Bournemouth council to join the property market by buying rundown homes (From Thisisdorset)

Not often I find myself agreeing with Bournrmouth Council but this is exactly what's needed in my view. And for other areas such as Charminster. The condition of an area always starts with the housing and who resides there. HMOs drag and area down done and I believe do nothing for the well being of those who live in them. Would like to see them banished to history like tenanment blocks of the 30's. In the 21st century a seperation from where we sleep to where we live, socialise and eat should be a human right and also the privacy of a private kitchen and bathroom can only help give dignity to people and support them in whatever issues they may be facing.

Sqalor and threat is unlikely to aid recovery

step up wrote:
Not often I find myself agreeing with Bournrmouth Council but this is exactly what's needed in my view. And for other areas such as Charminster. The condition of an area always starts with the housing and who resides there. HMOs drag and area down done and I believe do nothing for the well being of those who live in them. Would like to see them banished to history like tenanment blocks of the 30's. In the 21st century a seperation from where we sleep to where we live, socialise and eat should be a human right and also the privacy of a private kitchen and bathroom can only help give dignity to people and support them in whatever issues they may be facing.

I totally agree with you - although it's a pity they could not develop some of the properties into 3 or 4 bedroomed houses for larger families as those are desperately needed more than more flats - but beggars can't be choosers and this is at least a step in the right direction - let's hope more vacant run down properties can be developed - and I would hope that these new properties will be used to house LOCALS - not more people wanting to come and live by the seaside from up north ....

Decent housing for LOCAL people should be the priority of *every* council first and foremost.

Morrigan wrote:

step up wrote:
Not often I find myself agreeing with Bournrmouth Council but this is exactly what's needed in my view. And for other areas such as Charminster. The condition of an area always starts with the housing and who resides there. HMOs drag and area down done and I believe do nothing for the well being of those who live in them. Would like to see them banished to history like tenanment blocks of the 30's. In the 21st century a seperation from where we sleep to where we live, socialise and eat should be a human right and also the privacy of a private kitchen and bathroom can only help give dignity to people and support them in whatever issues they may be facing.

I totally agree with you - although it's a pity they could not develop some of the properties into 3 or 4 bedroomed houses for larger families as those are desperately needed more than more flats - but beggars can't be choosers and this is at least a step in the right direction - let's hope more vacant run down properties can be developed - and I would hope that these new properties will be used to house LOCALS - not more people wanting to come and live by the seaside from up north ....

Decent housing for LOCAL people should be the priority of *every* council first and foremost.

Are you Bournemouth BORN, are you in WORK, if so then fine but its a bit late NOW to STOP the influx because of the EU, lets have the VOTE and see what the people say !!!!

''Recent research.It's been something that the residents and business community has been saying for a very, very long time and is a step in the right direction.

All i hope is the private landlords now address the issue and provide quality accomodation.

However, being a tenant of one of the landlord stakeholders, i do have reservations towards his commitment to do that.

Well done to the council at last using money in a positive way BUT and it's a big but ,don't give the new let's to the scum that have given Boscombe it's name and will destroy the home again and do not give assured tennancies so bad tennants can be kicked out straight away ,we saw with our own eyes a flat near to ours in the end took two attemps by the court to remove but as I said a good start more please

This along with other initiatives the council are current persuing wont be enough to make a lasting change to boscombe They will raise the area in the short term but nothing lasting in the long term. Currently there are over 150 more one & two bedroom flats planned for boscombe squeezing more & more people into an already over populated area We already have enough of them & need 3/4 bed units to aid regeneration, That would make a diffference.This current plan of 1/2 bed flats won't arround churchill gardens

Redgolfer00 wrote:

Morrigan wrote:

step up wrote:
Not often I find myself agreeing with Bournrmouth Council but this is exactly what's needed in my view. And for other areas such as Charminster. The condition of an area always starts with the housing and who resides there. HMOs drag and area down done and I believe do nothing for the well being of those who live in them. Would like to see them banished to history like tenanment blocks of the 30's. In the 21st century a seperation from where we sleep to where we live, socialise and eat should be a human right and also the privacy of a private kitchen and bathroom can only help give dignity to people and support them in whatever issues they may be facing.

