£7,000 free to council tenants in Sheffield

[gpsy 10]

Has anyone heard the rumour that 1fish2fish56 will swallow any old crap? Sounds a bit like any excuse for a good whinge to me.

 

 

 

In the past I've moved into 2 properties that were already condemned for demolition and I lived in them jointly for 6 years. Sometimes - like when you're a student, low-paid or unemployed - you don't have much choice as to what gets offered to you.

 

 

 

That seems to be what this thread is about. You think some other people are luckier than you are and want to whinge about it.

In one post you've quickly insulted 1fish2fish56 and labelled their and my own opinions as being a 'whinge'. That's hardly very respectful, just because you may not share the same opinion is it? It would be far better to discuss the subject rather than childishly insult us for our opinions, or if you don't feel capable of doing that you could of course just not post in the thread?

 

If your neighbours win the lottery god help this forum.

If my neighbours won the lottery I'd be happy for them. It wouldn't affect me in the slightest. There's quite a difference here and I'm not complaining about luck, I'm taking issue with the fact that I think public money is being used inappropriately. The amount being paid to this person seems grossly inflated compared to their actual needs and the inconvenience they actually face. So much to the point that they seem amused by it all and still have no interest in ever seeking a job because they can enjoy such perks as this.

 

If they had been lucky and won the lottery, all well and good, but in this case it appears they're being given a large handout simply because they're being moved from one provided house to another.

 

---------- Post added 17-05-2013 at 10:03 ----------

 

I can see where you're coming from gypsy.

 

I don't know anything about this, but if it's as you state, then it certainly leaves a bitter taste.

 

It's one thing the Council paying for people to live for free in properties, but it's something else if these same people are suddenly getting a cash windfall at our expense.

 

I can accept the Council would have to pay the costs of removal and any other associated costs involved with the move (relocating their Sky dishes etc ), but £7,000....Really?

 

If this is effectively funding a nice holiday and a new X-Box, things that many hard working taxpayers can't afford, then the world has truly gone mad.

 

Regards

 

Doom

Exactly

 

All the things many of us working, paying tax etc. may struggle to afford this person is now getting freely. And it's made worse by the fact they refuse to go out and work, not that they can't. They were recently offered a course to attend and improve their chance of employment, they opted to sleep in and then watch Jeremy Kyle before generally enjoying a free lifestyle of late nights, late mornings, easy afternoons and weekends of partying. All the payment will do is fund that lifestyle further, get them a few luxury items, maybe a holiday and further reinforce that the mugs in this situation are the ones who are out working to support their chosen lifestyle.

 

---------- Post added 17-05-2013 at 10:05 ----------

 

I don't read it like that, I read it as the SCC are once again being generous with our money without good reason. There's no way a tenant, either of SCC or a private landlord should be paid to move from a rented property. When their lease came to an end, they'd be moving anyway.

 

£7,500 for a tenant to move from one rented property to another? That's outrageous when they're closing libraries, cutting grants to youth clubs and various other costcutting exercises.

 

I don't mind them paying something, as this is a move they've not chosen to make, but surely a more reasonable amount would be better? There's no way the expenses involved here mount to £7,500. Especially not when they're already drawing up a wish list of non-house related items.

 

Would it not make more sense to give what's needed rather than being overly generous with public money when as you correctly point out other services are suffering which mean the public are losing out.

 

---------- Post added 17-05-2013 at 10:07 ----------

 

When I moved into my council property six years ago it cost us more than £7000 to get the place as we wanted it.

Our fault I know but the place was a mess ,we also added a drive and garden fencing etc.

We were lucky that we could afford to do this work at the time but if we could not have done the work the place would have been not for us.

 

That's fair enough, but this persons place has had nothing spent on it. The garden is like a dump zone with furniture and other bits of rubbish just left there and there's very little in modernisation or decorating taking place. But instead of looking at the situation a blanket £7,500 is being paid.

[geared 318]

Perhaps they've got the wrong end of the stick and thats the general number being banded around by neighbours, when their cheque comes through it might be disappointing?

 

They'd be silly to spunk it all on tellys and holidays before sorting out a new home anyway.

[Timewarper 10]

Yes, council tenants usually get a pay-out when they have to move because of demolition. Me and the ex got a pay-out of about £2K when we were rehoused from St Aidan's about 15 years ago. It's to help with removal costs and things. It's also not a loan or anything, so they don't have to pay it back.

[Doom 10]

If you'd made somewhere your home, settled in it and spent time and possibly quite a lot of money in it, how would you feel if a large organisation came along and said 'sorry mate, you'll have to leave, we're knocking down your house'? Its quite a different scenario to moving when we choose.

 

It's not his home though, it belongs to the Landlord.

 

I'm sure there will be an agreement in place that the Landlord could ask him to vacate the property within a certain notice period (6 moths?).

