Affordable Homes Fraud

[Bill Fernie]

What else is being done to help the Highland Housing situation?
The Highland Housing Alliance
http://www.highlandhousingalliance.com
It has been acknowledge by many bodies including the council that at least 5000 new affordable homes are needed in the Highlands. All of the housing associations in Highland - Albyn, Cairn, Lochaber, Lochalsh and Skye, and Pentland have had difficulties in obtaining serviced land. Highland Housing Alliance was established in 2005 by Albyn Housing Society Ltd, Cairn, Lochalsh and Skye, Lochaber and Pentland Housing Associations as well as the Highland Small Communities Housing Trust, the Highland Housing and Community Care Trust and Highland Council
to exploit investment opportunities to increase the supply of suitable land. The new body will purchase land and sell it on to house builders using the income to purchase further sites.

To give some idea of the housing problems in Highland I am reproducing the housing section from the Audit Scotland Report -
The Audit of Best Value and Community Planning
http://www.audit-scotland.gov.uk/pub...6/06pf01ac.rtf

Housing Services
1. Statutory Performance Indicators, and the council’s own performance information, show there is an overall improvement in the performance of the Housing Service in recent years. There is a continued improvement in the levels of rent lost through voids, with the figure for 2004/05 down to 1.8 per cent from 2.3 per cent in 2002/03, with a target of 1.35 per cent by March 2006. The time taken to relet houses fell from 74 days in 2002/03 to 67 days in 2004/05. The service has set a target that by March 2006, 95 per cent of housing allocations will be processed within 28 days. The signs are that good progress is now being made towards this. The average time to complete a council house sale has also improved, down from 30 weeks in 2003/04 to 28 weeks in 2004/05.
2. However, there are also some less positive trends. The performance of response repair services is not improving, and although customer satisfaction with completed repairs meets the council’s target of 98 per cent, the proportion of repairs completed at the first visit is below the target of 93 per cent, at 89 per cent.
3. The number of households assessed as homeless increased to 1,723 in 2004/05 from 1,613 in 2003/04, and the average time taken to deal with homeless households was 12.7 weeks in 2004/05, up from 11 weeks in 2003/04. Of particular concern is that 14.5 per cent of households represented themselves as homeless or potentially homeless during 2004/05, compared with 8.7 per cent during 2003/04.
4. The Housing Service faces a number of major challenges including a considerable pressure on affordable and appropriate housing, a rapid increase in the number of homelessness presentations and high levels of fuel poverty. Over six per cent of homes across the council area are second or holiday homes, while council stock has reduced under right to buy legislation by approximately 600 houses per year for the past ten years. Identifying land appropriate for development is restricted by issues such as access to utilities and only 2,000 affordable homes have been built during the last decade.
5. The total council housing stock in 2003/04 was 15,459, with 10,342 applicants on the waiting list. The council sees this as a major social issue and constraint on economic growth and is undertaking a range of work to try to address this. Through these efforts it is anticipated that there will be a substantially higher level of new affordable housing built over the next five years than in the previous five.
6. Because of the pressures on its housing stock, the council is heavily reliant on temporary bed and breakfast accommodation. It recognises this is an undesirable, expensive and often inappropriate solution for people in housing need.
7. The council is planning to transfer its housing stock to a new provider through the Community Ownership Programme (COP) sometime in the next two years. This depends on a tenants’ ballot, due to take place in the autumn of 2006. The council has met the standard of consultation with tenants required by the COP.
8. evidence that some area based staff are resistant to change, and that first line managers do not drive continuous improvement at the area level. Professional staff feel de-skilled by new methods of working, for example in relation to the schools PPP programme, where major design projects have been outsourced to private developers. This means that PAS officers are unable to apply and develop their own skills on what are perceived to be more prestigious and high profile projects.
9. In spite of staff dissatisfaction, some change and improvement is evident within the service. For example, architectural technicians have retrained as project managers recognising the increasing importance of this area of the service’s activity; PAS currently monitors 400 contracts per year using corporate contract monitoring standards. Changes in workload volume have meant the service has been able to reduce its level of fees income from 21 per cent to 12.5 per cent, more in keeping with the industry standard and more cost effective to the council.

