Jump to content


Sheffield City Council Housing Waiting List

Recommended Posts

The only advice I'd offer the OP is keep bidding everyweek. But it all depends on what type of property your looking for and in what area? You have more chance of getting a 1 bedroom flat and if your not picky on where you live then I'd say you should get something within 1-3 years?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In quite a few areas, there has been massive demolition but no new council housing being built to replace them. Where have all those people gone? Just to name a few, there are manor, kelvin, park hill, parson cross, scowerdons, newstead..... The list can go on. There have been only a few properties built for council tenants, and lots of private houses in thses areas. A lot of people cannot afford these. It is so wrong.

 

Its unlikely that many new council owned homes will be built again. The whole idea nowadays is to have mixed tenure estates, some privately rented, some owner occupied and some social housing. Even Parkhill when its renovated will only have a minority of social tenancies. The cost of renovating some properties would have been more than they were worth, and the council had many standing empty when the decisions were taken to demolish.

 

Whilst I agree its frustrating for people who want council housing - some people do have unrealistic expectations that they have a 'right' to be housed by the council. I'm not sure why this is so?

 

And as PT says - perhaps if the Right to Buy had never been introduced we wouldn't have this situation. Plus, demolition was mainly done to properties that were unpopular, or would have been uneconomical to renovate. And lets not forget all the council housing in Sheffield and elsewhere that has had its ownership transferred to housing associations.

It sounds like Miss Macbeth works for Sheffield Homes at City council, it doesn't make any difference anyway this system of prioritising is unfair and messed up. Yes I am very lucky that I can now afford a private property so no more need to wait for council to give me a house.

 

I was serious when I asked the question 'What criteria do you think councils should apply in deciding who to give properties to?' But no one has answered it yet. :confused:

 

I have worked for more than one social landlord, and I'm involved with a residents' group on a voluntary basis now I'm retired. So I try and keep up with legislation around housing and homelessness. I always try and post links to factual stuff, because I live in hope that people will read them and understand why they may not be entitled to any priority. Alternatively the information may help someone who is genuinely in need and hasn't realised.

Edited by Ms Macbeth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It sounds like Miss Macbeth and Levithian13 do work for Sheffield Homes at City council, it doesn't make any difference anyway this system of prioritising is unfair and messed up. Yes I am very lucky that I can now afford a private property so no more need to wait for council to give me a house.

 

I don't think the priority system is unfair, social housing should mainly be given to people who meet a certain priority such as being homeless, disabled, mental health problems etc etc, then the other houses (1 in 4) be given to people who want to wait their turn. It's not that's it unfair, it's just there is a series lack of housing stock comapred with the number of people who need/want it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It sounds like Miss Macbeth and Levithian13 do work for Sheffield Homes at City council, it doesn't make any difference anyway this system of prioritising is unfair and messed up. Yes I am very lucky that I can now afford a private property so no more need to wait for council to give me a house.

 

So you're saying that they should only let properties on waiting time? For instance a person with a child fleeing domestic violence shouldn't be given priority over someone who just wants to be rehoused?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Its unlikely that many new council owned homes will be built again. The whole idea nowadays is to have mixed tenure estates, some privately rented, some owner occupied and some social housing. Even Parkhill when its renovated will only have a minority of social tenancies. The cost of renovating some properties would have been more than they were worth, and the council had many standing empty when the decisions were taken to demolish.

 

Whilst I agree its frustrating for people who want council housing - some people do have unrealistic expectations that they have a 'right' to be housed by the council. I'm not sure why this is so?

 

And as PT says - perhaps if the Right to Buy had never been introduced we wouldn't have this situation. Plus, demolition was mainly done to properties that were unpopular, or would have been uneconomical to renovate. And lets not forget all the council housing in Sheffield and elsewhere that has had its ownership transferred to housing associations.

 

I was serious when I asked the question 'What criteria do you think councils should apply in deciding who to give properties to?' But no one has answered it yet. :confused:

 

I have worked for more than one social landlord, and I'm involved with a residents' group on a voluntary basis now I'm retired. So I try and keep up with legislation around housing and homelessness. I always try and post links to factual stuff, because I live in hope that people will read them and understand why they may not be entitled to any priority. Alternatively the information may help someone who is genuinely in need and hasn't realised.

 

I answered your question, I said they should house everyone. Some people will not want to be housed and will do so of their own accord, more often than not because they have been born into a privileged position. But many people wish to be housed as they do not have the means to house themselves. i.e. everyone who wishes to be housed and are unable to house themselves, should be. Often people in poverty, yet many of these people in poverty contribute massively to society and governments through taxation.

 

Decent housing and an adequate supply of housing are key to a healthy society. For many people finding adequate and affordable housing is a massive problem and a hinderance to their development. If we seek to improve society (which I'd hope we all would like to do), then ensuring there is an adequate supply (if not oversupply) of housing is key.

 

I believe that anybody who contributes to society, in return deserves support from that society. Be it in the form of healthcare, housing, education etc., it is the case that in the UK, people whom do not contribute to society receive healthcare, housing and education and more, free of charge. A prison provides all this (This being a good thing if it leads to the improvement of the individuals and allows them to make a meaningful contribution to society).

 

If we can provide this for a group of people who are more likely to be social parasites, why can we not provide this to people who do contribute, allowing them to develop and improve their circumstances and in turn contribute more, for the ultimate good of society.

 

If a person wishes to be housed in order to improve themselves (and in turn society) then I think society has a moral obligation to house them. People do not have the right to be housed, but if the social parasites at the top of society wish to maintain a degree of dominance and for society as we know it to function, then THEY NEED to provide housing to those who want it in order to maintain a healthy society. They should be seeking to improve it, sadly they seek to extract from it as much as they can.

