Rebecca Lamb #170 Wearing a bikini at the local pool, Beggy Obson desperately seeking attention.

If you were "keeping your life private" which would you be least likely to share?

  • You mysteriously moving out of your "furevvahhh hurm"

  • How frequently you bonk your beaver toothed beetroot? (Kids will be able to see in the future)

Results are only viewable after voting.
Status
Thread locked. We start a new thread when they have over 1000 posts, click the blue button to see all threads for this topic and find the latest open thread.
1
Cooriedoon said:
Just a quick one. I don’t for a second think they are moving to a council or social housing property. But where I live, there are sometimes occasions where the local authority simply cannot let a property due to its dire location, so it can end up going to someone with very little eligibility. Basically whoever is willing to take it despite how bad the area is 😂
Click to expand...
Exactly, that's what I said earlier. Sometimes no-one wants the house so you may get lucky 😂 very rare though how desperate people are these days
 
Clarity456 said:
That's easy to explain away as when they got the house beaver was working for his dad on a much higher salary and the last year interest rates have gone through the roof, meaning that it hasn't always been that way and it's not their fault that they now can't afford it.

Sorry guys if you don't agree but I will die on this hill that due to everything Dingles said thus far I believe they are renting 😂 I would have guessed private first but then cos you wouldn't really waste money on "renovating" a private landlords house I do think it's a housing association place. You can't change my mind sorry 😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭
Click to expand...
She also thinks renovating is giving the whole
house a lick of paint 🤣 so possible she could be painting a private rented house. Every house i have rented has allowed me to paint and have new carpets down if i paid for it.
 
There is categorically zero chance they’d be moving to social housing. I also don’t think for a second they’d move into rented either.

I doubt they’ve made a particularly significant dent on their mortgage but unfortunately they will still be selling at profit whether the house is worth it or not. I’m sure family did help them buy it but even so they’ll still have a profit for themselves.
 
Bananarama22 said:
She also thinks renovating is giving the whole
house a lick of paint 🤣 so possible she could be painting a private rented house. Every house i have rented has allowed me to paint and have new carpets down if i paid for it.
Click to expand...

Well this is true tbf! but I still think it's a HA property they're moving to 😭 not to sound like a daily mail reader but 40k a month boss babe likes to take what she can off the taxpayer including fraudulent unnecessary NHS operations.
 
I wonder what Beaver has done now👀😂
 

Attachments

  • 81EF68A3-DE38-4186-BA25-D02C3BA1EA05.jpeg
    81EF68A3-DE38-4186-BA25-D02C3BA1EA05.jpeg
    44.7 KB · Views: 8
Someone else I follow has just said they've exchanged contracts today so have 1 week to be out of the house. Rebecca announced the move then the next day they were signing paperwork, so could it be that people have dropped out of helping them move this weekend? 🤔 was someone paying for their removals and now won't? Have the moving company cancelled? 🤣
 
Clarity456 said:
How so?

They have 3 kids, potentially with extra needs, on paper boss berb bogtrotter is unemployed, potentially even claiming universal credit, beaver must have a job lined up in the area (a "local connection")

Granted they're not homeless but other than that what else would they realistically need to be granted a HA/LA property?

My friend got a social housing flat in London of all places with no kids, not living in the area at the time but did have a job there and she got one after being on a waiting list maybe about 5 months?

I totally agree after the sexxehhh rangeh, walking into Selfridge's and buying the "Chanel earrings" and not wanting to know unless it's 10k a month it's absolutely abhorrent and rage inducing that they should be taking up a house that a genuine family who are struggling could make use of, when the dingles current financial woes are all self inflicted, but from friends whove had LA/HA properties I can't see any reason they would be "way down the list" than many more people other than those in temp accomodation/homeless
Click to expand...

Because they can’t just rock up at the social housing and demand a house - the waiting lists are incredibly long. Because, sadly, there will be other people on the list with children who are actually homeless, or have been living in temporary accommodation for a long, long time. Beggy and Steve will not leapfrog over them, especially as they currently live in a house that they own, and are set to come away from with money from profit that they could use on private renting (if they haven’t bought something else). Because, even if some people think their children have ‘additional needs’, those needs are not ‘high priority’, they are learning difficulties or similar. Not health problems or debilitating illnesses. Because they have family they can move in with/help them out financially. Because they are not homeless

Of course it works differently in every local authority area, but they would absolutely not be entitled to one in mine, not in that time frame whilst they still had a roof over their heads and money to burn (which she is handily showcasing to 1000’s)
 
Herefortruth said:
Because they can’t just rock up at the social housing and demand a house - the waiting lists are incredibly long. Because, sadly, there will be other people on the list with children who are actually homeless, or have been living in temporary accommodation for a long, long time. Beggy and Steve will not leapfrog over them, especially as they currently live in a house that they own, and are set to come away from with money from profit that they could use on private renting (if they haven’t bought something else). Because, even if some people think their children have ‘additional needs’, those needs are not ‘high priority’, they are learning difficulties or similar. Not health problems or debilitating illnesses. Because they have family they can move in with/help them out financially. Because they are not homeless

Of course it works differently in every local authority area, but they would absolutely not be entitled to one in mine, not in that time frame whilst they still had a roof over their heads and money to burn (which she is handily showcasing to 1000’s)
Click to expand...

Given that the shacks been for sale for a year I don't think they just plan to "rock up" and demand, i don't think even bog and beave are that stupid 😂, my opinion is that they've probably been registered with Bridlington housing associations for a while.

Alot of people don't have the same suspicions as me 😂 😂 which is fine! it would be boring if we all thought the same thing all the time.
 
Clarity456 said:
Given that the shacks been for sale for a year I don't think they just plan to "rock up" and demand, i don't think even bog and beave are that stupid 😂, my opinion is that they've probably been registered with Bridlington housing associations for a while.

Alot of people don't have the same suspicions as me 😂 😂 which is fine! it would be boring if we all thought the same thing all the time.
Click to expand...

😂 I wouldn’t put it past them to try it! I see a lot at work, and even though I feel sorry for their children, they really are not in as bad a position as a lot
 
Status
Thread locked. We start a new thread when they have over 1000 posts, click the blue button to see all threads for this topic and find the latest open thread.
Back
Top