Anti social housing

sel it was on the wright stuff this morning .a think alot of people in this country would like to see the same hear .we havent had any trouble ,i wouldnt put up with it

Don't think it's harsh, especially if a process of warnings etc haven't worked.

Dust off the kalashikov eh london ?
Always works round here.

I was listening on LBC - have to say the people calling in, who did often have experience, if not themselves, then their parents seemed to be very much in favour. It's very sad when a small minority can spoil others' lives.

All it requires is the equation rights = responsibility. If you have a right to a house then you have a responsibility to abide by the rules.

We have a family around here who are known as The Borrowers - need I say more? Thye are of normal stature.

Some friends of mine own and live in a house in a nice, respectable area in Surrey/Middlesex. Some years ago an estate was built to house problem families from the Westminister council area. I'm afraid to say it has had a very detrimental effect.

Sel agree re. responsibilty.

Mishap "they are of normal stature" made me splutter into my coffee! Lovely

I just Googled this topic and I'm obviously late to the party as it was in lots of papers this morning. I do feel so sorry for people who have to suffer in such situations; in some cases death/suicide is the result and that can't be right.

Provided the homes were reasonable I wouldn't have a problem with this (as long as they are some distance from other houses!) To often one family can ruin the peace of so many others, if they fail to respond to the usual penalties then this could be a last resort.

I have friends who bought a house on a small estate which also included some social housing, unfortunately the people housed there have made the lives of the rest of the estate almost unbearable. My friends would like to move but no-one will buy their house, which is now worth a lot less than they paid for it.

Label a child as 'scum'.....and that is probably what you would get.
The police have failed lamentably to protect people from much anti social behaviour. Enforce the law properly, but do not condemn children to live in a ghetto.

I believe the idea in Amsterdam is that police recources would be concentrated in these 'villages' and therefore more effective. I agree about the children what would the alternative be? Care? This idea, I presume is a last ditch one and I feel sorry for any child who has to live with such parents.

This is a difficult one, I mean the children aspect as identified by "Greatnan", and echoed by Sel, and to be honest I'm not sure what the answer is. The nature versus nurture debate has been around for a long time, as has the self fulfilling prophecy theory.

phoenix absolutely right. Just looking online I don't see any mention of children. The Dutch have them too I believe - it'll be interesting to see how they tackle that.

The word " scum " does not exist in Dutch in that connotation.
I will look online for the Dutch version of this news and report back.

Shouldn't get to that state of affairs should it. Agree re policing - target it in areas where people are suffering this kind of thing and use creative approaches to get kids doing something else other than crime.
They (police) do seem to operate in a strange way - in this country they are never allowed out on their own. I have been to meetings in school where 3 turn up where one would do.
The community liaison officers are allowed out on their own and I occasionally see one on his mountain bike. Midwives, district nurses and many other professionals go out on their own. Teachers used to being outnumbered 30:1 by hulking teenagers and not uncommonly wade in to sort the fights inside schools or outside gates.
In NZ police are allowed to go out on their own. But UK policemen have to be joined at the hip. Have they been watching NYPD etc - every police person got to have a buddy? Do they have to keep an eye on each other all day long in case they fall into evil ways like they did not so long ago? Did Dickson of Dock Green have a buddy?
Also they seem to retire when they are about 42.
Any ex-police-grans who can explain?

Is it just our media in the UK or are the Dutch, famous for their tolerance (at least until pushed too far, which was invariably a very long way) becoming totally intolerant of everything so that they are verging on the fascistic? I do hope not.

My daughter has bought and lived/lives in ex council property. First a flat in South London and now a house in Herts. In each case most of the other flats were council tenanted, as are many of the houses on her estate and the vast majority of tenants are pleasant law-abiding folk like you and me, who keep their gardens in good order and cause no problems to their neighbours.

There are problem families and these fall into two groups, those who have problems like addiction, incapable of self management, complete lack of parenting skills and other such problems, who may need to be re-housed but mainly need a lot of social input, training and support then there are those who are criminal, see no need to respect their neighbours or have children they see no need to discipline. These may well benefit from, quite literally being sent to the sin bins. It might give them an understanding of what the people whose lives they damaged felt like.

I can see a lot in re-introducing the victorian belief in the deserving and undeserving poor, but the problem is how much effort is put into indentifying those whose problems lie in being unable to cope as distinct from those who wont pull their wait and any tests devised by the state would be more interested in cutting the cost of tests than truly trying to identify those who need help.

Jess I suspect the twosomes are to prevent false accusations against the police, sort of chaperoning if you like.
I once requested a meeting with my daughter's teacher because I was concerned about something. To my surprise another teacher sat in in the meeting, saying she was to 'take notes'. I realised the school was afraid I was going to accuse the teacher of something - and all I wanted was an informal chat.
I think the police are entitled to a pension after 25 years' continuous service, so many choose to retire at that point, so someone who had joined at 18 could retire at 43.

We had reference to the deserving poor some time ago and I asked the person who posted it whether she thought she was in a position to judge.
Do we really want to go back to Victorian thinking about 'them' and 'us'?
I grew up in a council house, my sister still lives in one so I have to admit to having sensitive antennae when people start talking about council estates.

Well I made my position on council housing and their tenants quite clear, and there is no way it could be considered negative.

On the deserving and undeserving poor, the problem is, as I said, how to divide them. I would put very few in the undeserving category. But there are families, like those that led that mother and her disabled daughter to commit suicide, and who make their neighbours lives hideous by abusing them personally, causing wanton damage to their homes, gardens and other possessions and leave them afraid to leave their houses and such families do not deserve our consideration

Got to hand it to the police union on that one jane - the pension elite of the public sector.
It is weird though - if that is the reason they have to have a buddy. Teachers live every day in a situation where they could be accused of something. Generally they are advised not to be alone with a child but that is completely impractical I think.
This policy seems to make the police considerably less efficient than they might be.

My sister lives on an estate where drug dealing and anti social behaviour was rife upto 3 years ago.

The council made a decision to challenge the behaviour of those who were in constant trouble and made life hell for decent people. I am pleased to say that when we visit her now the atmosphere has changed for the good and the estate has become a very nice place and regained it's neighbourliness.

At what point does the decent person deserve a right to live their life without fear and continual worry for the welfare of their elderly neighbours, their own children and possible damage to their property?

I think you have to live with this situation to know the depression and fear people sadly have to live with to understand the problem. I thank goodness I don't.

The large social housing estate which I once represented on a local council had a small number of trouble makers who caused a disproportionate amount of distress to decent residents. The housing officers planted someone with a video camera in a vacant house on one of the worst roads and managed to get rid of the offenders. On one occasion, I was phoned at the crack of dawn by a resident whose car had been vandalised by neighbours' drug-dealing sons. By midday they had been served with an eviction notice. Where there's a will...

But where did they go then, anno? That's the problem if you just move the troublemakers on - they're rehoused and do the same elsewhere.

Sad to say, probably to one of the 'sink' estates on the other side of town. Not an ideal solution, except for the residents they had havoc for.