I totally agree with you - although it's a pity they could not develop some of the properties into 3 or 4 bedroomed houses for larger families as those are desperately needed more than more flats - but beggars can't be choosers and this is at least a step in the right direction - let's hope more vacant run down properties can be developed - and I would hope that these new properties will be used to house LOCALS - not more people wanting to come and live by the seaside from up north ....

Decent housing for LOCAL people should be the priority of *every* council first and foremost.

Are you Bournemouth BORN, are you in WORK, if so then fine but its a bit late NOW to STOP the influx because of the EU, lets have the VOTE and see what the people say !!!!

TOTALLY agree with RedGolfer00:
Are you Bournemouth BORN, are you in WORK, if so then fine but its a bit late NOW to STOP the influx because of the EU, lets have the VOTE and see what the people say !!!!

Problem is ....Two words....
"HUMAN RIGHTS"
or as I call it "Crock of sh*t"

The council is going to spend 825,000 quid on these houses.
They have to be joking!
How many will that amount buy?
Talk about emptying the ocean with a teaspoon............
....!

OK in theory but in practice with "right to buy" legislation in a few years these properties could easily find their way back into private ownership and but to let.
.
If it's going to take the Council13 years to get our money back this could just end up the taxpayer subsidising private ownership.
.
As others have said 1 and 2 bedroom flats will not create family homes which the Council have claimed they want to create.
.
It sounds like the Council really doesn't have a thought out strategy for Boscombe but hopes that if they throw enough taxpayers money at the problem it will sort itself out.
.
The question that has been ignored is what will happen to people currently living in HMO's bought by the Council. These will tend to be single people who won't qualify for Council housing. Is this policy of cracking down on HMO's simply going to shift social problems from Boscombe to another part of town ?
.

The problem with Bournemouth's lack of houses stems from Maggies big sale years ago now we don't have enough council houses for families that need them only houses rented out by greedy landlords who only want DHSS or Uni students who will pay more. Bring back council houses for locals who need a larger home.

Lots of comment about 'bringing back council houses for locals'.
Those in favour (and I do agree) need to understand that policies, ironically often supported by this same side of political thinking, now mean you cannot do this. You must build homes for all comers regardless of their geographical origin - it is their 'human right' you see, you cannot offer any preference to locals.
A concern about this idea not yet aired is the recognised and sometimes far too cosy links between these HMO Landlords and some at the Town Hall - doubtless one of the reasons change in Boscombe has been 'slow' to date.
Who will decide what properties are bought with public money, at what sum and from whom. Transparent? - I bet it won't really be!

Very small step in the right direction. See the usual reactionaries have weighted in the usual local angle everyone else can get stuffed nonsense. Decent housing is a basic human right end of.
Ive got a job and a home but guess what? I've got more in common with an immigrant worker that a rich indigenous Brit bankster or any other privileged person thats living off of invested income that can only go up or down by gambling on the London markets. I don't care where anyone comes from, if you've got a good heart then fine and even if you have fallen off the radar in this money bankster dominated society where social justice is a joke. Solidarity. Tax rich they caused this mess let them pay for it.

oh and we are not all in this together. the working class are being soaked rotten with austerity measure so Cameron and his flunkies can protect the banksters and tax dodgers who are the biggest benefit fraudsters of all.

A N Archist wrote:
Very small step in the right direction. See the usual reactionaries have weighted in the usual local angle everyone else can get stuffed nonsense. Decent housing is a basic human right end of.
Ive got a job and a home but guess what? I've got more in common with an immigrant worker that a rich indigenous Brit bankster or any other privileged person thats living off of invested income that can only go up or down by gambling on the London markets. I don't care where anyone comes from, if you've got a good heart then fine and even if you have fallen off the radar in this money bankster dominated society where social justice is a joke. Solidarity. Tax rich they caused this mess let them pay for it.

