Social Housing Bungalows - not eligible as under 55

Everyone has to make decisions and none of us can demand and get everything we want on our own terms, of course.  Nobody is expecting you to re-home your dog.   Why should you?   You can keep a pet dog or a pet horse, or ten, if you choose.  Why not?  It is entirely your own personal choice.  However,  keeping  your dog   will cost you £300 a month on top of the Housing Benefit you are extraordinarily fortunate to be given.   It is also is stopping you getting the flats which you are extraordinarily fortunate to have been offered.   A 90 year old couple, he a wheelchair user, were living in a Bournemouth bus shelter.  No private landlord and no council offer for them.  No housing benefit or welfare benefits either, because they had carefully saved up, after a thrifty lifetime of savings.   They had no private pension, no enhanced pension.   Having savings instead is regarded as the same as being Bill Gates.

The rules about disabled housing are first and most wrong because nothing, nothing at all, should be allowed past planning consent as new build housing, unless it can be occupied for the lifetime of the building by people at all times of their lives, importantly, including when they have someone in the household who is disabled.
Only by turning on a supply of the almost non existent national disabled-friendly housing stock will you or anyone begin to have the reasonable selection of housing others take for granted.

Hi and welcome 

I live in housing association bungalow since I was 50 due to becoming wheelchair bound 

I suggest you self refer for a care needs assessment on the Gov website 

A OT will come and assess you and if they feel appropriate will recommend aids or need for suitable type housing 

The report can then be sent to local housing and may allow you to then bid on bungalows if that is what is recommended 

They may suggest adaptions to your current home 

There is no unity of purpose in lobbying about housing from the users' point of view.   The developers have shedloads of gold to lobby.   It is in their interests to cut every corner, on eco standards, on safety and soundproofing and energy efficiency and on solar panels, heat recovery, water recovery,  green roofs and walls, balconies for everyone to access sun and plants, even when confined indoors, and of course, the space to turn a bariatric wheelchair means no home becomes unliveable for any occupant.   That same space makes lockdowns, crowded families, working from home, home schooling all the more bearable.   It allows for storage, for flexible use of the home, for a live-in carer or multi-generation living or lodger.  Disabled-friendly housing is friendly for everyone else, too.    What's not to love?   

 A person with a disabled- useable home will not necessarily need to go into a care home or institution, and will frequently need far less carer visits, because they can move freely all round their home.   A home ready for a disabled person will easily have hoist tracks fitted, so people will not need to remain in hospital.  It won't have doors too small to let furniture me moved in, or stretchers be moved out.  It will have as standard the type of loo which is standard in Japan, and which allows anyone with limited movement and strength, but still the ability to sit on the pan, to have independence and dignity because the loo itself does a wash and dry.

We the  occupants, and the future generations who occupy the housing, are set in direct opposition to the lobbying developers, who would only need  to spend a comparatively minor amount extra, if disability is planned in from the outset, but who begrudge every penny of profit.    Against that, all that we, the general public have is numbers.   Young and old, fit and frail, all of us,  in our millions.  It doesn't matter if we are paying mortgage or rent, we want a roof over our head.  It doesn't matter if we are 100% athletic, and so is everyone who ever lives with us or ever visits us. Sooner or later, the building we live in will need to be usable by a person with reduced mobility.

Everyone who doesn't die young gets old.  Everyone who thinks they are safely fit and athletic today is only one accident away from short term or permanent injury.   Everyone in the world is either disabled or a T.A.B. (Temporarily Able Bodied)   So what do we do?  Sit grumbling and let the lobbying developers construct Grenfells, that's what.   Sit  competing against others in equal or greater need, for the tiny number of accessible units of housing, that's what. 

One of the Scope mods put a notice on this board drawing attention to a government public consultation on exactly this topic.  Nobody took any interest.   
(Councils had obviously protested they couldn't cover social service demand, caused mainly because there is simply nowhere for disabled people to live without needing constant visits, because they cannot get in and out of their bedrooms, kitchens, bathrooms unaided and without being able to turn a wheelchair or get up and down stairs. At last, they were wondering if somebody ought to think about the occupants of housing, who don't lobby local and central government to permit the lowest standards of building.   But  even Scope readers couldn't  be bothered to accept the invitation to change things.) 

@newborn, quoting the bible sounds, looks good but no help. The local, regional and county councils are overwhelmed with applications for social housing and especially over 55 yr old disabled accommodation. In my own area where I have registered for a ground floor flat or bungalow I would have to move 20 plus miles or leave my dog and move into a social care setting. Neither my wife or I want or willing to do as we use both our two bedrooms for health reasons we have only been allowed a single bedroom accommodation, most are all electric heating, and the few that allow pets are town based no walking areas or facilities for charging and storing a large mobility scooter safely or securely or car parking nearby. There are long waiting lists for certain types of property’s.  Having had two OPs reports in the last two years has not got us further up the ladder. Sometimes we can’t be to picky in where we live and will have to be grateful for what we are offered.

@newborn i'm still not entirely sure how you think you are helping here? we try our best to help people not rail against the system.

poppy where is the mention of care homes and institutions?

That is a reason to ensure A L L new build is disability friendly.  It was the reason that, at last, someone in power began to take an interest in the real lives of real people living in the 'housing units' developers get allowed to build as cheaply as they can.   At last, financial self interest by the accountants in local councils,  who must pay for social care and care homes, began to balance against financial self interest by well funded developers' lobbyists.

The need for accessible and liveable housing is not one ever before put forward.  Nor does anyone seem to care.  The Scope team did.   They posted the government  public consultation.   Few people showed a flicker of interest.   I doubt if more than half a dozen of the public will have bothered to fill in the question

The o.p. was about bungalows, which the author was annoyed to find are reserved for disabled elderly, not necessarily freely allocated to dog owners.