Bill Fernie again
As can be seen from the information above the housing situation is serious and the lack of building the past 10 years and no prospect of the council entering into any form of building due to the right to buy and lack of capital etc means that other solutions are urgently required. The governments offer to write off the council housing debt may not be what everyone wants to see but it is the only game in town right now. Should the council look this gift horse in the mouth? At the end of the day it will not be the council but the tenants when the vote comes shortly. A No vote will mean fewer houses will be built as the new Housing Association will not be able to do anything and the council will still require to use incoming rents to service the outstanding debts on existing houses. A Yes vote will mean the New Housing Association is not encumbered by a huge financial millstone and can get on with making house improvements way beyond what the council can offer under present circumstances and perhaps of more immediate interest is able to guarantee the rent levels for the next five years – something Highland council cannot do.
This is NOT privatisation and tenants are heavily represented on the management committee - See http://www.highlandhousingassociatio...committee.html

I personally would have put myself forward to be on the new Highland Housing Association but housing chairmen (I am chairman of the Caithness Housing and Social Work committee) were specifically barred from doing so. Councillor Katrina MacNab was selected from Caithness and with her back ground in Citizen’s Advice and currently as manager of the Pulteneytown People’s Project in addition to representing the Pulteneytown ward in Wick is in a very good position to know what would assist the many low income families in Caithness. In addition Caithness has another representative – Andi Wakeman formerly the director of Pentland Housing Association based in Thurso. These local representatives are well able to put forward the views of tenants and are fully supportive of the Stock Transfer proposal.

Finally if the above is far too much to take in just read the latest Tenant produced by the team on the topic of Stock Transfer - it might be easier to take in and has lots of easy to understand information -
http://www.highland.gov.uk/NR/rdonly...eoctober06.pdf

Hopefully there is some useful information and /or links to information that might be helpful -
Sorry if I do not have time to enter this debate again as many other things are pressing and I have meetings tonight and for the rest of the week.

[j4bberw0ck]

Wow.

OK. I'm impressed. Knowledge and a dose of passion are a powerful combination.

Cheers!

J

[frank ward]

Jabberwock tells us that 'full market value' is different to the Valuers opinion of full market value. If there is any difference, I suspect it will be little.

He then asks:

"Housing Associations have to raise the capital to build the houses, which they do like you and me - they get a mortgage (effectively). Theyt borrow large amounts, though, and can set one lender against another to get the lowest interest rates. Tell me, how much taxpayer's money goes into subsidy?"

Well I can tell you mister Wock - an average of £50,000 per home is provided by the taxpayer for building 'affordable-homes-for-sale' in the Highlands, plus the value of land subsidy on which the home is built.

This money is grant aid, not loan, and represents a straight gift to the housing association. Very little, if any, commercial mortgage needs to be raised to top up this grant, especially if apartments are built instead of houses.

Staggering? Yes. Reasonable? I think not, given the pressing need for rented housing.

[dozy]

I agree with Pussycat ,its good to see that some people have the brains to see it for what it is ..WELL DONE ...I think all the people that back the Associations must be reading from the story of THE KINGS CLOTHES....You can't FOOL all the people all the time ...They will see right throught it in the end .....

[j4bberw0ck]

Jabberwock tells us that 'full market value' is different to the Valuers opinion of full market value. If there is any difference, I suspect it will be little.

Sometimes, it can be little - when the housing market isn't in a bubble as it is now. The point you're missing is the premium that people will pay to buy a house; for instance, I'm sure if you look at houses for sale in Caithness (and I haven't) you'll find many are on the market for "Offers Over £nnnnnn". The figure given for "offers over" is what the seller's agent believes is a reasonable price for that property. The owner, though, hopes / expects to get significantly more. So you have three values floating about:

1. the value the seller's agent assigns to it,
2. the value it actually sells for
3. the value the Valuer places on it AS SECURITY when the purchaser goes for a mortgage.

There can be a huge difference between value 2 and value 3 - and lenders will not lend any more than a percentage of value 3. That means, pussycat, that the buyer has to have cash to make up the difference. In the current market, it can be almost any amount, but £10k is commonplace depending on the number of people chasing the house.

With the HA homes, the Valuer assigns a "reasonable market value" based on what a similar private sector house would be worth without the "offers over" premium. The HA then sell the house for that value - or more usually they sell a quarter share, or half share, for the corresponding fraction of the value. So people able to buy a HA home only have to have cash enough for legal fees and say a 5% deposit. And that, my feline friend, is the difference.

