Should having the right to a home be enshrined in law?

[mercalia]

We hear these days about thing like having an internet connection is no longer a luxury

What about have a roof over your head? Maybe if that was the law and a right under the law then that would unblock the housing market. I cant see Mr Mays idea of "encouraging" longer tenanacy will have any effect as there are too many greedy people with money to buy up what property that there is or to stop basic homes being build becuase there are profits to be made from building for the rich?

If it was the law then councils would have to get tough with all the owners of unoccupied properties and where there isnt enough make owning a second home financially crippling?

[Cyril Haearn]

Yes of course
The new tiny homes are great, like trailer homes in the US, 30 qm is enough for one person
Big advantage: if one does not get on with the neighbours one can move easily
Big advantage (2) living in a tiny home is much cheaper, no need to have a mortgage lasting decades

[Ruadh495]

Tiny homes are a great idea, but it's finding a site that's the problem. And planning, of course.

I'd like to see a right to reside on your own land, without implying any right/permission to erect permanent structures. So an individual can buy cheap land and live there in a tent, but building a bungalow would still require planning permission.

Wales does have a permission system for low impact dwellings and I believe Scotland also has something (hutting?) but nothing in England.

[Cyril Haearn]

There is a vacant plot in my leafy suburb, a large wigwam was erected there a couple of months ago, 20 qm or more I guess and 6 m high maybe
Been by a couple of times, never seen the inmates

[NATURAL ANKLING]

Hi,
Then it comes back to where would you want to live?
Scotland / N-England or sunny south Devon

I think Torbay are high on list of vulnerable homeless etc, because its better to be poor in Torbay than Manchester due to the weather.
We already have high house cost in SW England, a shed in Salcombe is 500K IIRC, your camping plot will require a small tent.

The Ayes Have It...............

[thirdcrank]

Universal Declaration of Human Rights

Article 25.

(1) Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.

(2) Motherhood and childhood are entitled to special care and assistance. All children, whether born in or out of wedlock, shall enjoy the same social protection.

(My emphasis)

http://www.un.org/en/universal-declarat ... index.html

I think we already have this as above, if we are still signed up.
=============================================================================
PS I was interrupted while doing this by a call from my credit card's fraud prevention (the radar had detected moths flying from my wallet. )

I see the European Convention doesn't include this but we are dumping that lot anyway.

http://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/Convention_ENG.pdf

[mercalia]

Universal Declaration of Human Rights

Article 25.

(1) Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.

(2) Motherhood and childhood are entitled to special care and assistance. All children, whether born in or out of wedlock, shall enjoy the same social protection.

(My emphasis)

http://www.un.org/en/universal-declarat ... index.html

I think we already have this as above, if we are still signed up.
=============================================================================
PS I was interrupted while doing this by a call from my credit card's fraud prevention (the radar had detected moths flying from my wallet. )

I see the European Convention doesn't include this but we are dumping that lot anyway.

http://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/Convention_ENG.pdf

well havent seen anyone sue the govt or local councils lately on this matter.

[old_windbag]

So an individual can buy cheap land and live there in a tent

On a related aside. Whilst wandering through the nearby city, for many years I've seen umpteen people in doorways begging for money. There are others who sell big issues to make money. Now some people may be mentally ill and can't escape the situation but for many why sit in a doorway begging when with a bike, tent, sleeping bag you could travel around the uk offering to wash a car or dig a garden for a couple of pounds. In more remote places such as in scotland I think people would be more open to this and help you out. Enough money to get you some water and a few tins of food each day would be the aim.

I think my mentality has always been one of "If I lose everything what would I do?". I also look at small rooms like my bathroom and think how you could kit it out to be fully liveable.

[rjb]

Hi,
Then it comes back to where would you want to live?
Scotland / N-England or sunny south Devon

I think Torbay are high on list of vulnerable homeless etc, because its better to be poor in Torbay than Manchester due to the weather.
We already have high house cost in SW England, a shed in Salcombe is 500K IIRC, your camping plot will require a small tent.

The Ayes Have It...............

Save yourself a few bob and look here on the somerset coast at Dunster.



a snip at £100k https://www.onthemarket.com/details/424 ... nt=clickad

and room to keep n+1 bikes.

[tatanab]

Thorny question - if there is such a right, should it be where you want to live or where you are told to live.

e.g and 18 year old leaves his parent's home in London. With no income to pay rent, should he be housed right there or should he be told to live where housing is available 150 miles away?

[pwa]

I do think we need a lot more cheap, basic accommodation. Housing provided for those too poor to pay the going rate should be basic. Clean, dry, just enough room, with a reasonably safe street outside.

[Psamathe]

Of course everybody should have a home & roof over their head.

But the conservatives have turned this into that you have to own your own home - so their ficus is on building homes for sale/profit rather than building homes for people to live in.

Renting is a quite standard way to have a roof over your head; Council housing is a quite acceptable way of having a roof over your head. But so much these days seems to be if you don't own your home you don't have a home.

Of course the rental market should be improved as well (address disreputable landlords, sub-standard rental housing, security, etc.) but that is a separate issue to the ownership requirement.

So often the government (Conservatives) talk about "affordable housing" when they are referring to lower cost to buy rather than getting a home which can include affordable rent.

Figures vary but reports e.g. 33% of council houses sold in 80's under Thatcher are now owned by private landlords. Reported last year that 40% of ex-council flats sold under "Right to Buy" are now being rented out by private landlords as a higher rent. It's about profit for the landlords, profit for the construction companies, etc. NOT about people having homes.

Ian

[reohn2]

^ wot 'e sed.
Has anyone else spotted just what's wrong with the way capitalism under neolibralism operates?

[old_windbag]

"affordable housing"

I said on a previous thread that we could easily build sub 100k homes by having a not for profit state owned building company. The houses built can be eco homes, timber frames or even simple modular builds with open space to divide into living spaces at purchase time before build. Post war we built prefabs at low cost which were still in use 30 odd years later( they weren't meant to be but were good builds ).

But the important thing is to tie purchasers into covenants on such cheap builds that only allow resale by inflation. So the purchaser doesn't in effect lose money but the home stays affordable to the next buyer. No second home use, no letting unless it is the state doing so. It would work.

Anyone concerned at how you'd go from those houses to big private homes on fancy estates shouldn't be. The low cost of these accessible homes would mean most would have money to save for future use if desired.

[Vorpal]

I think the system for rental security in Norway is quite good. Rental security is expensive, typically 3 months rent. However, what happens is that the landlord & tenant together open a special account in both names. It can be done on-line with some banks, but they need identification or existing accounts & a signed rental contract.

The money is held in the account until the contract ends. At that point the landlord either has to release the money for transfer into the tenants normal account, or they need to provide an itemised list of charges against the deposit. The tenant can either agree, and take the remaining money, or dispute it, in which case it goes to mediation.

It doesn't prevent slumlords. It just makes it a little harder for them to operate. They sometimes take advantage of people who don't know the law about security accounts, or people moving abroad, who don't have time to wait for mediation. They also overcharge for things like cleaning and minor repairs.