Pre Fabs to be used in Dublin as housing crises increases

Gatling

CatFromHue wrote: »

I'd agree with Donkey here, the people who this is being aimed at will be very wary about moving in to them as they'll be worried about getting stuck there.

I don't know if anyone saw the episode of Dail on The Dole in Limerick where Willie O'Dea was trying to help a 2 parent 2 child family who due to housing shortage where stuck in one hotel room for the lot of them. They were offered one place in the city but they deemed it unsituable, it could well have been too, but they were offered another place in Askeaton, which is 20 or 30 mins outside the city, but wouldn't move there as it was too far away. The show ended with them still in the hotel room and had been there for 4 or 5 months.

But if there well built multiple rooms I wouldn't be to concerned living in one .
Most people will probably think prefab ohh not living in one of them there like caravans .
What I've been looking at since this the op posted are pretty nice modern homes .
As your post related to people won't move from the preferred choice oh it's too far ,hasn't got the right shops and so on .
There really shouldn't be a choice the local authority should find a property that meets standard's and then a take it nothing offer be made similar to what's happening in the uk .
Here's a property in this location here's the form are you taking it ,or if your not taking it we completely discharge you from our care and housing support and your on your own.

As harsh as it sounds it's only fair

murphaph

RecordStraight wrote: »

I wouldn't want to share a bath and a toilet with a group of single men who each have no incentive to ever clean them.

Lol. I'd say there's many a 3 bed semi house share in suburbia that fit that bill....but those are perfectly legal. Banning bedsits was monumentally stupid. They could have banned the creation of new ones perhaps, though this would still be denying that there exists a need for cheap housing. The need hasn't gone away with the legislation. The people who needed it now live in doorways and instead of sharing a dirty toilet they go to the toilet in back alleys. This is the reality.

athtrasna

Mod Note: We have a politics forum if people want to discuss minimum wage/government policy etc http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/forumdisplay.php?f=99

RecordStraight

CatFromHue wrote: »

I'd agree with Donkey here, the people who this is being aimed at will be very wary about moving in to them as they'll be worried about getting stuck there.

I don't know if anyone saw the episode of Dail on The Dole in Limerick where Willie O'Dea was trying to help a 2 parent 2 child family who due to housing shortage where stuck in one hotel room for the lot of them. They were offered one place in the city but they deemed it unsituable, it could well have been too, but they were offered another place in Askeaton, which is 20 or 30 mins outside the city, but wouldn't move there as it was too far away. The show ended with them still in the hotel room and had been there for 4 or 5 months.

"I want a free house and I want it exactly where I want, exactly as I want". It's ironic that people dependent on the state can be so demanding, while those who are in the fortunate position of paying their own way will just take the best thing that they can afford, even if it isn't in the ideal place or hasn't the ideal number of rooms. Totally different attitudes in operation.

cerastes

the_syco wrote: »

Bedsits had no regulations. I think someone tried to input regulations, but I also think it was decided that no bedsits would be better than trying to police what is out there.

I dont see how not being able to regulate them and so create a blanket ban on them is any different to not being able to police places without toilets?

Im trying to think of an analogy, but its along the lines of cant fix the problem so lets get rid of everything regardless of how it affects anyone that avails of it, and the consequences have probably barely been seen. Id estimate the misery its caused cant be calculated, particularily because those making the decision arent affected themselves, cant see those affected, and have no knowledge (nor ever had any) of the situatio.

Del2005

<MOD SNIP, this is not the politics forum >

RecordStraight wrote: »

Were they sharing a toilet with strangers by choice? Or were they sharing a toilet with strangers because that was all they could afford?

What's the difference between this and an old 5 bed house with each room rented individually? Both are sharing the bathroom with strangers, yet one is now illegal

RecordStraight

Del2005 wrote: »

<MOD SNIP, this is not the politics forum >



What's the difference between this and an old 5 bed house with each room rented individually? Both are sharing the bathroom with strangers, yet one is now illegal

Mods, please delete this if it's deemed off topic...

The difference is that in a house-share, at least you know who you are moving in with, or who you are allowing to move in with you. When renting a 'self-contained unit' with a shared toilet, you have no control over either. I speak as someone who shared a house with 5 others...

the_syco

Del2005 wrote: »

What's the difference between this and an old 5 bed house with each room rented individually? Both are sharing the bathroom with strangers, yet one is now illegal

IIRC, a house share must have cooking facilities, toiletry, shower. A bedsit doesn't.