He then asks:

"Housing Associations have to raise the capital to build the houses, which they do like you and me - they get a mortgage (effectively). Theyt borrow large amounts, though, and can set one lender against another to get the lowest interest rates. Tell me, how much taxpayer's money goes into subsidy?"

Well I can tell you mister Wock - an average of £50,000 per home is provided by the taxpayer for building 'affordable-homes-for-sale' in the Highlands, plus the value of land subsidy on which the home is built.

Why thank you. You can tell me the moon's made of cream cheese if you like - and I'll ask you the same question. What's your source of information? HAs borrow huge sums from banks and other lenders - in the case of Orkney HA they've several times negotiated facilities of around £4 mio from Royal Bank of Scotland. How much does it cost to build a 2 bed semi or a 1 bed apartment? I'm quite prepared to believe that any government, local government or QUANGO enterprise is horrendously inefficient - it goes with the turf, really - and I'd be happy to hear more from you on "taxpayer subsidy".

I'm also always happy to learn and to apologise when I'm wrong.

given the pressing need for rented housing.

I don't doubt there's a need for rented housing but I'd still like to know who on earth you think you are to deny people - especially first time buyers to whom the Scottish offers system is monumentally cruel - the chance of buying a home!

I agree with Pussycat ,its good to see that some people have the brains to see it for what it is ..WELL DONE ...I think all the people that back the Associations must be reading from the story of THE KINGS CLOTHES....You can't FOOL all the people all the time ...They will see right throught it in the end .....

Dozy, you're making a very simple but very telling error; suggesting that people who agree with you have the brains, and implying that people who disagree with you, don't. I strongly suspect that unfortunately, "dozy" applies to you as an adjective as well as a noun. On the other hand, if you have some information to contribute to this, then go for it.....

[cuddlepop]

I think what angers people is that they dont feel they have a choice when it comes to council stock transfer.If you dont say yes then the debt doesn't get written off and everyone suffers.Its that blackmailing feeling where getting as council house tennents that is hard to take.
I dont know eneogh about what pussycat is implying to comment on the apparent under handness of this proposal but what i do no is that housing has and alwas will be a problem unless radical steps are taken.
There isn't a hope on Skye for first time buyers to get on the property ladder.Whether or not this would work is debatable but like everything else Scottish Executive decides, they will make it work regardless

[frank ward]

It seems to me that jabberwock has either not read the 'Homestake' article or is simply refusing to accept ANY of the serious issues it raises.
This stubborn ignorance is coupled with an unpleasant tendency to denounce those he disagrees with as stupid.

According to the article - and confirmed by the director of Cairn housing when the P&J put these points to him - only 4 homestake flats (in Dingwall) could be afforded by a worker on the local average wage. the director said only those earning in excess of £18,000 should consider a homestake application.
Not a big wage, but a lot bigger than that of the 'low-paid' worker that Homestake claims it exists for.

Jabberwock demands to know the source of the '£50,000 per house' subsidy claim I made. The source is two-fold - The Scottish Executive and the Highland Council. Do your own research if you think otherwise.

Supporters of privatisation complain about the lack of affordable houses to buy and think this will cure the problem. It will not. It will make matters worse, because 'affordable' sales only benefit the first buyer (if at all) and the same money could build a rented home that would serve generations. The more affordable rented houses there are, the more downward pressure there is on private rents and house prices.

It seems to me that the HAST article is generrally accurate, and a welcome breath of fresh air through the stagnant crap fed to us daily about the wonderful new 'affordable' homes that few of us can actually afford.

http://www.hast2006.org.uk/hsfraud.htm

[peter macdonald]

There are other ways of giving young locals a chance to get on the property ladder

http://www.theherald.co.uk/news/71736.html

I know about the situation in Skye where holiday homers and retired immigrants to the island have made it all but impossible for the young folk to get on the property ladder a situation repeated in pockets all along the west coast where property prices bear no resemblance to income
We need to cater for our young folk if not more depopulation .less schools ..less post offices etc

[squidge]

I understand what jabberwock is saying and i understand also where pussycat is coming from.

A friend just tried to buy a house in fochabers -

1. the value the seller's agent assigns to it,- the house was for sale at offers over £100 000,
2. the value it actually sells for - My friend offered £119 000 and it sold for £135 000.
3. the value the Valuer places on it AS SECURITY when the purchaser goes for a mortgage.- The valuer valued it at £95 000 so they could borrow A percentage of the £95 000 any more would have had to be cash.

