There were 1379 units allocated to triathlon housing association

http://www.triathlonhomes.com/about-us/

Jut a normal run of the mill housing association providing accommodation for those that most need it, nothing to see here….

Eligibility requirements:

Minimum income £48K

Jut a normal run of the mill housing association providing accommodation for those that most need it, nothing to see here….

£395 per week. You couldn’t make it up.

Gibberish

How so? I know I get my words wrong sometimes but does that not make sense?

Welcome to ‘Affordable Housing’ UK style

“Gibberish”

Really?

Triathlon Olympic homes put up the rent by 23%. Where will Sharon live now?

So, that’s an original resident of the area (I think from roughly where the new housing is situated), with complex individual needs, as well as being a parent of a dependant child, being forced out by a situation where the LA will not pay the massively increased rent to the private landlord. In a development where social and ‘affordable’ housing were promised. With zero accountability. So, hardly ‘gibberish’.

You may dislike the affordable housing and housing association mechanisms. They are governed by law. You may not like the NAO and how they require public sector bodies achieve the greatest value from asset sales. But it’s governed by law.

None of it is the fault of the Olympics or the companies that bought the redundant assets from the company set up to handle the Olympic Delivery Authority asset disposals.

None of it is the fault of the Olympics or the companies that bought the redundant assets from the company set up to handle the Olympic Delivery Authority asset disposals.

Yay privatisation of public assets, the free market always delivers the best deal for the public, now lets all sing a happy song.

Facetious and not particularly helpful comment there from another of the usual suspects.

Facetious and not particularly helpful comment there from another of the usual suspects.

Gibberish

You may dislike the affordable housing and housing association mechanisms. They are governed by law. You may not like the NAO and how they require public sector bodies achieve the greatest value from asset sales. But it’s governed by law.

None of it is the fault of the Olympics or the companies that bought the redundant assets from the company set up to handle the Olympic Delivery Authority asset disposals.

Stoner – thank you for explaining but do I detect some wee grumpiness. 🙂

None of it is the fault of the Olympics or the companies that bought the redundant assets from the company set up to handle the Olympic Delivery Authority asset disposals.

Really?

From what I can see Its the fault of an utterly corrupt system that is prepared to watch vainglorious governments unquestioningly spank vast sums of public money on a 2 week festival of bread and circuses, mostly for the benefit of corporate sponsors, who’s taxpayer funded assets will then be effectively given away to the private sector for them to profit from as they see fit.

So who’s faut is it then?

“None of it is the fault of the Olympics or the companies that bought the redundant assets from the company set up to handle the Olympic Delivery Authority asset disposals.”

Gibberish.

I’m going to add ‘gibberish’ to this thread. It’s a nice word.

Gibberish gibberish gibberish gibberish gibberish gibberish gibberish gibberish gibberish

Yay! 🙂

How many residents of Gibraltar are actually contributing to this thread though?