Wandsworth Council starts moving to evict the families of those who were looting

How do we feel about that?

On one hand the families of wrong doers are being punished, which shouldn't sit well with anyone, but on the other hand, some of the little shits that were out there thinking that they were entitled to cause this damage, were there because their parents weren't doing their jobs and haven't been for some time.

My personal perspective on this tends towards feeling that the punishments for the people who have damaged their own communities should include being rejected by their communities.

Again, on the other hand I understand that such a downward spiral leads to a worse problem - stripping housing and benefits makes them more dangerous - what do they have left to lose? And besides, they will only resent society more and become more antisocial.

I am really troubled with this.

We have bred a generation, it would seem, that feel entitled to something for nothing, that believe they are above judgement and automatically entitled to respect without earning it even in the most basic way (and by this I'm taking bankers, MPs, benefits cheats, the bad back merchants, the snotty arrogant anti-social asbo teens - the lot).

How do we turn that around? It is a generational problem, and there is no way that a government that seeks re-election every four years can row that back - red or blue.

Punishment seems like a dirty word now. The European convention of human rights makes allowances for rehabilitation, and for the protection of others from harm, as 'legitimate purposes' to infringe an individuals rights (such as freedom of association and assembly) - but punishment? Punishment as a deterrent? Punishment as a simple penalty? It doesn't sit. I'm not talking about flogging or lashing people either.

I'm not sure how I feel about any of this, except really uncomfortable. There had to be consequences.

 

Its the only way they will learn, the kids caused all the trouble but for me its all down to there mums and dads, we had no mobile phones in the 90s but mi mum always knew where i would be and what time i'd be in and if i was not in on time and she came looking or phoning round on landline to mates mums and dads, i'd better hope and pray i was where i said i'd be or i'd be no-where for the next month apart from my bedroom. Although i saw my dad every weekend my mum brought me up on her own Monday to Friday, and i knew who was the boss she knew exactly how to get me to tow the line with the threat of not giving me the money to go to the Barnsley games with mi mates, or if that failed she would tell mi Granddad to have a word if he got no joy she would then tell mi dad and that's the last thing i wanted because there where no threats or talking with him it was all action and the action more often then not, the action was his hand hitting my lughole and back of mi head,

I never stole or set fire to buildings, because my Granddad, Dad, or Mam would have killed me

These kids doing this sort of thing have no respect for no-one not even there family's and that's the trouble

 

I don't think Cameron really thought this one out.

Making people homeless because they nicked a £600 TV or a £4 bottle of wine can only make things on the streets worse than what they are. Will the streets be safer by making Families homeless? I don't think so.

Should younger brothers and sisters be made homeless because of the action of a 19 year old who is still living at home? Again I don't think so.

Are they going to throw 6 month olds out on the street?

This policy is shear madness and ill thought out and will only lead to a nationwide revolt if they start throwing families out on the street.

 

It won't happen. They (Cameron et el) would have to change the entire law surrounding the Housing Act and they just won't do it. There isn't a civil judge in the country that will evict a family from their home based on 1 incident, irrespective of what that incident is. There are too many 'alternatives' for a judge to use, and until a Housing Landlord can prove that they've done everything possible to make that tenancy work, they'll keep utilising them. Youth Offending Teams, Youth Inclusion, Acceptable Behaviour Contracts, Anti-social behaviour orders, Civil injunctions, Demotion orders, Family intervention teams. And they're just the ones from the top of my head...

The other thing that would worry me would be where the finance is coming from to pay for all these families to be taken to County Court? The cost of solicitors and barristers? The cost to have a case just heard in court?

And then there is the problem of where they get housed next. They've only 2 options once evicted. They move onto another social landlord and hope they don't do the necessary background checks, or they go into private rented, where the landlord doesn't give a **** as long as they're getting their money, which the social would pay anyway. And in the current financial climate, which private landlord wouldn't take on a tenant where they don't have to rely on the tenant for there money because its paid for them? That then brings down more communities.

The youth of today have no sence of community because they haven't been given one. How is this rioting stuff any different, or worse, than what the bankers did when they completely ruined the economy? They got away with a lot more than a TV and a pair of trainers and not one of them has been imprisoned.

Personal opinion is that they shouldn't be evicted from their homes. They should be tried on the criminal offences they have committed during these riots and the landlord should be entitled to keep that evidence on file to use should further breaches of tenancy be committed in the future.

 

I dont think it a generational thing at all. For a start youve just described two generations, possibly three and sections of society have always wanted something for nothing

 

Someone from the council has been on the radio tonight about this

Says the law already exists for them to evict such people, it is not a new thing at all.

The householders sign a tenancy agreement assuring that all members of their households will behave and not cause trouble within the community. They are entitled to evict and make them seek private landlord accommodation as they have forfeited their right to cheaper subsidised social accomodation.

 

Re: Someone from the council has been on the radio tonight about this

Correct and although it does concern me that there is a possibility of vulnerable types getting caught up in this I think it is going to be a short sharp shock to many as they have been seen as poor parents loathed by their community at large and risk homelessness. Its going to be interesting.

