I don't want to be offered social housing, but to continue rent supplement

mary1989

Hi all,
Just wondering if anyone could shed some light on my situation.

I am just after receiving a form to continue my rent supplement but when I completed it to return to the community welfare officer he told me I would have to go on the social housing list.

I am living in private rented accomodation and am very happy here and I don't want to be offered a council house.

To continue receiving the rent allowance I have no choice but to go onto this list.

What are rhe chances of getting offered a house I wonder? I live in Mayo.

Thanks in advance.

MarkR

Have a look at the citizens information website. http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/social_welfare/social_welfare_payments/supplementary_welfare_schemes/rent_supplement.html

Seems you don't really have a choice. If a house comes up you might be offered it. It can be rejected, up to twice, then you lose the supplement.

I presume the social housing would be cheaper for the state, so I can see why they would want to stop paying rent allowance.

D3PO

I find these threads so hard to swallow.

The social welfare structure is giving you a dig out and you have the cheek to whinge and complain about it.

get over yourself OP. Don't want to go on the housing list. Improve your lot and don't be reliant on getting a handout.

desertcircus

D3PO wrote: »

I find these threads so hard to swallow.

The social welfare structure is giving you a dig out and you have the cheek to whinge and complain about it.

get over yourself OP. Don't want to go on the housing list. Improve your lot and don't be reliant on getting a handout.

While there is a point to be made about the relative cost of social housing versus rent allowance, there's nothing to be gained from adopting a confrontational attitude. If the OP has gotten used to living there and considers it home, it's entirely natural to look into whether it's possible to stay.

As for the last line: given that you know virtually nothing about the OP's personal circumstances, and given that unemployment is running at one in six adults, it's breathtakingly presumptuous to tell someone to improve their lot and not rely on handouts. Are there well-paid jobs all over the country just lying around waiting for anybody at all to express an interest?

Victor

D3PO wrote: »

I find these threads so hard to swallow.

The social welfare structure is giving you a dig out and you have the cheek to whinge and complain about it.

get over yourself OP. Don't want to go on the housing list. Improve your lot and don't be reliant on getting a handout.

Constructive, on-topic posts only please.

Moderator

Victor

mary1989 wrote: »

What are rhe chances of getting offered a house I wonder? I live in Mayo.

It really depends on what is available and who is looking. Families, older people and those at risk are a priority. Single people and couples are at a lower priority.

People are usually housed according to their needs, that is older people and people with mobility difficulties will normally be given single-storey houses or apartments where there are lifts. Established families will be given enough bedrooms for their needs, whereas young / growing families will normally get an extra bedroom and so on.

The points scoring will also take into account how long you have been on the housing list.

Not all council properties are in traditional council estates.

the_syco

mary1989 wrote: »

I am just after receiving a form to continue my rent supplement but when I completed it to return to the community welfare officer he told me I would have to go on the social housing list.

It seems that they're trying to cut costs, putting you into cheaper accommodation saves them money. Long term, I can see this happening more on a cases by case basis.

mary1989 wrote: »

I am living in private rented accomodation and am very happy here and I don't want to be offered a council house.

Have you checked where the council house may be? Perhaps if you talked to your CWO, you may find a council house in your area that would suit you? Is there any reason in particular that you don't want to be put into a council house?

irritablebaz

you have to now be on the social housing list as it proves you are in need of housing. i doubt you will actually be offered any social housing anyway as local councils stock is non existent. i dont know where you live so cant say if any housing authorities have stock or are building anything.

good luck with filling out the forms though, they have all been recently changed and are a nightmare to complete.

djimi

Most of the stories that you hear from people on social housing lists are of wait times of several years. I know it depends on the area and your personal circumstances, but Id say that if you go on the housing list now then chances are you will be safe enough for a few years to come!

3DataModem

the_syco wrote: »

putting you into cheaper accommodation saves them money.

I presume you mean saves "us" money.

Mrs OBumble

Lots of people on the list don't really want a council house.

Apply to go on the list. It's the only way to keep the RS.

If there's a choice about which area you are willing to live in, nominate only one - and make it the one that you are least likely to get offered a house it (may be the one that's most popular, has least houses in it, or perhaps the lease of the sort of houses that you need).

Do not tick the box that asks if you will accept voluntary housing. (If asked why, say that if you're in social housing you want to have the chance of buying your own house one day.)

If you have a conversation with a council staff member as part of the application process, make sure to say how happy you are in your current house, and how you hope to be earning more soon so that you can afford your current rental without needing the RS. Or something similar. They'll get the drift.

who_ru

D3PO wrote: »

I find these threads so hard to swallow.