The housing association would have offered it for sale at something around the 95 to 100 000 mark without a premium. One of the biggest benefits to first time buyers on a low income is that these properties are fixed price - not slap on another third in cash. This is an absolute boon to thosepeople on lower incomes who want and are able to buy.

However pussycat makes the point that there is a need for rented property for those who cannot or dont want to buy. She is absolutely right. There needs to be an investment in social housing for rent. If the housing association is to take over the council stock there should be some commitment to building homes to rent. Places where people can be housed and can stay and settle and make a home for themselves and their families with security of tenure. Private renting is all well and good but a six month short assured tenancy gives no one the security they need to settle and make a home. It simply leaves you with an issue you cant think about and no way into the Council house or Housing association Property that offers you a more permanent prospect because you are already housed. Its a viscious circle. I cant see anywhere in what I have read about housing stock transfers a commitment to build new property for rent. Its almost as thought there is an underlying suggestion that those people who need to rent a home are second class in some way, failing in some area of their lives which means they cant aspire to the pinnacle of home ownership and thats just wrong.

[frank ward]

Squidge, thanks for your sensible contribution.

But according to Homestake [leaflets I picked up] a property is offered for sale at 'full market price'. It is first offered to those on the waiting list, but if no-one can afford it it is put on the open market !

An estate agent has told me that the new flats by Inverness bus station are a target for buy-to-let investors.

[squidge]

I looked into the homestake thing too and i cant see how buy to let investors could buy the flats if they are allocated for homestake. The people have to be on the housing list and be in housing need and have a mortgage offer. People buying to let wont be on the housing list or be in housing need. I think that if they dont get buyers from the housing list then they should offer them to rent to people on the housing list rather than sell them on the open market. That would make much more sense if you ask me

[Bill Fernie]

As I am being accused of some bias by Frank Ward now Solidarity ex SSP I am publishing his email to me today.

I have to say I think that it is a bit of cheek being accused of not publishing everything on the topic that comes my way. do they publish all sides in this debate. I think I made the link to the HAst 2006 web site where everyting they think is there to see and read. Anyhow here is an attack on me published to er redress the balance.....

News Editor
Caithness.org

HOUSING STOCK TRANSFER

Bill,
what a tiresome and desperate piece you have penned in defence of council house privatisation.

I am sorry to note that your 'News' on Caithness.org continues to carry multiple pro-transfer items whilst continuing to censor all all other items
against transfer. This includes your risible repetition of the 'news' that 77 residents in Lewisham who voted yes. At the same time your website simply ignored the No votes in Stirling and Renfrew. It seems a few cockneys are more newsworthy than thousands of Scots.

I note that you have ignored ALL of the press releases issued by HAST and other organisations opposed to transfer.

Whilst this may be expected in view of your political support for HST (or rather your unwillingness to fight for an alternative), such censorship serves
you and your website badly - if you do indeed have any pretentions at all to be an unbiased 'news' site.

Instead have also published your own personal misinterpretations of the HAST2006 website, mostly tracts lifted directly from the Council's own webnsite.

As you are well aware, the statistics published on the HAST2006 website are official, from the Council or the Scottish Executive. This is clearly stated on the HAST2006 website yet you still published the false accusations against HAST by Borders HA and shamefully refused to print the HAST rebuttal - The official Executive statistics say that Borders rents went up 5.5% last year, not 3.5% as claimed by the post-transfer housing association.

You are also wrong to suggest that anti-transfer groups are opposed to the notion of housing associations. Many housing associations play useful and important roles. It is the record of large associations that troubles me.

Like the Highland Council's Chief Executive who banned the public display of all information that indicated there was any opposition to HST, you too appear to have decided that only one side of the argument is to be heard.

Highland Councillors have shown themselves to be spineless in fighting the threats and blackmail spilling from 11 Downing Street downwards, as you admit, but hopefully Highland council tenants will show more backbone.

Frank Ward
Solidarity, Sutherland

[gleeber]

Brilliant Bill
Classic Frank

[j4bberw0ck]

This stubborn ignorance is coupled with an unpleasant tendency to denounce those he disagrees with as stupid.