=-=

I'd like to say I was surprised it took the government took this long to come up with a solution to the homeless issue, but I'm not. One thing I will point out is that even when there was bedsits, there was still homelessness. Just now, the government has to provide decent accommodation that are not bedsits, which I'd say they would've done otherwise....!

ellejay

RecordStraight wrote: »

"I want a free house and I want it exactly where I want, exactly as I want". It's ironic that people dependent on the state can be so demanding, while those who are in the fortunate position of paying their own way will just take the best thing that they can afford, even if it isn't in the ideal place or hasn't the ideal number of rooms. Totally different attitudes in operation.

The populace that require a "free house" have to meet particular criteria.

A "free house" is not handed out liberally.
Speaking in general terms, the populace are unemployed or barely making minimum wage.

They want to stay close to their family and friends so because they cannot afford childcare, they've no access to bank loans and limited if any external social life.

So say you move them to an area where they know no-one? Who minds the kids? How to they afford childcare? Who do they borrow a tenner off?

RecordStraight

ellejay wrote: »

So say you move them to an area where they know no-one? Who minds the kids? How to they afford childcare? Who do they borrow a tenner off?

I've done it. You are just expected to cope - I didn't have anyone from the government coming around offering my wife and I cash or help.

The irony is that you have working parents paying for and living in their less than ideal houses in less than ideal areas, and their taxes being used to put up other people in houses that they are not paying for that must be where and how they like them. Surely you can see that?

ellejay

RecordStraight wrote: »

I've done it. You are just expected to cope - I didn't have anyone from the government coming around offering my wife and I cash or help.

The irony is that you have working parents paying for and living in their less than ideal houses in less than ideal areas, and their taxes being used to put up other people in houses that they are not paying for that must be where and how they like them. Surely you can see that?

It's not easy, fair play to you.

I do see that, but I'm guessing you can afford a car? You might struggle to tax and insure it, but you can do it. These groups of society can't.

Also, a lot of the people waiting to be homed, are single parent families. The fact you and your wife had each other would make things a little easier I'm guessing.

I think it's all relative.
So say the Jones from Dublin are "given" three bed semi in Cavan.
Mother and three kids move down.
- Now if the house was vacant in first place, no-one wanted to live there anyway.
- Developer has sold to council or nama has sold to council.

The locals are saying well for them being given a lovely 3 bed house.
The Jones are saying I can't believe we've to live out in the sticks, can't walk to the supermarket, no bus route, Mother can't get a part time job or improve standard of living because no-one to mind the kids, kids have to move school, new books, uniforms, nightmare.

RecordStraight

ellejay wrote: »

It's not easy, fair play to you.

I do see that, but I'm guessing you can afford a car? You might struggle to tax and insure it, but you can do it. These groups of society can't.

Actually, we don't have a car. We could afford it, but if we spent money on a car, we'd have less to spend on other stuff. So we use public transport.

ellejay wrote: »

Also, a lot of the people waiting to be homed, are single parent families. The fact you and your wife had each other would make things a little easier I'm guessing.

I think it's all relative.
So say the Jones from Dublin are "given" three bed semi in Cavan.
Mother and three kids move down.
- Now if the house was vacant in first place, no-one wanted to live there anyway.
- Developer has sold to council or nama has sold to council.

Nobody is seriously talking moving people from Dublin to Cavan. The example given was a family from Limerick City who declined a house in Limerick city because they (not the council, who know their requirements) deemed it unsuitable, and declined one in Askeaton (35-45 minutes away) as too far.

I'm all for helping people out when they need it, but when you have people dictating exactly what type of free house they want in what kind of neighbourhood - choices that employed people who pay their own way DO NOT have - then I think things have gone too far.

ardmacha

ellejay wrote: »

The populace that require a "free house" have to meet particular criteria.

A "free house" is not handed out liberally.
Speaking in general terms, the populace are unemployed or barely making minimum wage.

They want to stay close to their family and friends so because they cannot afford childcare, they've no access to bank loans and limited if any external social life.

So say you move them to an area where they know no-one? Who minds the kids? How to they afford childcare? Who do they borrow a tenner off?

So tax or reduce services to other people with childcare needs, who themselves live in less convenient locations so others can have their choice of free house? They won't need to borrow tenner if they get a job.

billythefish99

ellejay wrote: »

The locals are saying well for them being given a lovely 3 bed house.
The Jones are saying I can't believe we've to live out in the sticks, can't walk to the supermarket, no bus route, Mother can't get a part time job or improve standard of living because no-one to mind the kids, kids have to move school, new books, uniforms, nightmare.