 

About time too...should do it here I say, if you get caught by the police for anti-social behaviour and are convicted in court and have a council house you should be moved out!! Why should you be given what is essentially a benifit when you are doing wrong? also, if your in a council house and both parents have good jobs earning a really good income (I know some where both parents earn £35k each) then you can afford a mortgage or private accomodation. Why should the tax payer pay for them to have houses??

 

I think it's a little bit of a 'knee jerk reaction'. Cameron knew he had to do something firm and harsh due to the strength of feelings in the country, but i think this could have been thought about for a little longer. In one respect i agree with it, but as others have said, if benefits are stopped where will these people get their money from for food etc? This has the potential to make the situation worse. I think they should all be made to do work in the communities that they helped to destroy over the last week.
As for kicking them out of council properties they will still get housing benefit so will move into private landlord owned properties. I feel sorry for the people they may move in next to. I'm wanting to move because of this problem. I live quite near to the town centre. When i first moved in 3 years ago there was hardly any landlord owned properties, now my area is over run with them and i feel like i'm living in an inner city ghetto sometimes with the chav behaviour that goes on around here.

 

Since when was Cameron in charge of Wandsworth council.....

This is in the rental agreement with the local authority and nothing to do with the government.

Jesus wept

 

What happens if you are convicted of anti-social behaviour and live in your own house?
Are you going to evict those too?
You cannot have two different laws, just because some live in council houses and some dont.
Some people are all too ready to blame the lower classes for all the Countries ills, taking up the Tory mantle of Dole Scroungers etc, never giving a moments thought to the people out there that are taking many times more money away from the Country. By just collecting all taxes that are being avoided, the economy would ber back on its feet in no time, but that would mean that the greedy ******** would have to contribute instead of taking, its far easier to blame the lower classes. If something is said often enough it becomes the "truth", even if it is a load of cobblers. Just ask the Sun readers!!!

 

Do you ever actually listen to anything that is said in Parliament?
This is what David Cameron said on THURSDAY.
Maybe it is time you started to listen instead of just talking balls .

 

The answer is in my statement...COUNCIL HOUSES!! owned by the STATE NOT THE TENANTS!! its in the tenancy agreement that the council can evict if the tenant has a ASBO from court or any conviction the Landlord deems fit to evict for!

 

The Tory controlled press haven't brainwashed people into a frenzy about all the tax dodgers though have they??!!

Must admit they have done a good job making out that all people who claim benefits are scum. In some cases this may be true, but as i know there are alot of genuine claimants out there who are now being persecuted by the new benefits system.

 

Didn't you hear Camerons speech in Parliament and outside No 10?

 

You cannot have 2 laws! 1 for the have nots and another for the have nots!
Either all are evicted or none are.

 

You've completely ignored his point.

It is in their tenants agreement with the council that actions such as we've seen could lead to eviction.

A private landlord can evict his tenants if they break their agreements too.

Once you BUY your OWN house then a landlord can't evict you (you don't have one) - but anti-social or criminal behaviour can have other serious consequences.

It's not two laws so please stop with your emotive nonsense.

 

Can't see how it can work to be honest, the risk is that the evictees end up being all homed in one place and a true ghetto is created that becomes more volatile and hostile towards the wider community.

Everyone has to live somwhere, do we see the rioters as more unacceptable in council houses than paedophiles or murderers ? I think it's time for a bit of a reality check in to what can actually be done and look at more commuinity based sentences for those involved. For example those unemployed and convicted or rioting to work in fixing the damage created, more serious offences punished with prison as normal. those in work fined with fines to go towards compensating those that suffered losses.

No simple answer to this one, but making people homeless isn't going to improve the situation.

 

I think you have to remember that for every little scroat who was involved in rioting there were hundreds who weren't, the danger here is we are further demonising young people - my daughter who's 14 sees it all the time, the default position of a lot of adults is quite aggressive towards children, they barge past her to get on the bus, bus drivers are downright rude, not all kids are brought up without respect for others or without being punished, most kids don't riot, don't get in trouble with the cops, aren't rude and are brought up right. Not that its easy to do in a society which values the rights of the individual over everything else, lets take a look at the society we are trying to bring our kids up in first.

As for evicting whole families, why punish entire families for the misdeeds of one individual? What about if one of these rioter has got a 6 year old sister, try explaining to her why she's getting thrown into the street. No, leave collective punishment to the Nazis.

 

People are quite rightly shocked at what's happened and obviously there should be proper punishment for it. But proper should be reasonable. I've heard fowk say all benefits should be stopped, personal belongings confiscated etc etc.

But there's 2 different types of crime here - those that went out with the deliberate intent to cause havoc, damage and intimidate people and stupid kids who got caught up in the moment and nicked a pack of biscuits or fags.

The first lot should be locked up and dealt with and have an extra sentence with extra community service to rebuild what they did with education thrown in to provide proper skills and chances. The second should be dealt with again proportionatly. Not sensationalised.

What happens when you take their homes? They've got these homes because they were found to need 'em - do we make 'em homeless AND unemployed? That's really going to stop 'em stealing and rehabilitate and reintegrate 'em into the community.

Don't know the answers but it's not to over react.