Jump to content

Recommended Posts

A tenner says the lotto winners will move...and if I lose...they'll pay :))


The reform of Housing Finaince is reform of the housing Revenue Subsidy System which is in fact a plan drawn up by the previous Labour government but which the Coalition have decided to implement. At present central government creams off a percentage of rental income collected by local authorities and then gives part of it back under the dubious title of 'subsidy'. In addition local authorities can borrow money for capaital programmes.


Under the new system, local authorities will get to keep most of the rental income they collect but will have the amount they can borrow capped by central government. That cap will be set according to what central government thinks the local authority should be collecting in rents irregardless of what it actually does collect or not. We are still waiting to see the first figures for the new system but estimates suggest that Southwark may be around ?9million worse off each year......whilst having had almost ?300million of current outstanding debt written off at the start of the new system (Southwarks current capital debts are at around ?700million).


The other reforms will still need to go through the parliamentary process and may or may not get through. My feelings are that the other reforms will have very little impact on the current shortage of available social housing or the lack of three and four bedroom homes. The fact is that in Southwark, existing housing stock just doesn't have the needed number of homes of that size. The average number of bids on a three or four bedroomed council homes is 300 each time one appears in the homsesearch magazine...and that is just from existing tenants needing bigger properties for their families. The bottom line is that we need to build more affordable housing and stop selling off the social housing we do still have. The coalition are doing nothing to tackle the over inflated housing market and it's consequences.


There are other issues too. The coalition have drastically cut the money for decent homes. It won't even pay for 20% of the outstanding work to be done. So any talk by the coalition of commitment to decent homes is bs I'm afraid.


By the way James, under the current laws, a succeded tenant can not be forced to move within six months of succession, or after a year from succession. It's absolutely fair and plenty of other local authorities use it..... The fact that Southwark chose not to make suceeded tenants downsize is unacceptable given how many families are crammed into one and two bedroomed flats whilst single suceeded tenants live in three and four bedroomed properties.

Hi DJKillaQueen,

The advice from council officers that colleagues have been shown is that Southwark council housing might be ?1M worse of per year BUT it will have far less bureaucy to contend with. As the Housing Revenue Account is a huge account with hundreds of millions this should be perfectly manageable.

I agree the new system will be an improvement and simpler to understand, without making much difference to tenants or the rents they pay. Everything will depend on the government getting their calculations right of course regarding the borrowing caps, but apart from that it should work for the better.

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
  • Latest Discussions

    • But all those examples sell a wide variety of things,  and mostly they are well spread out along Lordship Lane. These two shops both sell one very specific thing, albeit in different flavours, and are just across the road from each other. I don't think you can compare the distribution of shops in Roman times to the distribution of shops in Lordship Lane in the twenty first century. Well, you can, but it doesn't feel very appropriate. Haa anybody asked the first shop how they feel? Are they happy about the "healthy competition" ?
    • ED is included in the 17 August closure set (or just possibly 15 August, depending on which part of the page you trust more) listed at https://metro.co.uk/2025/07/25/full-list-25-poundland-stores-confirmed-close-august-23753048/. Here incidentally are some snippets from their annual reports, at https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/02495645/filing-history. 2022: " during the period we opened 41 stores and closed 43 loss-making/under-performing stores.  At the period-end we were trading from 821 stores in the UK, IoM and ROI. ... "We renogotiated 82 leases in the year, saving on average 45% versus the prior lease agreement..." 2023: "We also continued to improve our market footprint through sourcing better store locations, opening 53 and closing 51 stores during the year." 2024:  "The ex-Wilco stores acquired in the prior year have formed a core part of this strategy to expand our store network.  We favour quality over quantity and during the period we opened 84 stores and closed 71 loss-making/under-performing ones."
    • Ha! After I posted this, I thought of lots more examples. Screwfix and the hardware store? Mrs Robinson and Jumping Bean? Chemists, plant shops, hairdressers...  the list goes on... it's good to have healthy competition  Ooooh! Two cheese shops
    • You've got a point.  Thinking Leyland and Screwfix too but this felt different.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...