Anagh Coar Homes To Get New Gold Plated Kitchens

[pauld]

What are you going to claim the majority of houses are allocated to none natives then ffs.

 

oh and well done indeed on getting in the word racist in, well played indeed, another know nuthin middle-class english prick exceeding his boundaries of local knowledge and the whole ethos behind local social housing innit.

[ScotsAlan]

If it's an investment, why not increase the rent based on which kitchen is chosen. Choose a cheap kitchen and your rent goes up a fiver a week. Pick a top of the range oak kitchen, and your rent goes up £15 a week.

 

Want new carpets? Yup, no problem, that's another fiver a week.

 

Unemployed? OK, you get the basic stuff for free.

 

Pensioner? Mid range free for you sir :-)

 

I have no problem at all with social housing. I think there should be more of it.

That's fine if it's a house for life, if not it raises problems.

 

Yup. I thought about that, but decided to ignore it :-)

 

But hey, why not have government housing run as a business? A ladder if you like. Start at the basic end, work up through the stock, and eventually get a mortgage.

 

That would help free up the basic houses for those in need, and get more money from those that could afford it. As an incentive, the top rent payers could be first in line for a first time buyers house.

 

Edited: spelling

[Andy Onchan]

Shouty man says that it's not the Corpy, it's Social Care - political members of that department include Bill Malarkey and Bill Henderson.

 

Whatever the politics, £10k for a kitchen in anything less than a mansion is extortionate (even if it includes a new boiler and ALL appliances)- if not a couple of grand is more than enough.

 

Its investment into stock, at a time when it is most appropriate and economically prudent, something many of the next generation will be thankfull for, what more is there to be said, they will get another 40 years rent out of those houses yet.

But still require 25% from central government in grants to balance the books! It's there in writing. You put them there.

 

Edit: and has done since 2009 (since that's as far back as the report goes)

 

 

Yes andy thats why i put them up to show, other LAs ofcourse have the mirror image, the department takes a global view of social housing.

the corpy only get 7.5% of rental revenues for admin, and 30% for maintainence, i could see they coulnt balance their books, they were the only pages i had left open after a weeks reading of many pages from social care and other LAs budget reports.

 

the department is a well run department, show us any bad examples of it not being well run.

Well not needing central government grants would be a start..... a grant requires repayment, where is that money going to come from?

[pauld]

If it's an investment, why not increase the rent based on which kitchen is chosen. Choose a cheap kitchen and your rent goes up a fiver a week. Pick a top of the range oak kitchen, and your rent goes up £15 a week.

 

Want new carpets? Yup, no problem, that's another fiver a week.

 

Unemployed? OK, you get the basic stuff for free.

 

Pensioner? Mid range free for you sir :-)

 

I have no problem at all with social housing. I think there should be more of it.

That's fine if it's a house for life, if not it raises problems.

 

Yup. I thought about that, but decided to ignore it :-)

 

But hey, why not have government housing run as a business? A ladder if you like. Start at the basic end, work up through the stock, and eventually get a mortgage.

 

That would help free up the basic houses for those in need, and get more money from those that could afford it. As as incentive, the top rent payers could be first in line for a first time buyers house.

 

 

Actually alan ive always been all for a version of your stated approach, up the rent and create a points system of credits to tenants something they can pass on to their children who can cash them in towards first-time buyers properties.

i think its the socially responsible thing to do, encourage future generations into private housing, even if that means taxing them with a credit system that only has a value against property purchase.

[pauld]

Shouty man says that it's not the Corpy, it's Social Care - political members of that department include Bill Malarkey and Bill Henderson.

 

Whatever the politics, £10k for a kitchen in anything less than a mansion is extortionate (even if it includes a new boiler and ALL appliances)- if not a couple of grand is more than enough.

 

Its investment into stock, at a time when it is most appropriate and economically prudent, something many of the next generation will be thankfull for, what more is there to be said, they will get another 40 years rent out of those houses yet.

But still require 25% from central government in grants to balance the books! It's there in writing. You put them there.

 

Edit: and has done since 2009 (since that's as far back as the report goes)

 

 

Yes andy thats why i put them up to show, other LAs ofcourse have the mirror image, the department takes a global view of social housing.

the corpy only get 7.5% of rental revenues for admin, and 30% for maintainence, i could see they coulnt balance their books, they were the only pages i had left open after a weeks reading of many pages from social care and other LAs budget reports.