Not at all, chuck. That was dozy, not me . I enjoy a good debate (or argument, if you will) and unlike many around here and on other forums, you won't find me slow to apologise if I find I'm wrong.

[frank ward]

Squidge says "The people have to be on the housing list and be in housing need and have a mortgage offer."

Squidge you may be right or wrong, but I'll check it out. I'll get back to you later on this.

From my own reading of the Homestake scheme, this is NOT the case. As I said earlier, if there is nobody on the waiting list who can afford the asking price, the owners do not hang about - the property goes on the market.

My estate agent friend was also dismissive of the Homestake "racket" as she called it.

[squidge]

Here is what i found

The type of people that Homestake will prioritise will vary locally but may include, for example: people who cannot afford to purchase on the open market but have an identifiable need to stay in the local area; local families unable to purchase a home; people living in or applying for local authority or RSL property. In a small number of locations where owner occupiers are affected by demolition plans, Homestake will be available to help them buy a replacement house in the same area.

and also

Homestake is aimed at low income households, so your income will be assessed to see whether or not you qualify. We call this a .means test.. Because housing costs vary so much from area to area there are no national criteria for this test.

You will need to demonstrate that you cannot buy a house suitable for your needs without help from Homestake. The RSL will turn you down if you could afford to buy a home without help. If you currently own your home or part-own a property, you will have to demonstrate that you are in housing need. You will have to sell your interest in that home at the same time as buying a home through Homestake.

The RSL will also want to satisfy itself that your income is sufficient to be able to afford to become a home owner.

I actually think Homestake is a good thing in a lot of ways. However it isnt a the SOLUTION to social housing problems. It is an option - thats all

http://www.homeadvantage-edinburgh.c...on_Booklet.pdf - this is where the infomration came from - i knwo that you have to have a mortgage offer too because my friend applied for one and they wouldnt accept her application without it - she had to go over to invergordon with it.

[cuddlepop]

Well said Squidge.Do you actyally live in a place called Governess or is that what you do?Because you seem to install Governess on Debates

[squidge]

Now that would be telling

[frank ward]

I didn't want to get involved in this thread but as Bill Fernie has published my letter to him I feel I must respond.
I should say that the question of housing stock transfer is a separate [but not unrelated] issue to that of Homestake or other houses-for-sale schemes.

Regarding my comments about his non-publication of dissident opinions, Bill says " it is a bit of cheek being accused of not publishing everything on the topic that comes my way. "

Well Bill I didn't say that, all I said was that your coverage of the HST issue has been woefully one-sided and the fact that you have published NONE of the anti-transfer press notices, going back months, is something you should be ashamed of.

Caithness.org sometimes reads drearily like a page of Highland Council Press Releases.
If you wish to continue this matter I suggest it be privately or on a new thread and leave this thread to the discussion on the Homestake fraud.

Frank

[Gogglebox]

Worth reading what Bill wrote earlier n this thread before we all get swamped with the anti rhetoric from the SSP bloke

There seems to be an awful lot of stuff coming from HAST but a lot of it was said to be lies and scare mongering

Its a pity we werent left to make this decision without the discredited SSP inflicting their unprogressive outdated and outlandish rubbish on us

We arent stupid we can read and make balanced views without HAST swamping us with there one sided stuff

Whether you are for or against this move or have not yet decided read both sides of the arguement not just this anti stuff thats swamping the boards

THis decision is vital to all council tennant and should not be used as the latest pet gripe from political parties - -this is our homes and lives they are playing political games with.

SCOTTISH BORDERS HOUSING ASSOCIATION
Corrects Wrong Information In Highland Against Stock Transfer Web Site
Scottish Borders Housing Association (SBHA) was the recipient landlord of the first whole-stock Local Authority housing transfer to take place in Scotland under the “New Housing Partnerships” initiative. SBHA received 6,218 properties across the Borders area, on 3rd March 2003.
Despite suffering a major flash flood in its third largest estate just 3 months after the transfer, in which 83 properties were made uninhabitable, SBHA has thrived and is doing well, providing innovative and good quality services to its Tenants and involving them at all levels of decision-making and consultation. Consequently, the Association feels it is essential in the interests of fairness and accuracy that the totally false statements in the HAST 2006 website are clarified.......SBHA would be happy to demonstrate to Tenants in the upcoming housing transfers across Scotland a wide range of evidence to show that stock transfer is most definitely a positive move for Tenants.