You have a home and a job.
Well done!
To live off of an invested income you have to PUT SOMETHING IN!
An anarchist is a pathetic individual who goes against everything that took people out of caves.
If law and order, and basic human progress are too much for you, you should go back, find a cave and crawl back to the life that humanity fought so hard to overcome.
Whether you like it or not life is separated with the haves and have nots.
If you go back and put every-one on an even footing it would very soon revert to the way things are at present.
Suck it in and live with reality!

There are plenty of 3/4 bedroom social house out there. Problem is many are occupied by 1 or 2 people. Kids went long ago and the parents should move to a smaller property. Perhaps the new bedroom tax will help.

Families don't move to Walpole road out of choice And as someone pointed out £825000 isn't going to buy many properties .
Dave Wells has shown the way with these older properties , knock them down and put up a modern ,low maintainence unit that can be designed to be usable instead of taking on structurally weak and damp properties that absorb money like sponges , or give the money to DW and let them do what they are set up to do ,why should this council want to be involved ?

The whole article talks about HMO's but never states what an HMO is.

elite50 wrote:
The council is going to spend 825,000 quid on these houses.
They have to be joking!
How many will that amount buy?
Talk about emptying the ocean with a teaspoon............

....!

Well thats 3 houses sorted out, I would be surprised if it bought 4

cascat wrote:
The whole article talks about HMO's but never states what an HMO is.

HMO stands for House in Multiple Occupation
he following are considered to be households for the purposes of HMO licensing:

Members of the same family living together. This includes married couples or those living as married couples (including same sex couples).
Relatives living together. This includes parents, grandparents, children (and step-children), grandchildren, brothers, sisters, uncles, aunts, nephews, nieces and cousins. Half-relatives are treated as full relatives and a foster child living with his or her foster parent is treated as living in the same household as their foster parent.
So, for example, three friends sharing together would constitute three households. If a couple are sharing with a third person that would consist of two households. If a family rents a property it's classed as a single household.

A good idea in principal.

Just hope this housing goes to Bournemouth resisdents who actually work.

For christ sake stop giving housing to degenerates, other eu nationals who here for a handout because they are "entitled".

Should mandatory for the applicants to be drug tested and if they druggies they can bugger off!! Same for the meths dependant lot too.

I have no sympathy for them types no one forced to you to abuse susbstances so tough S*it

This seems quite a good idea to me- it makes you wonder why it wasn't done years ago?

If the money is used for deposits- and the remainder borrowed (10% deposit: 90% mortgage) then a lot of properties could be purchased. Plus lenders must have some pretty good mortgage rate deals for ideal low credit risk borrowers like councils.

Politically its a bit surprising that a Conservative council is buying private housing to become a public landlord. Labour should have been doing this, but after 13 years in power they never quite got round to it!

It may cost a lot in the short term, but long term it is far better that public money paid out through housing benefits as well as earnt wages get paid to a council to fund more housing, than paid to a private landlord to fund the millionaire lifestyle.

Its a big thumbs up from me... and potentially if it catches on nationally, this could prove to be the magic button Dave is looking for to boost the housing/ building/ home improvement industries. Councils all over the UK buying up run-down housing stock, gutting them and re-fitting them with new boilers, electrics, plumbing, re-decorating... lots of jobs, doing something worthwhile, for the benefit of the country and in particularly those at the bottom end of the housing ladder- its a vote winner, has a 'big society/ all in it together' feel about it, is a job creator and economy booster!!

Somebody must be able to point out the spanner in the works to me?!

Boscombe has some amazing properties that are full of character. More than in most other areas in Bournemouth.

The inside of a house is as good as you want it to be if you have creativity and imagination. Although doubt if these qualities are present in many employees in positions of influence in Bournemouth Council.