 

the department is a well run department, show us any bad examples of it not being well run.

Well not needing central government grants would be a start..... a grant requires repayment, where is that money going to come from?

 

If that is the case alan and i am pretty sure your right, the money is paid back when the stock matures and rental income has risen by inflationary rises and exceeds all interest payable on loans, thats why the scheme depends on getting a long long life time out of the properties, its the inflationary rentals that catch and then surpass interest payments, the stock being old is healthy in that way.

 

And thats a million miles away from subsidised "pond life" as claimed by the majority according to tugger and bob and amadeus and oldmanxrent a gob.

[Andy Onchan]

Shouty man says that it's not the Corpy, it's Social Care - political members of that department include Bill Malarkey and Bill Henderson.

 

Whatever the politics, £10k for a kitchen in anything less than a mansion is extortionate (even if it includes a new boiler and ALL appliances)- if not a couple of grand is more than enough.

 

Its investment into stock, at a time when it is most appropriate and economically prudent, something many of the next generation will be thankfull for, what more is there to be said, they will get another 40 years rent out of those houses yet.

But still require 25% from central government in grants to balance the books! It's there in writing. You put them there.

 

Edit: and has done since 2009 (since that's as far back as the report goes)

 

 

Yes andy thats why i put them up to show, other LAs ofcourse have the mirror image, the department takes a global view of social housing.

the corpy only get 7.5% of rental revenues for admin, and 30% for maintainence, i could see they coulnt balance their books, they were the only pages i had left open after a weeks reading of many pages from social care and other LAs budget reports.

 

the department is a well run department, show us any bad examples of it not being well run.

Well not needing central government grants would be a start..... a grant requires repayment, where is that money going to come from?

 

If that is the case alan and i am pretty sure your right, the money is paid back when the stock matures and rental income has risen by inflationary rises and exceeds all interest payable on loans, thats why the scheme depends on getting a long long life time out of the properties, its the inflationary rentals that catch and then surpass interest payments, the stock being old is healthy in that way.

But spending less on kitchens will get it paid back quicker, if at all!

 

Try looking at 31st March 2010 financial reports for Onchan commissioners..... page 20. My link. I think you will find that the numbers there stack up.

 

Edit: And you still need to answer where the corpy will get 1.9 million from to repay central government grants (which is funded by general taxation, which at the moment is personal tax)

[pauld]

Yeah, a few kitchens that no-one here can prove are going to cost 10k each alledgedly are just a drop in the ocean of the whole stock.

be another 30 years until the next one, those houses must be 30 years old, you could not possibly spend 10k on an anagh coar house kitchen, impossible, and anyone who has stood in a few will know that.

 

You just dont get it do you, the department runs the whole of social housing, its THEIRS, matters not who the loans are from and who has the title deeds, the differing LAs are no more than glorified rental agencies who do as they are instructed by the department, the department keeps a healthy eye on things, with regular quarterly, face to face meetings with the various LAs representitives.

 

i do not yet know the mechanism by which grants to cover shortfalls due to rentals not yet covering all costs in some LAs with young average age property are covered by LAs with maturing stock whose rentals have an excess on interest payment on old loans.

 

I personally would like to know how the departments books balance aswell.

 

And wasnt the corpys over spend in admin, or atleast partly, and that figure was for all their rental admin aswell wasnt it, wasnt it about 40% of rental inome coming from corpy owned assets, shop rentals etc.

[Blade Runner]

 

oh and well done indeed on getting in the word racist in, well played indeed, another know nuthin middle-class english prick exceeding his boundaries of local knowledge and the whole ethos behind local social housing innit.

 

Thanks, your appreciation is noted.

[ScotsAlan]

If it's an investment, why not increase the rent based on which kitchen is chosen. Choose a cheap kitchen and your rent goes up a fiver a week. Pick a top of the range oak kitchen, and your rent goes up £15 a week.

 

Want new carpets? Yup, no problem, that's another fiver a week.

 

Unemployed? OK, you get the basic stuff for free.

 

Pensioner? Mid range free for you sir :-)

 

I have no problem at all with social housing. I think there should be more of it.

That's fine if it's a house for life, if not it raises problems.

