monopoly and cash

Rent swallows 36% of income for Isle of Wight social housing tenants

According to official figures, low income households moving into social housing on the Isle of Wight spend more than a third of their income on rent.

Housing charities said a reduction in benefits has made the rent burden more severe for people in need and called for more social homes to be built to keep up with demand.

Third on income on rent
The latest data from the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government shows that new social tenants spent, on average, 36% of their monthly income on rent during the financial year 2017-18.

Although it is 58% cheaper than the private market, the median tenancy rent for social houses on the Isle of Wight was £82 per week.

This amount excludes the payments of bills.

Social housing is let at low rents to those who are most in need or struggling with their housing costs.

According to the housing charity Shelter and the Joseph Rowntree Foundation, spending more than a third of your disposable income on rent or a mortgage means you may not be able to afford other basic needs.

Compared to national average
Nationally, households living in social housing spent 34% of their income on rent.

The median rent for new social housing tenancies in England was £83 per week, which is £1.50 lower than the previous year.

The data shows that 21% of new social housing tenants were in work on the Isle of Wight. A further 6% were over 65 and 14% were rough sleepers or people living in temporary accommodation.

House building needed
Catherine Ryder, head of policy at the National Housing Federation, said:

“Our research shows we need to build 90,000 homes for social rent each year to keep up with demand.

“To do this, Government must reform how land is sold, so that housing associations are not directly competing with private developers for land to build social housing.

“Reduction in benefits since 2010 will also have had an impact on people’s incomes and are making it much harder for people to afford rent and other essentials.”

Downward trend
The total number of new social housing lettings peaked in 2013-14, and since then there has been a steady downward trend.

A spokesperson from the ministry puts this trend down a fall in the number of vacant properties available to be re-let.

He said:

“A widening affordability gap between the social and private rental sectors discourages current social tenants from moving into private accommodation. As a result, turnover is lower.”


Article shared by Data Reporter as part of OnTheWight’s collaboration with Press Association and Urbs Media

Image: TaxRebate under CC BY 2.0

Advertisement
Subscribe
Email updates?
6 Comments
oldest
newest most voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Colin
21, March 2024 6:38 pm

Shambolic, the whole lot of them. They spend more time arguing about how they want to make decisions but are incapable of making any. Dither and Delay. And that’s coming from a councillor. They should be ashamed of themselves.

septua
21, March 2024 8:11 pm

Councillors each receive an allowance of ca. £9,000 p.a. to carry out their duties, and they receive more if they have extra responsibilities. How many employers would continue to pay employees this amount if they failed to carry out their job properly?

RootDown'92
Reply to  septua
21, March 2024 8:32 pm

Arguably the Cllrs who have repeatedly blocked the DIPS are doing what they were elected to do, as they proudly campaigned as nimby’s.
What £ they receive has nothing whatsoever to do with how the votes get tallied up.

karen
22, March 2024 12:51 am

Filibuster at its greatest extent over 7 years. Did anyone really think the originators would let it happen?

Angela Hewitt
22, March 2024 7:50 am

I love nimbys. They have stopped the courtry from being completely covered in concrete. However, in this case they can’t possibly be nimbys because they are holding up DIPS and allowing developers to carry on concreting without redress!!

Benny C
Reply to  Angela Hewitt
22, March 2024 1:36 pm

Exactly. Messrs Stewart, Ward, Churchman et al allowed the plan to lapse. How about holding them properly to account for the consequences? In aiming for other short term goals they trashed, properly trashed, our planning controls. Not a price worth paying, not communicated, quite possibly denied, but true.

billp
Reply to  Benny C
22, March 2024 2:47 pm

The previous plan has not lapsed. It was implemented in 2012 and can apply if necessary until 2027.

sjw1
22, March 2024 8:37 am

Let’s face it they have absolutely no intention of producing a plan, it’s just make-work & holding pointless meetings that only produce hot air. It would be laughable if it wasn’t so serious. What a shambles!

Snowwolf1
22, March 2024 2:40 pm

Lock them in a room and sort it out, the Council cannot afford to waste £660,000 of taxpayers money when they have already wasted enough on poor organisation and information gathering not to mention the inhouse bickering during the past to decades and seem to be getting worse. Start communicating and work as a team – it isn’t rocket science more a case of “too many Chiefs… Read more »

vitabrevis
23, March 2024 2:31 pm

So once again the Tories sabotage the Island Plan, allowing more opportunity for Tory-supporting developers to force their unwanted and destructive builds onto the Island. I feel for Cllr Fuller, one of the most genuine and dedicated members and who now has to explain to government why we STILL don’t have a plan. Look forward to yet more 4-bed mansions while the quota of “affordable” houses inexplicably… Read more »

reCaptcha Error: grecaptcha is not defined