So they get a flat in York St 30 seconds from Stephens Green and the poor sap who works for a living has to move to Cavan because there is nowhere in Dublin to rent. As ever, everyone is looked after except the private renter, who is completely on his own, no bailouts or free houses for him.

ellejay

billythefish99 wrote: »

So they get a flat in York St 30 seconds from Stephens Green and the poor sap who works for a living has to move to Cavan because there is nowhere in Dublin to rent. As ever, everyone is looked after except the private renter, who is completely on his own, no bailouts or free houses for him.

Well, a lot needs to be done in private rental sector for sure.

I don't know what the solution is, but I do think that the families should be entitled to turn down a house. As things stand, I think they're allowed to turn down 2 housing offers, then they're struck off.

ellejay

RecordStraight wrote: »

Actually, we don't have a car. We could afford it, but if we spent money on a car, we'd have less to spend on other stuff. So we use public transport.

Nobody is seriously talking moving people from Dublin to Cavan. The example given was a family from Limerick City who declined a house in Limerick city because they (not the council, who know their requirements) deemed it unsuitable, and declined one in Askeaton (35-45 minutes away) as too far.

I'm all for helping people out when they need it, but when you have people dictating exactly what type of free house they want in what kind of neighbourhood - choices that employed people who pay their own way DO NOT have - then I think things have gone too far.

But maybe it was unsuitable?!
The council don't always make good choices.

In my own area, I'm aware of a family of seven being offered a two bed house.
Two parents and 5 kids.
Personally, I'd deem that unsuitable!!!

I know of another family, 1 single parent family, 1 kid, offered a house in an estate that is so bad the seagulls don't even fly over it.
The actual house she was offered was right beside a very troubled family.
Again, personally, I'd find that unsuitable.

And no, I'm not defining "bad" or "troubled" you can use your imagination.

ellejay

ardmacha wrote: »

So tax or reduce services to other people with childcare needs, who themselves live in less convenient locations so others can have their choice of free house? They won't need to borrow tenner if they get a job.

surely we have a duty of care to the more vulnerable in society?

how do they get to the job?
who minds the kids?

so what's the solution, low tax for everyone and let the more unfortunate live like rats and have no life?

billythefish99

ellejay wrote: »

surely we have a duty of care to the more vulnerable in society?

We dont have a duty to provide them with a better standard of living than those who work and rent or pay a mortgage. If you cant house yourself you should be housed, but not at the expense of those who can.

ardmacha

ellejay wrote: »

surely we have a duty of care to the more vulnerable in society?

how do they get to the job?
who minds the kids?

so what's the solution, low tax for everyone and let the more unfortunate live like rats and have no life?

I'm not proposing low taxes for everyone, quite the reverse. What I am saying is that use of that taxation has opportunity costs. There can be a profound inequity in hard working people being denied services in less convenient locations while others live in Dublin 1 at the expense of the State when there are hundreds of jobs within walking distance of their free house.

looksee

https://www.google.ie/maps/@53.495824,-1.347628,3a,75y,84.45h,77.26t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s6JzmguP93sqq9Xg2ZqKePA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Prefabricated houses were built in parts of England to ease the housing crisis after the Second World War. Some are still inhabited nearly 70 years later, though they are at the end of their lives at this stage. They were highly regarded at the time and many people have lived in them and regard them with great affection. I remember an aunt and uncle living in one and my memory is that they were comfortable little houses.

Teyla Emmagan

looksee wrote: »

https://www.google.ie/maps/@53.495824,-1.347628,3a,75y,84.45h,77.26t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s6JzmguP93sqq9Xg2ZqKePA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Prefabricated houses were built in parts of England to ease the housing crisis after the Second World War. Some are still inhabited nearly 70 years later, though they are at the end of their lives at this stage. They were highly regarded at the time and many people have lived in them and regard them with great affection. I remember an aunt and uncle living in one and my memory is that they were comfortable little houses.

At last someone has provided a photo of a prefab house! I have been googling all sorts of things that couldn't have been right. There are already houses like these in the country surely? What about this one, in behind the ditch, is this the same type of house?

https://www.google.ie/maps/search/google+maps/data=!4m2!2m1!4b1

Seriously now, they hardly look too bad. Ugly, but servicable. You have your own front door and everything. That is a million times better than a hostel or a B&B IMO. Are they cold to live in though?

Mrs OBumble

RecordStraight wrote: »

The difference is that in a house-share, at least you know who you are moving in with, or who you are allowing to move in with you. When renting a 'self-contained unit' with a shared toilet, you have no control over either. I speak as someone who shared a house with 5 others...