Yes it really is a drop in the ocean but if its the start of something bigger and better it deserves our support.

Sadly I doubt that many people that work for the Bournemouth Council in positions of influence have the creativity and vision necessary to really take this forward and make it work.

It seems the HR process that filters the people that get to the top eliminates anyone that is able to think out side the box.

It's so very sad, Boscombe could be an amazing place. But it will take vision, commitment and at least 15 years. No one nowadays seems able to take the long view.

I suppose at least some council tax returns will be forthcoming, which as an HMO does not happen, in the case of students occupying.
.
Bournemouth Council also need to look at Winton, Moordown, and Charminster to do the same thing.
.
3 and 4 bedroom houses are available, but at present being occupied by single and double occupants, who should be moved to smaller accommodation appropiately. Thus releasing 3 and 4 bedroom properties for families in need.
.

The Seasider wrote:
This seems quite a good idea to me- it makes you wonder why it wasn't done years ago?

If the money is used for deposits- and the remainder borrowed (10% deposit: 90% mortgage) then a lot of properties could be purchased. Plus lenders must have some pretty good mortgage rate deals for ideal low credit risk borrowers like councils.

Politically its a bit surprising that a Conservative council is buying private housing to become a public landlord. Labour should have been doing this, but after 13 years in power they never quite got round to it!

It may cost a lot in the short term, but long term it is far better that public money paid out through housing benefits as well as earnt wages get paid to a council to fund more housing, than paid to a private landlord to fund the millionaire lifestyle.

Its a big thumbs up from me... and potentially if it catches on nationally, this could prove to be the magic button Dave is looking for to boost the housing/ building/ home improvement industries. Councils all over the UK buying up run-down housing stock, gutting them and re-fitting them with new boilers, electrics, plumbing, re-decorating... lots of jobs, doing something worthwhile, for the benefit of the country and in particularly those at the bottom end of the housing ladder- its a vote winner, has a 'big society/ all in it together' feel about it, is a job creator and economy booster!!

Somebody must be able to point out the spanner in the works to me?!

Which Dave are we on about, Cameron or a certain Wells.

Oh dear spend taxpayers money getting them on the cheap spend even more taxpayers money doing them up. Then a few years down the line a right to buy scheme or a private investor will get them on the cheap and make a massive profit at the taxpayers expense. Behind closed doors its prob already a done deal, still trebles all round yet again this council proves its run by developers for developers.

Privately owned HMO's are not all filled with jobless layabouts or students, and provide an increasingly affordable, way to live, and when bills are split several ways, they can provide higher quality/better amenities than could be afforded living on ones own. I say target HMO's which cater for people on benefits, as these are the ones that bring Boscombe down, better still limit the number of benefit claimants in each HMO to a maximum of 1.

I think one or two on here need to get their heads out of the Daily Mail for a moment or two - it might at least stop them bleating out it's predictable Orwellian slogans.

In the real world -

" Each council can decide what rules to apply to work out who does, and who doesn't, qualify to join their list. Councils could decide, for example, to only accept people who have lived or worked in their area for some time, or people who work but are on a low income ".

The devil here will be in the detail. The criteria of having family size determining your place on the list is deeply flawed, and has caused much isuse and a considerable amount of resentment. It needs to change.

Likewise I suggest that any new additions to your family are treated as your responsibity, not that of the council. Similarly do not expect to be able to move into the area and rely on the council/state to heavily subsidise your living.

My concern here is why has taken the council so long to make this almost token effort ? If these houses were so rundown then why has the council been paying 'top dollar' in housing benefit to their owners for years ?

Only when the council stops paying excessive rents for squalid housing elsewhere in Boscombe landlords will have a stark choice - continue housing those with drink/drug problems at a vastly reduced rent (suitable to the standard of housing) or bring the housing up to a standard where those who contribute to society and want to pay their way will be happy to pay for, will we see any real noticable change.

