However, the bare fact is the houses weren't built to meet a prevalent market demand. Patently, the demand for these large houses doesn't actually exist. They were apparently built on the assumption that they could be under occupied and that the state would continue to pay the required rent nevertheless. Essentially, the people who built/rented out the homes were creaming a nice bit of extra profit off the state. I have a feeling they were built not to fulfil an obvious demand but because someone sat down and worked out what gives you the best return on your investment, assuming the rules on housing benefit as they were at the time. Those rules have now changed and they're taking a bath. I have no real sympathy for them, they're just being reminded of what the word 'speculation' actually means (and it's not 'guaranteed return').

Established in 2001, Coast & Country Housing Ltd took over the ownership and management of homes from Redcar and Cleveland Borough Council as part of a large-scale voluntary stock transfer (LSVT) in July 2002. As the largest registered provider in Redcar and Cleveland, we own and manage 10,190 homes which includes 88 shared ownership properties. We are a ‘not-for-profit’ Company, limited by guarantee, and are regulated by the Homes and Communities Agency.

Set up in 2002 by Wigan Council Wigan and Leigh Housing is an arm's length management organisation, ALMO. The organisation is non-profit making and 100% owned by Wigan Council.

The Company is responsible for managing and maintaining all landlord services for Wigan Council’s 22,000 homes including rent collection, repairs and maintenance, dealing with empty properties and all tenancy matters.

Wigan and Leigh Housing also deals with other functions on behalf of the Council such as homelessness, council house sales, adaptations for tenants with disabilities and building new Council homes.

With approximately 12,200 properties, we are the largest Registered Provider of affordable housing in Wirral. We are a socially responsible, not-for-profit organisation.

Lots of people house share – so if the house cannot be filled with 1 family why not with 3 single adults – I am sure there is a long waiting list of lower priority single people looking for social housing

You can't sublet if you're receiving housing benefit so it would have to be the housing associations or councils that do it, and (an assumption) the houses aren't built for multiple occupancy, so there's be some refitting required which the owners don't want to pay to have done.

You're right of course there are massively more people in need of housing who aren't in big families than are, but we haven't been building that kind of housing. UKG won't/can't spend the money to do it so they don't and private enterprise can't see enough profit in it, so they don't. So the result is as the article states - homeless people and empty houses being demolished.

The whole Sublet thing is a local goverment issue so they could amend the rtules to allow it in some situations

I dont see why the house would need to be refitted - people house / flat share all the time in "normal" houses.

Because, unless the people that were sharing were related then the housing would need to be a HOMO (House of Multiple Occupancy) and comply with the relevant regulations. You can have 2 non-related people living (renting) in the same property without having to comply with the HOMO regulations 3+ and you do. Most of the rules are concerned with things like fire safety.

Flat sharing (WG) is very popular over here. A lot of under 30s live in flats together, at least 2 singles sharing a 2 bed flat. Often there are 5 or more people sharing a flat together. It is a very economical way to live.

err then there must be thousands of people in london living illegally - I know of at least 1/2 a dozon or so people in my office who house share with more than 3 people in the house

When I was a student I shared with 5 people