Buying Next Door to Social House

Many of those living in social housing or receiving housing supports are, in fact, people in full or part time employment but whose income is below the qualifying threshold which is thirty-five thousand per annum. There is a prejudice evident in your comments which are sweeping and not well informed, to say the least of it. On the list of criteria to determine what makes a good neighbour their economic, employment or family circumstances ought to rank at the very bottom.

What is your definition of a "standard" person or persons? Well paid, professional, mortgage holder, two cars in the driveway, kids in fee paying education? A minority of the working population would have all those criteria ascribed to them these days just as a minority of welfare recipients could be categorized as lazy, dishonest, scrounging , anti-social, entitled or criminally minded.

The state has a duty to protect it's weakest citizens be they unemployed, disabled, poorly paid or homeless and part of that obligation is to provide housing affordable to those of limited means.

I think you would like to see all of these non "standard" people living together in ghettos rather than contaminating your nice, leafy, middle class enclave. We have seen many of these ghettos arise in our cities and towns over several decades now because of disastrous local authority policies and decisions and we have seen the major societal ills that have arisen as a result.

So this requirement for private developers to earmark twenty per cent of new builds as so called "social housing" is a welcome development in attempting to avoid repeating mistakes made in the past. It may not be a perfect solution but it is a start.

So there's no such thing as 'normal' and many (according to you) social housing tenants are employed up-standing citizens that anyone should be delighted to live next to, but at the same time - according to you, if you place these same people all in the same area it turns into a ghetto?

There is always uncertainty in an estate. You can't control who buys the houses next to you or if a landlord rents them out, the tenants could be anyone

My mother bought a house in an estate that had 'no social housing' partially for this reason.. Then, probably, the worst family in the town bought a house privately near to her and terrorised the neighbours

They were so bad that the person living next door to them was forced to move out in fear of their lives and the house ended up selling for a fraction of it's price.

This was all privately owned housing.

In my housing estate, all privately owned houses too, but with some Landlords owning a few units, a house very close to us was rented to someone who had been convicted of a very serious sexual crime against a minor. There is no certainty in life.

On the other side of the coin, one of my friends lives in an estate with 100% social housing, and she has never had any trouble at all from her neighbours and loves it there.

There is no certainty.

No, I just use the word ghetto as a device to illustrate that mindset certain members of the middle class possess. The acronym NIMBY would be more appropriate. Not In My Back Yard. Bad planning at local authority level over the past six decades has resulted in vast estates being developed on the outskirts of our major cities and towns without any supporting infrastructure put in place. Inevitably, problems such as crime and drug abuse can arise because of this but the vast majority living in these communities are responsible and law abiding.

The council house is vacant, per the OP.

Why is the current house for sale? Well, how often do houses next door to each other in 70s housing estates go up for sale within a few months of each other? Maybe it's a coincidence and the current owners are selling up for other reasons, but maybe, just maybe it's because they now find themselves next door to a council house.

I lived for 12 years in a social housing block of 6 houses, I was a council tenant myself, we had fantastic neighbors, kept pride in the complex, nearly all worked. Far friendlier people than the private estate I grew up on, everyone helped everyone, in and out of each others houses, I really miss them to be honest.

But there was one house that was a lone council house next to us that consistently had bad tenants, drugs galore, parties, fights, cops always in and out. OP if I was buying and knew there was one next to me, I'd walk away, most of the time you will get fine neighbors but you are at high risk of getting some really bad ones. The council are obligated to house these and they are constantly moved around the place.

I'm not sure this is the ringing endorsement of having local authority tenants next door that you think it is.

Run away from it-dont walk away, RUN!!!!

Ive been a landlord and Ive lived in houses with social tenants, sure, some are fine, but, social welfare tenants are less likely to care for a property, why should they, the council will have to house them anyway, they can't be left homeless, they know this. Re kids-monlkey see monkey do-I definitely would not buy a house with them near me, not to mind attached to me.

Private landlords are way more careful in selecting tenants, for the others saying it's different, maybe they have unicorns in their front garden as well.

I live on a street of 30 houses, the council never bought a house, maybe cos the houses are 150 years old. I think the council mainly buy in large estates, houses less than 50 years old. If people are dealing or causing anti social behavior you can contact the council. You have to balance the risk. Is it likely you could be living next door to a noisy or disruptive tenant. If it's a 2bed council will only give it to a parent with one child. You could buy a new house and theres 10 per cent chance of living beside a council tenant. I lived next door to a private house, it was always rented out to hap single mothers with 2 kids, I lived there 3 years there was no noise or problem from the tenants . The owner sold the house after 4 years to make investments, eg the house I was renting , eg nothing to do with the hap tenants

I thinks it's s tough market now since theres so few houses for sale in most areas

Generally the new flooring and appliances are paid for using grants from Welfare.

Welfare pay for fridge, cooker, that's about it. Re sound issues, is it detached or semi detached, it makes a difference if neighbour is noisy

The post was referring to a person who had sold their house to a council and saw all their fixtures and fittings in a skip when the relet repairs were being done. The kitchens and floors weren't put in by a tenant in that case, they were removed before a tenant was put into a house.

Make your points as you see fit, I wouldn't argue otherwise. I am simply pointing out that in the post you referenced the fixtures and fittings were being removed from a house that was purchased by the council from a homeowner. I didn't make any claims about social tenants myself so I'm not sure why you referenced my post and then added the bits about social tenants. Perhaps you are mixing me up with someone else?

I only buy beside social houses , far more fun and generally more interesting

"Welcome to Russian Roulette. Would you like this gun with one bullet or this gun with five bullets?"

"Sure it's all the same, give me the five bullets"

You're obviously personally and emotionally invested in this so apologies if I offended you or think I'm describing you, but you are deliberately misrepresenting my position.

To summarise, again. The probability of having a nightmare neighbour is massively higher if they're a social housing tenant compared to an owner occupier. There's simply no other way to put it.

That does not mean all social housing tenants are bad nor does it mean all owner occupiers are great.

But basic facts should mean the OP either runs a mile or goes back and asks for a heavy, heavy discount.