£150 a Week for a Small Brighton Bedsit: How?

I know someone who lives in a bedsit in a relatively small building of studio/bedsit flats in Brighton. I went round to see him recently. I was happy for him, and still am, since he has accommodation in Brighton. He had been sleeping for six months on the seafront when the Council suddenly changed their local connection policy and gave him accommodation in a Brighton hostel. That Brighton hostel was very grotty, as most Brighton hostels are. To his surprise, only a few months later, he heard that he had been given a flat in Kemptown. He admits to having been quite stunned when he heard, since what with not having the necessary 'local connection', what could possibly entitle him to a bedsit?

He was thrilled, since, it had appeared that the Council, having maintained that they operate a 'local connection' policy, did a complete reversal on that policy for him, and not only gave him a hostel room, but, later in the year, a proper bedsit flat. Since then, he has been obtaining furniture and the like. The room is very humble - a sofa, a chair, a single bed, a small toilet and shower. It smells a bit, there's some damp, but he isn't complaining. He's still looking for work, but at least he is housed and has a roof over his head. He still finds himself going to soup runs occasionally and places where you can obtain food for free. He doesn't have a drink or drugs problem or what any diagnosed 'mental health issues'. He isn't a part of any hedonistic Brighton scene. Much like how he behaved in Brighton's hostel when he was there, and indeed, when he was street homeless, he is the kind of person who just 'keeps his head down' and gets on with life.

Anyway, why am I writing this? Well, when I paid him a visit recently, I was surprised because he told me about the place where he lives as I looked round his room.  There are about 15-17 flats in the building, all owned by one landlord. His surname, as I remember, is 'Cox'. More than that I do not know. Each 'flat', or rather, dingy bedsit, houses one person, but the friend told me that if I thought his room was small, then, "I should see other tenant's rooms".  The thing is, you see, that having looked around Brighton at various times in my life, looking to rent, I know that a bedsit of the nature of what my friend is living in should be about £100 a week tops and, for that, your studio flat would be quite immaculate. If I were an estate agent, or a landlord, I would be seeking about £60-70 a week for his place, having seen it and I doubt very much that on the private rental market, the landlord could get too much more than that for each room as they are so tiny. But that is why this block of flats is so disturbing.

My friend told me that all of the 17-ish flats in the building, of a similar size to the one pictured, are inhabited by mostly single men on housing benefit and Jobseekers Allowance/Income Support. In other words, in order to obtain a rental contract with this landlord, you have to be on JSA or at least be dependent on housing benefit, paid by your local authority to his bank account. Such an arrangement is, to my mind, rather fishy, since the landlord who owns this building of frankly rather grotty bedsits charges the Council £150 a week for each one. This is, at the very least I would say, double what he could charge, given the size of the rooms, on the private rental market. How can this be? I've asked the question before, but it has to be said, what are these cosy arrangements that Brighton and Hove City Council have with various landlords in Brighton and Hove? How do they come to pass and who sets the rates? Who is in charge of these affairs?

How can it be that a 'social landlord' can charge a local authority double or perhaps treble what he could charge in the private rental arena? Is the extra money some kind of 'payback' for civic action on homelessness and the housing of the vulnerable? Where is the justice for the tenants who, presumably, don't get much, if any, choice where they are placed by the local authority? For £150 a week, the Council could presumably pay a private landlord not in the social landlord Council network scene something less, or get something better for a 'client' for the same amount. Either way, while the residents are not really so much complaining, some of them do think that what the Council is paying the landlord of this property is rather steep given the quality of the accommodation.  Most are just pleased to be housed, one chap I talked to there having lived there for 4 years.

Does being a 'social landlord' entitle you to loads of public money or loads of taxpayers money? Shouldn't tax payers be holding Councils to account that they should be looking for value for money from the public purse? Are these residents being exploited in any way because their position in society is vulnerable? Well, we know that that kind of thing doesn't happen in Brighton, but it is a possibility. At least one landlord who lives in Brighton today expressed what certainly seemed to be a gasp of shock at what the landlord of this bedsits property was charging, as the friend told him after Mass. Perhaps more people in Brighton should know of it.

Comments

Richard said…
First, are you sure about the prices?

It sounds like it has a private toilet and shower, which makes a huge difference to the rent (the link you give only has a shared bathroom).

On Rightmove, the cheapest studio flat with a private loo and shower in Brighton is £450/month (£100/week), and most of them seem to be £550/month (£125/week). Big ones are even more.

OK, £100-£125 still isn't £150, but it's a lot more than your estimate of £60-£70.

Second, sadly, single men who've been sleeping rough are seen as a high risk group for landlords (not just non-payment of rent, but also causing problems for other tenants or damage to the flat).

So they are going to charge more (otherwise they wouldn't take them in, and would get a tenant from a 'safer' group).

Sure, your friend isn't a risk, but the landlord doesn't know that, and can't spend a week getting to know a potential tenant before letting him have a flat.

I'm no fan of local councils, but this rent doesn't look outrageous for getting him off the streets. Certainly not 'corruption' level.

And he's in a flat, in time for winter, and in six months he'll have a history of being a reliable tenant and hopefully be able to get somewhere better and cheaper.