However as long as the council/state continue to subsidise landlords providing slum housing, we will continue to have the same folk here, causing the same problems.

And yes I am fully aware of those who for many reasons cannot work, have serious medical conditions and genuinely need help. It is not for them that much needed changes should be introduced.

We need a complete overhaul, and not what I suggest is probably no more than just a temporary sanitising of the most visible signs of Boscombes problems.

They should compulsory purchase every house in walpole road and turn them all into family flats for people on the waiting list. I understand from a friend who's been on the list for 3 years that the criteria for being on the council list is changing next week. People will have to prove they have had a link to the area for at least the last 3 years (should be 10 in my opinion) they are not earning too much and if I've been told correctly those already living in council housing that have more bedrooms than they require will be offered somewhere smaller to meet their needs and free up these larger properties for those who need them. It will be interesting to see if they can enforce this, but it will be a step in the right direction.

I think a certain point has been missed in all this ,few people are not drawing benefits in that area , so they use public money to buy a couple of properties , public money to do them up , install ,as likely as not tenants on benefits and then use public money to pay the rents in housing benefit and probably to a foreigner who has never contributed a penny to the revenue of this town - why do it . It's a loser all the way down the line . Local people will pay for it but gain nothing

As per usual all the ignorant people on here generalising re Hmo's. Presuming they are all large properties with low life tenants.
An HMO can be a 2 bed flat. As I understand it housing benefit is paid with regards to the need of the individual. So a single person may only be entitled to receive rent for a single bedsit or room . If we get rid if all these then we all pay more for them to live alone in a flat. If we make them too cosy they won't all be tempted to find a job to fund a place for themselves.
Not all Hmo's are badly run properties. Unfortunately mr wells over the years has tarnished the name of landlords by having badly maintained properties and not being fussy who lives in them.
I own a HMO bedsit property which I maintain well and choose tenants well.
They stAy for years and one of my neighbours didnt know for 3 years that it was a bedsit property. They are a mix of elderly single people, to foreign workers. They share bathrooms thats all and are all happy to do so. My house is in amongst large family homes, nursing homes, and some converted flats.
I am not in it for greed.i invested for a pension. The multi let aspect appealed as spreads the risk with non payment of rent etc. it's a 30 year investment not a get rich quick scheme as these larger properties don't come cheap.
I serve a need .my tenants are happy and stay for on Average well over 5 years. It's not in boscombe. I understand the problems there which if one landlord didn't own so much of it maybe wouldn't be a problem but don't tar us all with same brush please.

I can imagine the council buying and doing up the properties and then paying a local landlord to run then (no idea who) or they will just sell them to a local landlord. We NEED homes not bedsits or self contained 1/2 bedroom flats. The Government changed the law on who can share bedrooms in families because people were being forced into breaking the law due to no large properties available. I am not talking massive families as even a family with 2 children of different gender really need 3 bedrooms. The reason that Boscombe has so many unemployed is thats where they have been dumped into bedsit land!

So where do the unemployed go then?!

"To get something out you have to put something in". Great logic Sherlock. If you've earnt it fair and square and paid the tax on it fine.

But there's inheritances, lottery wins, money cobbled together by exploitation.

I do wish people would read about what an anarchist is. It dosnt mean chaos and freeloading it means doing things for ourselves and factoring the hierarchies out of society, the exploiters, slavery employers, the manipulators, the power-nuts

read about: anarcho-syndicalism, anarcho-capitalism, anarcho-envrionmenta
lism.

Anarchy used by the establishment is just a yah-boo word bandied around to scare people. There's nothing to be scared of. No Gods, No Masters, simple as. We can look after ourselves.

A N Archist wrote:
"To get something out you have to put something in". Great logic Sherlock. If you've earnt it fair and square and paid the tax on it fine.

But there's inheritances, lottery wins, money cobbled together by exploitation.

