Lotto win council tenant stays put

“Sorry but this is - as usual - half a story and a load of gossip and assumptions.

The fact that someone suddenly gains "a significant sum" does not automatically mean that they are "wealthy". It's entirely possible for someone to have huge debts which the money pays off - or for them to have won just enough money to "buy a house" but that win puts them over the threshold for all other benefits and sources of income - so "buying a house" would immediately leave them with absolutely no money to live on, just a "roof over their head". They may have bought houses for other members of their family - taking a number of people out of council houses whilst staying put themselves - or any one of a thousand other ways to spend their money that actually saves the council and us a load more money than we would if they just spent the money on a house for themselves.

It's also unclear from this report whether or not that claim is even true - the article merely says that someone with an axe to grind - CLAIMS - it to be the case with no proof offered. It begs the question - how does she KNOW about that lottery win and how does the council KNOW how much money that person has allegedly won? So far as this report goes, it sounds like an attempt to make the public "hate" council tenants in the same way that the public have been propagandised and brainwashed into "hating" the unemployed, the disabled, smokers and just about everyone else. It's a classic distraction technique used to take your eyes off the ball and allow authorities to abuse people or cut spending to cover-up for their own incompetence and waste elsewhere in their budgets.

For the record - I'm not a council tenant and have no connection with Stroud or anyone living there - in fact, I'm a private tenant on a very low income and would dearly love to be able to get a council house - so I'm very much in favour of making sure that they are not being occupied by people who can genuinely afford to house themselves. I'm just pointing out that anyone can SAY there's a "significant" lottery winner in a council house - doesn't make it true and it certainly doesn't paint a complete picture.

By all means, apply common sense to the allocation of social housing and press for the rules to be changed if necessary but don't resort to this sort of "Daily Mail" manipulative hate-mongering.”

“the person could buy a house somewhere else and give it to the council”

“Walker, we do not know anything about the person who has won the lottery in this case (unless i have misread). How do you know the tenant isnt a single 80 year old woman? Surely in this case to use your words its "morally abhorrant" to expect her to leave a house she could have lived in for most of her life to expect her to up sticks and move just like that? I know the chances are slim of this being the case, but dont jump to conclusions about the tenant just like that.

Furthermore, the local housing allowance is the same whether a tenant is in a council house or private rented, the latter meaning that if the rent is higher than the housing allowance the tenant makes up the difference, so your taxes wont be paying any more for someone in a private tenancy, hence making no difference.”

“If you have enough money to buy 'several houses' then surely the decent thing to do would be to buy one and free up a much needed council house for someone more deserving. Wasn't there an article just this week about a soldier who is being made redundant from the army that needs a council house....?”

“Congrats on winning the lottery! I am not green with envy about such things, I really do mean it.
Now go and expand your horizons buy purchasing a house thus releasing your council house to someone who needs it more than you.”

“Amy86, the point is social housing is intended as affordable housing for people on low incomes. This doesn't just mean those that are claiming benefits but also those that are on low incomes but above the thresh-hold for benefits.

Further, it's all well and good saying that people on benefits can rent privately because they can claim housing benefit but who do you think it is that pays for that benefit.......the taxpayer is who. I would rather people were housed in affordable social housing than private rented if it's me paying the bill.

When you consider that social housing rent may be around £300 a month and private rented more than twice that do you not think that, at the very least, it is morally abhorrent that those that can afford their own house are living in affordable social housing?”

“Those that have incomes above the social rents criteria should pay market rents or asked to look for private accommodation to release the house for more needy on the waiting list. Even £60k/year is too high and the earnings limit should be set lower. This chap is a social miscreant and does not deserve any sympathy - so just get your own house and make space for others on the waiting list.”

“I cant wait for the comments to start pouring in about this story!

The article doesnt mention that the tenant will actually now be paying rent for the property (as will anyone in a council property with savings over £16k), so it doesnt matter if the property belongs to the council or not, theyre getting their money. Yes, this person could move out and buy their own property, but why should they? They may have lived there for 50 years, why should they have to leave? People in receipt of housing benefit are not bound strictly to council properties, they can rent privately also and still claim for the rent so it isnt as if this tenant is taking away from the masses by staying here. If there are 3200 on council waiting lists perhaps the council should be working with landlords in the private renting sector to help them fill their rooms?”