 

Yup. I thought about that, but decided to ignore it :-)

 

But hey, why not have government housing run as a business? A ladder if you like. Start at the basic end, work up through the stock, and eventually get a mortgage.

 

That would help free up the basic houses for those in need, and get more money from those that could afford it. As as incentive, the top rent payers could be first in line for a first time buyers house.

 

 

Actually alan ive always been all for a version of your stated approach, up the rent and create a points system of credits to tenants something they can pass on to their children who can cash them in towards first-time buyers properties.

i think its the socially responsible thing to do, encourage future generations into private housing, even if that means taxing them with a credit system that only has a value against property purchase.

 

Not sure about passing it on to your children.....

 

I personally don't think people in social housing should be forced into the private sector. If anything, I think the private sector should be rent controlled, in line with the social sector.

 

That would help reduce house costs to sensible levels, by reducing the return for property developers. After all, the higher the rents are, the more property prices increase, and the bankers make the most from it all...

 

I would be happy if almost all housing was government controlled. They do it it Singapore... and it works very well there.

 

I think a tiered social housing system could work very well here too. But it would need a brave Government to do it...

[oldmanxfella]

And as it happens my daughter and several aunties and uncles moved into mortgaged houses, including my parents, i know that any manx people reading this have family now or in the past whose whole lives were spent in social housing.

 

You also posted this a few posts back pauld ..

 

When you or old manxtwat, call everyone that lives in social housing "pond life" your also including my parents grand parents and aunties uncles cousins etc

 

So which one is it? I think you are a troll. Either one post you made is true (my family are all in social housing and appear happy) or it isn't, how can you post two contradictory posts in the same thread? Where exactly does your extended family live - in my little pony world in your head?

[Silentbob]

Aw OMF, don't wind him up anymore, mumsy will be along soon with his warm milk and ritalin, soon time for beddyboes young pauly

[Merkin]

I imagine after your racist post addressed to Amadeus you are a boat in the morning kind of "fella"

 

I am. Not because i want anyone to go, i just think it's hilarious.

 

Ps rats. Thats worth a smile as well.......

[pauld]

And as it happens my daughter and several aunties and uncles moved into mortgaged houses, including my parents, i know that any manx people reading this have family now or in the past whose whole lives were spent in social housing.

 

You also posted this a few posts back pauld ..

 

When you or old manxtwat, call everyone that lives in social housing "pond life" your also including my parents grand parents and aunties uncles cousins etc

 

So which one is it? I think you are a troll. Either one post you made is true (my family are all in social housing appear happy) or it isn't, how can you post two contradictory posts in the same thread? Where exactly does your extended family live - in my little pony world in your head?

 

 

Some are still some branches of uncles and cousins who do still live in social housing, now retired, most moved on into private ownership in the last 25 years, even my second cousins are nearly 20 now.

And 90% of manxies reading this will also of had a mix of both over the last 50 years, with their families, i have family all around the island, my parents even jumped on the property band wagon late in life, even the cousins whose parents bought houses, and will die in them, some of those now live in social housing will eventually own their own home, when their parents are finished with it.

 

both sets of grand parents spent their adult lives in social housing after the nissan huts.

[oldmanxfella]

And as it happens my daughter and several aunties and uncles moved into mortgaged houses, including my parents, i know that any manx people reading this have family now or in the past whose whole lives were spent in social housing.

 

You also posted this a few posts back pauld ..

 

When you or old manxtwat, call everyone that lives in social housing "pond life" your also including my parents grand parents and aunties uncles cousins etc

 

So which one is it? I think you are a troll. Either one post you made is true (my family are all in social housing appear happy) or it isn't, how can you post two contradictory posts in the same thread? Where exactly does your extended family live - in my little pony world in your head?

 

 

Some are still some branches of uncles and cousins who do still live in social housing, now retired, most moved on into private ownership in the last 25 years, even my second cousins are nearly 20 now.

And 90% of manxies reading this will also of had a mix of both over the last 50 years, with their families, i have family all around the island, my parents even jumped on the property band wagon late in life.

 

BELL END. Shut up. You're boring me now you mentalist.

[Silentbob]

All the proper manx families I know have been homeowner farmers and therefore not subsidi........oh wait.

 

I see where you are coming from now, as true manx, you believe the government owes you something. Whereas us comeover johnny foreigner types should just shut up and pay taxes?

 

Am I getting this right?