I do wish people would read about what an anarchist is. It dosnt mean chaos and freeloading it means doing things for ourselves and factoring the hierarchies out of society, the exploiters, slavery employers, the manipulators, the power-nuts

read about: anarcho-syndicalism, anarcho-capitalism, anarcho-envrionmenta

lism.

Anarchy used by the establishment is just a yah-boo word bandied around to scare people. There's nothing to be scared of. No Gods, No Masters, simple as. We can look after ourselves.

Idiot.
How would you know how landlords become landlords? What a gross generalisation.
They pay tax like anyone else. They pay capital gains tax when sell up.
They pay inheritance tax if they've inherited.
Not everyone wants to buy. A lot wish to rent. We rent less in this country than most of Europe.

A N Archist wrote:
Very small step in the right direction. See the usual reactionaries have weighted in the usual local angle everyone else can get stuffed nonsense. Decent housing is a basic human right end of.
Ive got a job and a home but guess what? I've got more in common with an immigrant worker that a rich indigenous Brit bankster or any other privileged person thats living off of invested income that can only go up or down by gambling on the London markets. I don't care where anyone comes from, if you've got a good heart then fine and even if you have fallen off the radar in this money bankster dominated society where social justice is a joke. Solidarity. Tax rich they caused this mess let them pay for it.

The rich are taxed. And at a higher rate.the rich also create jobs and wealth. Without them where would be?
Most wouldn't have a job.

A N Archist wrote:
Very small step in the right direction. See the usual reactionaries have weighted in the usual local angle everyone else can get stuffed nonsense. Decent housing is a basic human right end of.
Ive got a job and a home but guess what? I've got more in common with an immigrant worker that a rich indigenous Brit bankster or any other privileged person thats living off of invested income that can only go up or down by gambling on the London markets. I don't care where anyone comes from, if you've got a good heart then fine and even if you have fallen off the radar in this money bankster dominated society where social justice is a joke. Solidarity. Tax rich they caused this mess let them pay for it.

Decent housing is a basic human right.
Agreed. What's not decent about a well maintained bedsit or studio flat for a single person?
These type of properties are licensed to
Are sure they are of a decent standard and basic amenities are within it.
Don't judge by the outside what the inside is like. There are plenty of family homes and homes owned by the elderly that are in disrepair for whatever reason. There may be a shortage of family homes but there is also a need for single unit accommodation.

Got me wrong well maintained studio's, bedsits have their place, almost certainly me and the mrs will end our days in one.

I believe Mr Wells own these 'run down properties' so are we saying that the Council are buying off him?

High Treason wrote:
There are plenty of 3/4 bedroom social house out there. Problem is many are occupied by 1 or 2 people. Kids went long ago and the parents should move to a smaller property. Perhaps the new bedroom tax will help.

Totally agree HT. I also remember from my council working days seeing lots of empty properties uninhabited for ages.
This maybe not the case now due to the large immigrant influx, which has to be housed.

O'Reilly wrote:

High Treason wrote:
There are plenty of 3/4 bedroom social house out there. Problem is many are occupied by 1 or 2 people. Kids went long ago and the parents should move to a smaller property. Perhaps the new bedroom tax will help.

Totally agree HT. I also remember from my council working days seeing lots of empty properties uninhabited for ages.
This maybe not the case now due to the large immigrant influx, which has to be housed.

Why do the have to be housed O'Reilly. They should not be entitled to anything until all the local people with a connection to the town who have been on the list for years have been housed. If after that there are any properties left then house the people who land in this country expecting it all.

