, they're first thought is not I am entitled to this from the state and keeping having children regardless

Even if you sold a local authority house you bought you still have to repay a % to the LA

The banks have only moved in the past week to entertain people in negitive equity

If the house was sold to make a large profit the lA would deem I have assets..you have to be in mortgage arrears before they'll entertain you for lA housing

El Weirdo

micropig wrote: »

People can be in a position where they need to do it, this does not mean that it will happen

Most people think along the lines of I will plan for children, work hard, ensure I an stable and then only have the number I can afford, they're first thought is not I am entitled to this from the state and keeping having children regardless

Even if you sold a local authority house you bought you still have to repay a % to the LA

The banks have only moved in the past week to entertain people in negitive equity

If the house was sold to make a large profit the lA would deem I have assets..you have to be in mortgage arrears before they'll entertain you if you have a mortgage

I'm pretty sure it does happen though. Maybe not a lot, but the option is there.

And who said I was just on about people with children? The option is there for anyone that finds themselves in the position of their property not being suitable for their needs. For example where a family member finds themselves unable to climb stairs and the only bathroom in the property is on the first floor. They may not be able to get the grant to build a WC downstairs or there is no room to extend or one of a myriad of reasons.

Also, the LA will only take a clawback if you sell your property within the first 20 years, iirc.

token101

Dudess wrote: »

You'd swear all council estates are paradises, yet I doubt those who have a problem with those in local authority housing would move there. All the problems and intimidation in some estates - plenty of folks living there would live somewhere else if they had the option.

Well I wonder why council estates are like that? Could it be that because these people have got something for nothing that they have no vested interest in giving a f***ing sh*t how the place is kept? Sure if it burns down they'll get a new, probably better place. And according to this woman Moyross is a great place. I'd rather live under a bridge than in Moyross personally, but if I did, I wouldn't expect the council to find me a bigger place when I decided I needed more children either. I think it's also worth noting aswell in this particular case that this woman must have known she had a problem kid on her hands from a very early age. He's the oldest child. But she still chose to keep having more children?

micropig

El Weirdo wrote: »

I'm pretty sure it does happen though. Maybe not a lot, but the option is there.

And who said I was just on about people with children? The option is there for anyone that finds themselves in the position of their property not being suitable for their needs. For example where a family member finds themselves unable to climb stairs and the only bathroom in the property is on the first floor. They may not be able to get the grant to build a WC downstairs or there is no room to extend or one of a myriad of reasons.

Also, the LA will only take a clawback if you sell your property within the first 20 years, iirc.

This thread?

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=78339366&postcount=947

El Weirdo

micropig wrote: »

This thread?

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=78339366&postcount=947

micropig

El Weirdo wrote: »

This thread says were talking about people with children.



as re: old people. If it's a case they don't have a downstairs toilet and do not qualify for hse grants, it is likely they are living in an old style house, with debate value, many have always lived in the house etc, there are underfunded community organisations which helps in cases where the state doesn't.

It's not as simple as you think to walk away and get LA housing for someone who has a mortgage, if it was the a lot country would do it in the morning

Have they suitable accommodation for older people?

token101

Dudess wrote: »

I agree with a lot of that - not saying she's a victim at all, but there is always a bigger picture. She didn't emerge from a vacuum. The ADHD thing - isn't it new because it's only recently recognised?

How exactly do you mean she 'didn't emerge from a vacuum'? What's the bigger picture? I'd say her bigger picture is a nicer and bigger house.

Well from my brief bit of reading, it seems like it's recognised by some, not all, and I'd say not even most, psychiatrists. It's divisive. It's a label placed on children because of a set of 'symptoms'. But it's so broadly used it seems from reading about it that it's a bit like turning up the doctor with a headache and a runny nose and him saying you have a 'bit of a cold'; it's so broad it's effectively meaningless. They must meet 12 symptoms essentially; listed here. Now I'm not a doctor, bit I can pick 12 symptoms there that could apply to a greater or lesser extent every child I've ever known. It's ridiculously subjective. I don't see violently abuses siblings or others there either.

And as for someone's quote about doctors not wanting to make diagnoses or prescribe tablets? Or the government not giving a carers allowance? Our welfare system is hardly airtight and many doctors would practically give you heroin just to get you out the door to see private patients.

El Weirdo

micropig wrote: »

This thread says were talking about people with children.



as re: old people. If it's a case they don't have a downstairs toilet and do not qualify for hse grants, it is likely they are living in an old style house, with debate value, many have always lived in the house etc, there are underfunded community organisations which helps in cases where the state doesn't.

It's not as simple as you think to walk away and get LA housing for someone who has a mortgage, if it was the a lot country would do it in the morning

Have they suitable accommodation for older people?

Who, local authorities? I'm sure they do.

Many voluntary housing bodies have specialised sheltered accommodation for older and disabled people.

Here, check out this website if you're interested in finding out which ones.

micropig

El Weirdo wrote: »

Who, local authorities? I'm sure they do.

Many voluntary housing bodies have specialised sheltered accommodation for older and disabled people.

Here, check out this website if you're interested in finding out which ones.