The social welfare structure is giving you a dig out and you have the cheek to whinge and complain about it.

get over yourself OP. Don't want to go on the housing list. Improve your lot and don't be reliant on getting a handout.

George Hook anyone?

JustAThought

who_ru wrote: »

George Hook anyone?

There is supposed to be a presumption that if you work you are rewarded for this effort & that this brings with it he benefit of living in a nice house in a nice area etc. why would anyone bother working if they can reap the same benefits as those who do , and live for free, FOREVER, in the place and location of their choosing .

fussyonion

JustAThought wrote: »

There is supposed to be a presumption that if you work you are rewarded for this effort & that this brings with it he benefit of living in a nice house in a nice area etc. why would anyone bother working if they can reap the same benefits as those who do , and live for free, FOREVER, in the place and location of their choosing .

There's that expression again.."free".
It's not free, council house tenants pay rent too.

who_ru

JustAThought wrote: »

There is supposed to be a presumption that if you work you are rewarded for this effort & that this brings with it he benefit of living in a nice house in a nice area etc. why would anyone bother working if they can reap the same benefits as those who do , and live for free, FOREVER, in the place and location of their choosing .

everyone working gets to live in a nice house in a nice area? well if i thought that by going on welfare, and not working, but still living for free, FOREVER, in a place of my choosing i'd darn well darn diddly do it.

But as you already know quite well not everyone working gets to live in a nice house in a nice place simply because they work and have a job. sounds almost communist really. Utopia.

if that's a presumption then we have a long way to go in Ireland before we actually get real.

Scortho

fussyonion wrote: »

There's that expression again.."free".
It's not free, council house tenants pay rent too.

Heavily subsidised. Theres people working and living in the city centre who'd give their left nut for renting at 10% of their income.

who_ru

Scortho wrote: »

Heavily subsidised. Theres people working and living in the city centre who'd give their left nut for renting at 10% of their income.

and how many of them would also like to be jobless?

fussyonion

Scortho wrote: »

Heavily subsidised. Theres people working and living in the city centre who'd give their left nut for renting at 10% of their income.

So say we have one half of the population working and the other half not. This could be due to illness, long term disability etc.

The working half can afford to buy their own homes and are living the life of Larry in their chosen areas.

What do you want to happen to the other half?

Do you want them to live on the streets?

I'm thankful there are council houses for people not so fortunate to own their own homes but don't, for one second, think these people are all paying a heavily subsidised rent because not everyone is.

I'm currently living in a council house but I DON'T see myself here for the rest of my life.

I DO want to own my home but I don't slate those who can't.

I was brought up in a council house and I'm bloody proud of it.

Also, not everyone living in council houses are unemployed.

Scortho

who_ru wrote: »

and how many of them would also like to be jobless?

Not everyone living in council housing is jobless though.
It shouldn't be a long term solution, neither should welfare.
It should be a facility that gets you by for a year or two, not your entire lifetime.

srsly78

How is this new? In 2003 I had to go sign up to the dublin corpo housing list so I could get rent supplement whilst a btea student. It involved lots of queueing... Different rules for dublin vs mayo?

fussyonion

OP, I realise I didn't really answer your question.

I suggest, if you want to continue to receive RA, that you just choose an area that you would like to live in should a council home become available.

Most people on RA are waiting for homes from the council (that's the point of the Housing List), but you either take a home when it becomes available or you lose your RA; there's no happy medium.

The other option is to rent privately, which I doubt you'll be interested in.

The_Conductor

who_ru wrote: »

and how many of them would also like to be jobless?

Many with young children- whose whole salary is paying for overpriced childcare- only continue working so they have a job to go to in a few years time when the children start school. For those with young families- more often than not- there is no financial gain associated with working.

who_ru

The_Conductor wrote: »

Many with young children- whose whole salary is paying for overpriced childcare- only continue working so they have a job to go to in a few years time when the children start school. For those with young families- more often than not- there is no financial gain associated with working.

perhaps not but that's how the government has absolved itself of state run childcare, leave it to the private sector. just increase child benefit before an election and get re-elected like FF did time again.

exactly the same as social housing, they have withdrawn from that to, leaving private LLs to fill the gap, many totally amateur, shady. some good.

But you have many other benefits of being in a job, self-esteem being one (maybe?), insurance paid (maybe), social interaction, opportunities to advance and upskill, etc etc.

I certainly prefer working, unsocial hours are part of my job, but it also gives a little quality of life that I know for a fact i wouldn't come close to having if i were unemployed.