The idea that couples who;s childeren have grown up and moved away should be forced out of their "homes" by the council by downsizing begs another question to debate. Should social housing tenants spend any money,time or have pride in the property they are renting if they are to be moved on in short order?. We have been very gratefull and good tenants of Bournemouth councill for 25 years ( by the way in my humble opinion they are the best councill landlords in gb!). We have brought up a family in our house under very happy circumstances. We payed our way by working hard,we committed to the local community and spent a lot of dough maintaining the property with civic pride.
Our kids all did well at school and have good jobs (they earn more than we ever did!) . Our last one just left home. If we go downsize,whether forced or by choice we leave at least £4000 of improvments to the property behind us.
Ask your self this---- would you be prepared to do that? Will future tenants spend anything on their rented propertys if the are to be put onto tenancys that shuffle them around like the roll of a dice?.
Not all of us who rent are dodgy!.

Morrigan wrote:

step up wrote:
Not often I find myself agreeing with Bournrmouth Council but this is exactly what's needed in my view. And for other areas such as Charminster. The condition of an area always starts with the housing and who resides there. HMOs drag and area down done and I believe do nothing for the well being of those who live in them. Would like to see them banished to history like tenanment blocks of the 30's. In the 21st century a seperation from where we sleep to where we live, socialise and eat should be a human right and also the privacy of a private kitchen and bathroom can only help give dignity to people and support them in whatever issues they may be facing.

I totally agree with you - although it's a pity they could not develop some of the properties into 3 or 4 bedroomed houses for larger families as those are desperately needed more than more flats - but beggars can't be choosers and this is at least a step in the right direction - let's hope more vacant run down properties can be developed - and I would hope that these new properties will be used to house LOCALS - not more people wanting to come and live by the seaside from up north ....

Decent housing for LOCAL people should be the priority of *every* council first and foremost.

Like the people who continue to have children and then expect a bigger council house? No its would just encourage the benefit culture of people thinking they can have as many kids as they like and the benefits service and the council will support them. Isnt that what the government are trying to prevent? Fair enough if a large family come on hard times and lose their home but do not expect the taxpayer to provide cheap accomodation for those that cant stop breeding!

High Treason wrote:
There are plenty of 3/4 bedroom social house out there. Problem is many are occupied by 1 or 2 people. Kids went long ago and the parents should move to a smaller property. Perhaps the new bedroom tax will help.

I think you might want to research that comment because its not strictly true. Many people in council houses are on benefits and are being forced into smaller accomodation because the cannot get HB for a larger house, and quite rightly so. This hasnt been in force for very long but will certainly free up bogger houses in the long run.

BoscombeBloke wrote:
Privately owned HMO's are not all filled with jobless layabouts or students, and provide an increasingly affordable, way to live, and when bills are split several ways, they can provide higher quality/better amenities than could be afforded living on ones own. I say target HMO's which cater for people on benefits, as these are the ones that bring Boscombe down, better still limit the number of benefit claimants in each HMO to a maximum of 1.

I think you have the wrong definition of a HMO. Its not a house share.

Dibbles2 wrote:

BoscombeBloke wrote:
Privately owned HMO's are not all filled with jobless layabouts or students, and provide an increasingly affordable, way to live, and when bills are split several ways, they can provide higher quality/better amenities than could be afforded living on ones own. I say target HMO's which cater for people on benefits, as these are the ones that bring Boscombe down, better still limit the number of benefit claimants in each HMO to a maximum of 1.

I think you have the wrong definition of a HMO. Its not a house share.

It is a house share or a mix of bedsits sharing certain facilities of 3 or more unrelated people.,this is why an HMO can be a 2 bed flat.
At present Hmo's of 3 storeys and with 5 or more unrelated people are licensed and inspected by council.
The people on here saying target the people on benefits forget there are elderly single quiet people in this group. I have some of this group and never have a problem. I choose not to have under 30's as they can cause problems with noise and don't tend to stay very long. But the generalisation on this forum is astounding.

O'Reilly wrote:
I believe Mr Wells own these 'run down properties' so are we saying that the Council are buying off him?

Hallelujah.
Yes mr wells owns most of these run down properties.heceven chooses to put plaques outside advertising the fact! That's how proud he is of them.
Unfortunately the decent HMO landlords get a bad name because of his hundreds of properties in the area and who he chooses to let to.