 

If those in power sought to improve society, I would not be making these comments, as housing would be provided to those whom wanted it. For the time being, priority need is a good thing, but it needs to be a thing of the past.

 

Jim, John and Jacob all need a house but society has only 1 to give. Jim needs it more than John, but Jacob needs it more than Jim. We should give it to Jacob as if we house one of the others the detrimental effect upon society will be greater. However, we should seek to house Jim and then John as soon as possible to avoid any detrimental effects or at least to reduce them (or to make progressively less significant improvements, but improvements nonetheless, for the sake of improvement itself).

 

 

People have a need to be housed, society needs to house people, need is not catoragized by the letter of law written by some bureaucratic organization, 'need' is the wishes/demand of the people. Housing is needed, all you have to do is look at the waiting list and number of available properties, see they don't add up and recognize that need.

 

You say 'genuinely in need', you mean 'needs more than'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really do not understand the priority system. I have a 3 bedroom house and I have priority for a move because I am willing to give up my 3 bed for a 2 bed in a better area however I have been biding every week for 4 months and still no joy and when I complained to the council I was told that rehousing has got nothing to do with them and it is responsibility of Sheffield homes now.

Sheffield homes claim to be very short of 3 bed houses so you would think that they would want me in a 2 bed as soon as possible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I really do not understand the priority system. I have a 3 bedroom house and I have priority for a move because I am willing to give up my 3 bed for a 2 bed in a better area however I have been biding every week for 4 months and still no joy and when I complained to the council I was told that rehousing has got nothing to do with them and it is responsibility of Sheffield homes now.

Sheffield homes claim to be very short of 3 bed houses so you would think that they would want me in a 2 bed as soon as possible.

 

 

You'd be easier getting an exchange, people are crying out for 3 bedrooms. I want to exchange my 2 bedroom house for a 3 bedroom house, I'm not desperate but I'd love 3 bedrooms.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

You say 'genuinely in need', you mean 'needs more than'.

 

I disagree. There will be people who NEED a property more than someone else NEEDS a property. For instance:

 

A person fleeing domestic violence NEEDS a house.

 

A person who is living in overcrowded circumstances NEEDS a house.

 

But which is more urgent? The first example, obviously.

 

However, there will be people who are renting privately who will say they NEED a Council house. Chances are, it will be for financial reasons like the rent is too high etc. However, they will also have a number of outgoings that they don't NEED such as Sky tv, going out once or twice a week, takeaways, holidays etc. etc.

 

They would be able to afford their rent if they cut out one or more of these. The problem is these days that people don't live according to their means and, in turn, would rather have a go at the Council for not giving them a property, when if they controlled their life a bit better and took more responsibility for their actions, they would be fine in a private rented property.

 

This means that they do not have a NEED for a Council property at all - they just want one to make their financial life easier.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I really do not understand the priority system. I have a 3 bedroom house and I have priority for a move because I am willing to give up my 3 bed for a 2 bed in a better area however I have been biding every week for 4 months and still no joy and when I complained to the council I was told that rehousing has got nothing to do with them and it is responsibility of Sheffield homes now.

Sheffield homes claim to be very short of 3 bed houses so you would think that they would want me in a 2 bed as soon as possible.

 

They will want you to move - but I'd assume that you wouldn't take just anywhere in Sheffield, would you?

 

You have priority and when bidding for properties going to priority, then it just depends on how much longer someone else has had their priority for. I've heard that some priority applicants are waiting up to 6 months for a property - so with your 4 months, you may still have to wait a bit longer.

 

And to be honest, it's probably not just the 3 beds that they are short of.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
They will want you to move - but I'd assume that you wouldn't take just anywhere in Sheffield, would you?

 

You have priority and when bidding for properties going to priority, then it just depends on how much longer someone else has had their priority for. I've heard that some priority applicants are waiting up to 6 months for a property - so with your 4 months, you may still have to wait a bit longer.

 

And to be honest, it's probably not just the 3 beds that they are short of.

 

You are right however I also have 10yrs waiting time and Sheffield homes have told us that people that want to move from a 2 bed to a 2 bed will have priority over me if they have just 1 day longer waiting time than I do.

 

Surely it would be better for them to give me a 2 bed first then a family who needs to move out of a 2 bed can have my 3 bed and then someone can move into their 2 bed.

Its not rocket science but when I tried to explain that to Sheffield homes it may as well have been.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You are right however I also have 10yrs waiting time and Sheffield homes have told us that people that want to move from a 2 bed to a 2 bed will have priority over me if they have just 1 day longer waiting time than I do.

 

Surely it would be better for them to give me a 2 bed first then a family who needs to move out of a 2 bed can have my 3 bed and then someone can move into their 2 bed.

Its not rocket science but when I tried to explain that to Sheffield homes it may as well have been.

 

What of the family in a 1 bed that need a two? You would then be taking a property away from someone who needs a two bedroom house.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
My circumstances are fairly common to cut a long story short, split up with my wife, no home

 

Declaring myself homeless was not an option for reason i'm sure many of you would understand working in full time employment.

 

Huh? You can be homeless and still employed, and you are under no obligation to tell your employer you are declaring yourself as homeless with the council. The council is also not allowed to turn you away if you are employed, nor can this make any affect on their decision.

 

In your situation, telling the council you are homeless is the only way you are going to get a priority case, and it will be on a single bedroom residence. If you are genuinely homeless, you wont care what it is as long as it is somewhere of your own.

 

Edit: Actually, now I have read that, its rubbish isn't it.. even if homeless you won't get priority as the council has no duty of care for you. As a working man with no dependents or ties, you should have enough money to get your own place. If you are unable to do so because your outgoings (even with no home) are equal or higher than your income, then I think moaning about council houses is the least of your problems.

Edited by the_bloke

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.