Mrs OBumble

Scortho wrote: »

Not everyone living in council housing is jobless though.
It shouldn't be a long term solution.

Ahh, but the OP did not ask about council housing. S/he asked about RS, which is only available to people getting welfare, of one stripe or another.

I agree with you that RS shouldn't be a long term solution - because actually it's part of what traps some people into unemployment: the only housing support available to low-income workers is council housing.

But what are the alternatives: move people into council housing, which in which low income people can and do receive support via income related rents, or withdraw the RS and leave them to find private sector rent themselves.

fussyonion

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Ahh, but the OP did not ask about council housing. S/he asked about RS, which is only available to people getting welfare, of one stripe or another.

I agree with you that RS shouldn't be a long term solution - because actually it's part of what traps some people into unemployment: the only housing support available to low-income workers is council housing.

But what are the alternatives: move people into council housing, which in which low income people can and do receive support via income related rents, or withdraw the RS and leave them to find private sector rent themselves.

Absolutely agree with this.
When I was on RA, I couldn't work. It was either:

- Accept the RA and don't work
-Lose the RA, work and not be able to afford my rent.

This is a problem facing thousands of unemployed people in receipt of Rent Allowance, which is why they brought in the ASH/RAS schemes, to enable people to return to work without worrying about losing their homes.

I agree Rent Allowance should not be a long-term solution also.

At least people who move on to secure council homes, can go back to work and give something back to society, which is what I did when I was given my home.

Victor

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Ahh, but the OP did not ask about council housing. S/he asked about RS, which is only available to people getting welfare, of one stripe or another.

I don't think so. It is also available to other people on low incomes.

The_Conductor

Victor wrote: »

I don't think so. It is also available to other people on low incomes.

Providing they initially qualified for RAS- and were unemployed or under employed for less than 30 hours a week, and are now employed for less than 30 hours per week, providing income limits are not breached, they may qualify to keep their Rent Supplement. You can't qualify for the RAS scheme in this circumstance- and any income you generate, will be reassessed as means, for determining a new level of RS for you.

Its a mechanism to get the unemployed back into work- and would not be available to people on low incomes per se- other than as a benefit they don't automatically loose, by virtue of commencing employment (within income limits).

Scortho

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Ahh, but the OP did not ask about council housing. S/he asked about RS, which is only available to people getting welfare, of one stripe or another.

I agree with you that RS shouldn't be a long term solution - because actually it's part of what traps some people into unemployment: the only housing support available to low-income workers is council housing.

But what are the alternatives: move people into council housing, which in which low income people can and do receive support via income related rents, or withdraw the RS and leave them to find private sector rent themselves.

No the op wasn't.
Another poster was on about how council housing isn't free, as some believe it to be.
It isn't free, however when you compare it to a similar privately rented/owned house, it's significantly cheaper.

gaius c

Edit: never mind. Will only get banned for it.

Mrs OBumble

The_Conductor wrote: »

Providing they initially qualified for RAS- and were unemployed or under employed for less than 30 hours a week, and are now employed for less than 30 hours per week, providing income limits are not breached, they may qualify to keep their Rent Supplement. You can't qualify for the RAS scheme in this circumstance- and any income you generate, will be reassessed as means, for determining a new level of RS for you.

Its a mechanism to get the unemployed back into work- and would not be available to people on low incomes per se- other than as a benefit they don't automatically loose, by virtue of commencing employment (within income limits).

Exactly. There is no housing benefit per-sec in this country, and that's just plain mad, IMHO.

Rosier

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Lots of people on the list don't really want a council house.

Apply to go on the list. It's the only way to keep the RS.

If there's a choice about which area you are willing to live in, nominate only one - and make it the one that you are least likely to get offered a house it (may be the one that's most popular, has least houses in it, or perhaps the lease of the sort of houses that you need).

Do not tick the box that asks if you will accept voluntary housing. (If asked why, say that if you're in social housing you want to have the chance of buying your own house one day.)

If you have a conversation with a council staff member as part of the application process, make sure to say how happy you are in your current house, and how you hope to be earning more soon so that you can afford your current rental without needing the RS. Or something similar. They'll get the drift.

Sound advice; being happy where you live when times are hard matters. Matters greatly. for health and sanity.

I share the Ops concerns; the nature of my disability imposes needs and I am very happy where I am. And was very worried when I had to go on the housing list

Last time I moved I was told this was needed but the forms somehow got mislaid ....and as I am over 70 now they are not following this up.. Yes a lot depends on your situation and rightly families with young children get priority. Grateful to be here. And would not like to take a dwelling needed for others.