7.30 ACT April 27th

Very aware of a family who were Govvy tennants for over 60 years. 2 beddy in an inner north suburb, 7 kids, so the gov built them a glorified chook house for the parents bedroom.

Dad was given the opportunity to buy for many years, but declined.

The kids moved away, the parents passed away, and the property was sold for a mill plus, proceeds to the ACT gov. (US!).

The swings and roundabouts of property ownership.

Public housing? Just set up a teepee on Lake Ginninderra and you’ll be offered three units within a couple of weeks. Don’t bother being forgotten on a waiting list for more than five years like the rest of us plebs. And if you can get someone calling themselves “an Aboriginal elder” supporting your cause all the better.

DHCS should lift thier game and start filtering some of these spongers out of the system. People who desparately need housing are on the streets whilst others who have outgrown the need for housing are not accountable. We cannot afford to spoon feed bludgers any longer. Once your established you should be on your own. Heaps of others have to struggle under the burden of a mortgage and young family. Canberra was very different 50 years ago when the commonwealth government was encouraging growth and tipping in the dollars. Self government brings responsibilities that seem to be on the backburner.

johnboy said :

And they want to “pay market value” for it but not what it goes for at auction?

Frankly I’m disgusted with the media support these spongers have had.

Absolutely. I was watching waiting for the point where they explained just why the bleep they were entitled to it. The argument they were making sounded more akin to a native title claim – “We’ve had a family link to this house for 50 years.”

I do want to throw out a red card though to Solly for his “joke” after the Clyde Mountain story about them “not breaking too many” road rules when filming it -deadly road where jerks break the rules often – that isn’t funny!

johnboy said :

And they want to “pay market value” for it but not what it goes for at auction?

Frankly I’m disgusted with the media support these spongers have had.

Why don’t they just go to the auction? That will determine fair market value on the day (to those who bid).

The Brisbane couple I referred to were saying that they could have the last 30+ years rent paid applied to the market value as part of the scheme up there, reducing the purchase price to virtually nothing. Lazily I assumed that it would be the same here.

Grrrr said :

If I-filed is correct about the rental assessment, that should probably be changed to something harder to rort, like quarterly assessment based on income for the entire previous quarter (or similar.)

What about simply check against the previous years tax return? If the review of their tax shows they declared less income to housing than ATO, then work out the difference and send em a bill. I always thought that data-matching was a very active part of what they do, to catch exactly these people.

The reason why the family didnt purchase the house, is probably due to the asset value. If they bought the house for their mother, then it would have probably affected her centrelink income which would then be means tested. If they bought the house themselves and rented it to her, she’d have to justify the situation to Centrelink.

johnboy said :

And they want to “pay market value” for it but not what it goes for at auction?

Frankly I’m disgusted with the media support these spongers have had.

That.

Glad I wasn’t the only one who had these thoughts.

screaming banshee said :

I am strongly against housing commission tenants being able to purchase a property at a discount

So, you’re strongly against something no-one in the ACT can do? ACT Housing offers the opportunity to purchase at market rate: http://www.dhcs.act.gov.au/hcs/sale_to_tenants_scheme

If I-filed is correct about the rental assessment, that should probably be changed to something harder to rort, like quarterly assessment based on income for the entire previous quarter (or similar.)

Sorry, that should be “equates to about $65,000 a year”