So they should give up there mortgage and go in to a special home, sounds like a plan:D:pac::pac:

Will we put the one & 5 kids in sheltered accommodation too?:D:D


This is a mute point because most of these old people don't have mortgages

El Weirdo

micropig wrote: »

So they should give up there mortgage and go in to a special home, sounds like a plan:D:pac::pac:

Will we put the one & 5 kids in sheltered accommodation too?:D:D


This is a mute point because most of these old people don't have mortgages

Ah here. Forget it.

micropig

El Weirdo wrote: »

Ah here. Forget it.

Probably the best thing to do, That was heading down a dangerous road:D:D:D:D:D

D1stant

El Weirdo wrote: »

Ah here. Forget it.

The thread? yes. It has run beyond its course

micropig

D1stant wrote: »

The thread? yes. It has run beyond its course

But we still haven't reached a final solution:pac::pac:

LH Pathe

Can I suggest she just stick the boys back in together n let them continue to be roidin the arse off each other. eesh.. whaddya want, woman.

I can see her problem though but ... not my problem.

Felexicon

cofy wrote: »

Because ADHD is a very distressing condition for all the family, I would expect that with such an extensive array of friends, that she would have at least friended one official site. By the way I said hairdressers, salons, etc., plural.

Ok, now you may want to sit down for this. Facebook is not the center of the universe. There I said it.
Maybe they don't want to mix a meaningless personal facebook profile with a serious condition her son suffers from

cofy

Felexicon wrote: »

Ok, now you may want to sit down for this. Facebook is not the center of the universe. There I said it.
Maybe they don't want to mix a meaningless personal facebook profile with a serious condition her son suffers from

1. I don't want or need to sit down for this rubbish. Facebook is not the centre of my universe either, but I'm glad you got that off your chest.

2. If facebook was so meaningless to this person then why start a campaign?

mikom

Felexicon wrote: »

Ok, now you may want to sit down for this. Facebook is not the center of the universe. There I said it.
Maybe they don't want to mix a meaningless personal facebook profile with a serious condition her son suffers from

So where is this FACEBOOK campaign she said she was starting?

Felexicon

mikom wrote: »

So where is this FACEBOOK campaign she said she was starting?

Who knows?
More importantly who cares?

It has no relevance to this conversation

mikom

Felexicon wrote: »

Who knows?
More importantly who cares?

Her children presumably.

Felexicon wrote: »

It has no relevance to this conversation

What conversation?
The one on the thread about Serinna corbett starting a campaign to get a bigger house, where she mentions a visit to the mayor and the kick off of a FACEBOOK campaign.

And she has started a Facebook campaign to bring families in similar positions together.
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:KqsxUpHx790J:www.limerickleader.ie/news/local/limerick-s-serinna-in-despair-over-home-for-kids-1-3764536+&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=ie

Probably waiting till after work to begin.....

Felexicon

mikom wrote: »

Her children presumably.





What conversation?
The one on the thread about Serinna corbett starting a campaign to get a bigger house, where she mentions a visit to the mayor and the kick off of a FACEBOOK campaign.



Probably waiting till after work to begin.....

Exactly!!!!!!!
This conversation is about the demands she is making to the SW. Not about a facebook campaign

mikom

Felexicon wrote: »

Exactly!!!!!!!
This conversation is about the demands she is making to the SW.

Which includes a FACEBOOK campaign.......... according to herself.

cofy

Felexicon wrote: »

Exactly!!!!!!!
This conversation is about the demands she is making to the SW. Not about a facebook campaign

If you are referring to our conversation, here on boards, about her facebook page then it does have relevance in that, it is exactly what started this conversation.

Felexicon

mikom wrote: »

Which includes a FACEBOOK campaign.......... according to herself.

OK. So we now make demands from SW through facebook.

Good story bro

mikom

Felexicon wrote: »

OK. So we now make demands from SW through facebook.

Good story bro

Dial 1800-Serinna with that info.............Bro-seph

Felexicon

mikom wrote: »

Dial 1800-Serinna with that info.............Bro-seph

You mad bro?

mikom

Felexicon wrote: »

You mad bro?

Yeeeeeah...... madder than Mad Jack McMad, the winner of this year's Mr Madman competition.

Seriously though, get in touch with Serinna and explain to her how you think a facebook campaign is futile and that she should perhaps filter her energies into getting that midwifery degree.

Felexicon

mikom wrote: »

Yeeeeeah...... madder than Mad Jack McMad, the winner of this year's Mr Madman competition.

Seriously though, get in touch with Serinna and explain to her how you think a facebook campaign is futile and that she should perhaps filter her energies into getting that midwifery degree.

Cool. I'll do that.

mikom

Felexicon wrote: »

Cool. I'll do that.

I hope ye'll be very happy together.

Felexicon

mikom wrote: »

I hope ye'll be very happy together.

OK I'm going to come clean here. I'm actually the father of the children

mikom

Felexicon wrote: »

OK I'm going to come clean here. I'm actually the father of the children

And here was me thinking it was just impotent rage on your part.

Felexicon

mikom wrote: »

And here was me thinking it was just impotent rage on your part.

It is. I just stick a splint on it when required for service

mikom

Felexicon wrote: »

It is. I just stick a splint on it when required for service

Try to rubberbandit instead.

cofy

mikom wrote: »

Try to rubberbandit instead.

:D:D:D deserves post of the day.