There are two different types of house-share.

In one (what I call a real house-share) - a group of people sign a joint lease and genuinely do share the house and responsibility for it. They are jointly and individually liable for the whole rent. If someone moves out, the group is responsible for finding the replacement - although some LL's reserve the right to veto suggested replacements.

In the other, individuals rent rooms in a house from the owner. They sign individual agreements, and are liable only for their own rent. They have exclusive access to their own room, and shared access to the kitchen, living and bathroom. If someone leaves, the LL finds the replacement and signs them up, and the other tenants have little if or no say. Many people here call this a "house share", though in my mind it's more like a fancy boarding house. Under current legislation, I do not understand how it can be legal, because they do not have individual toilet access. But apparently they are. Unlike bed-sits, which are similar except that people have cooking facilities in their own rooms instead of shared use of a kitchen.

looksee

Teyla Emmagan wrote: »

At last someone has provided a photo of a prefab house! I have been googling all sorts of things that couldn't have been right. There are already houses like these in the country surely? What about this one, in behind the ditch, is this the same type of house?

https://www.google.ie/maps/search/google+maps/data=!4m2!2m1!4b1

Seriously now, they hardly look too bad. Ugly, but servicable. You have your own front door and everything. That is a million times better than a hostel or a B&B IMO. Are they cold to live in though?

Your image isn't showing an individual house. It is very unlikely that the ones I showed are any sort of indication that modern prefabs would look like them, and I seriously doubt they would have that amount of space around them!

ardmacha

Quite a few such houses were built in the North, temporarily, 50 years ago, and are still there.
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-29254528

Gatling

ellejay wrote: »

But maybe it was unsuitable?!
The council don't always make good choices.

In my own area, I'm aware of a family of seven being offered a two bed house.
Two parents and 5 kids.
Personally, I'd deem that unsuitable!!!

I know of another family, 1 single parent family, 1 kid, offered a house in an estate that is so bad the seagulls don't even fly over it.
The actual house she was offered was right beside a very troubled family.
Again, personally, I'd find that unsuitable.

And no, I'm not defining "bad" or "troubled" you can use your imagination.

Don't believe half of that everyone has a sob story or sense of entitlement they play the whole that's not suitable or that's no suitable as long as it's been paid for by somebody else sorry but I'm waiting 8 year on the list here in South dublin with my wife and 2 kids (same sex ) we get told were only allowed to apply for 2 bed apartment s and that's it.
Most we apply for come back to small or only suitable for 1 adult and 1 small Child
No local authorities would put Seven into a 2 bed ,that's word of mouth bs .
The gaul the people have to sit there I'm not living there and not living here is a joke and lone parents excuses are well and truly debunked at this point in time most lone parents I personally know are better off than me and my wife are .

handlemaster

Gatling wrote: »

Don't believe half of that everyone has a sob story or sense of entitlement they play the whole that's not suitable or that's no suitable as long as it's been paid for by somebody else sorry but I'm waiting 8 year on the list here in South dublin with my wife and 2 kids (same sex ) we get told were only allowed to apply for 2 bed apartment s and that's it.
Most we apply for come back to small or only suitable for 1 adult and 1 small Child
No local authorities would put Seven into a 2 bed ,that's word of mouth bs .
The gaul the people have to sit there I'm not living there and not living here is a joke and lone parents excuses are well and truly debunked at this point in time most lone parents I personally know are better off than me and my wife are .

Are you and your wife un able to work ?

jlm29

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

There are two different types of house-share.

In one (what I call a real house-share) - a group of people sign a joint lease and genuinely do share the house and responsibility for it. They are jointly and individually liable for the whole rent. If someone moves out, the group is responsible for finding the replacement - although some LL's reserve the right to veto suggested replacements.

In the other, individuals rent rooms in a house from the owner. They sign individual agreements, and are liable only for their own rent. They have exclusive access to their own room, and shared access to the kitchen, living and bathroom. If someone leaves, the LL finds the replacement and signs them up, and the other tenants have little if or no say. Many people here call this a "house share", though in my mind it's more like a fancy boarding house. Under current legislation, I do not understand how it can be legal, because they do not have individual toilet access. But apparently they are. Unlike bed-sits, which are similar except that people have cooking facilities in their own rooms instead of shared use of a kitchen.

You'd also have your own front door, which to me would be a lot more appealing than a house share with strangers. If you end up in a house share with a dodge, it can be hard going!