 

If that was to happen I'm sure the Landlord wouldn't have to pay him £7,000 to set-up elsewhere.

 

I own my home and have furnished it with my own money after many years of grafting at work.

 

Here we're talking about someone who doesn't own the property, relies on others to pay for the property and at I guess I would think most of the furnishings within the property are also paid for by others (ie. Taxpayers).

 

Whilst I don't begrudge my taxes going towards those who are genuinely hard up, I would object to them getting a Brucie Bonus that will allow them to go on nice holdiays and purchase TV's (as suggested by the OP).

 

Regards

 

Doom

[geared 318]

Perhaps that will happen tho, most contracts need a month or two notice, so the landlord could serve notice and kick the tennant out - and then say he lives there and pocket the 7 grand.

[mop head 10]

ITS NOT £7500 ITS actually £4700 and i also live in these houses i work and have never ever signed on so for all of you that think people who live in social housing are on the dole reality check we are not

[lazy gator 10]

LETS GET THE FACTS RIGHT

1. The disturbance payment iS £4,700

2. Most people i of working age who live in these houses work.

3. The government did not stop funding for pathfinder it ended in in 2009, incidentally demolision on the houses was not due to start until 2009 obviously no impact or cost analysis was done when plans to knock down the houses was considered as the funding was due to end before work started. What did pathfinder do on the Arbourthorne to improve the area?

[kidneystone 23]

It's not his home though, it belongs to the Landlord.

 

Even though the house belongs to the landlord it is the tenants home. A home is what you make it

[lil-minx92 10]

The costs involved in moving home easily mount up-

page 17/18 here lists just some of the potential costs

 

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/7719/147648.pdf

[Narden Dee 10]

Wow £7000 well they could probably retire on that amount:rolleyes:

It's compensation for being moved its no different to the plans for HS2 train which is also public money used to compensate home owners

 

I get the feeling some people are jealous and it's rather petty

[lazy gator 10]

The council's cabinet committee recently approved the demolition of the remainder of the 5M (flat-roofed) properties in Arbourthorne, (located off East Bank Road and Eastern Avenue).

 

As a councillor for the Arbourthorne ward, I chaired the numerous public meetings back in 2004 which eventually led to the Arbourthorne Masterplan being adopted. These properties were built to last for approx 20 years, but have lasted much longer than that. The brick-built houses in Arbourthorne have been improved to the government's Decent Homes Standard, but these properties don't muster the test, and will therefore be the last major-scale demolition scheme in Sheffield.

 

A number of the 5M properties have already been demolished, but the Tory-Lib Dem coalition pulled the plug on goverment funding to complete the demolition work. The council has now found a way to secure that funding and so the remaining 5M properties have recently been declared for demolition.

 

If you are to be made homeless - because the house you live in is going to be knocked down - then you are legally entitled to compensation. The council will also give you priority for rehousing.

 

Private owners, that is those occupants who have bought their own council homes, will be compensated for the market value of their properties and also have their legal costs met. Council tenants will be eligible for disturbance payments, for example to cover the cost of new carpets and curtains when they move.

 

I'm not sure what private tenants might be compensated for though. But as it happens, I'm in the process of setting up the first of a series of monthly meetings with those residents affected by the demolition scheme, and thanks to the OP raisding this issue, I'll make enquiries with council officers as to their eligibility for compensation.

 

First ive heard of any monthly meetings that will take place i look forward to these, what will they discuss. the residents in this scheme have been poorly informed right from the start, this has caused a lot rumours and bad feeling towards the council who always pass the book onto government. As far as we (the tenants and owners) are aware home owners will get the value of there home plus 10% of the value of there home.i presume that this would be on top of any costs involved with moving. There are a number of drop in sessions on each wednesday of june for affected residents in phase 2.

[Doom 10]

Wow £7000 well they could probably retire on that amount:rolleyes:

It's compensation for being moved its no different to the plans for HS2 train which is also public money used to compensate home owners

 

I get the feeling some people are jealous and it's rather petty

 

I wouldn't say it's jealousy, more of a concern that a limited pot of money (the Council's budget) is being funnelled in the wrong direction when there are far more worthy causes.

 

I certainly object to our Council giving someone who isn't working our money to afford luxuries that many hard working people can't afford.....I'd say that money could be put to a better use.

 

Regards

 

Doom

 

---------- Post added 17-05-2013 at 19:31 ----------

 

Even though the house belongs to the landlord it is the tenants home. A home is what you make it

 

But it's not actually his....It's the Landlords....He lives there, but he doesn't own it....He's not even paying for it.....The taxpayers are!!

 

I would think the Landlord could ask him to leave at any time, obviously subject to a reasonable notice period.

 

Regards

 

Doom