A Birchington couple with a blended family of three teenage boys and two girls – who stay weekends- with the oldest daughter having severe disabilities, say they are desperate to move from their two-bed flat but have been told they could face up to 10 years on the housing waiting list.
Louise Gowton and husband Stuart have been bidding for three-bed homes on the Kent Homechoice site for the past four years without success.
Originally the Orbit Housing flat at Quex Court was home to Louise and her two sons, now aged 17 and 15, but then Louise met and married Stuart in 2018. During covid Stuart’s son, now 13, also moved in, meaning the three teens now share one room.
Stuart also has his daughters, aged 12 and 16, to stay, recently agreeing to a 50/50 shared custody of oldest daughter Freya who lives with cerebral palsy and is confined to a wheelchair.
Louise, who runs cleaning business Lou Sparkle, said: “My stepson has been living with us for six years. We went on the bidding list as they said we need an extra bedroom and the three boys shouldn’t be sharing. My eldest is 18 in May and I felt he needed his own room, especially as he has ADHD and his mental health is affected. The council say my stepson should have his own room but the younger boys are happy to share.
“At the moment there’s no room for wardrobes or a chest of drawers so all their clothes are stored in bags under their beds and they are in bunkbeds which scares me.
“This year we have had 50% custody of Freya. It is quite difficult to get her in the flat as there is no lift but we have 20 stairs leading up to our front door. My husband has to drag Freya in her chair up the steps and bump her down to get her out, which can be dangerous.
“He used to carry her but two years ago she had an operation for a double stoma and since that surgery she can’t be carried.
“Freya has to have night-time equipment and she is sleeping on the floor on a mattress in my kitchen/lounge, which is not good for anyone, let alone a disabled young lady. Stuart’s other daughter also has to sleep on the floor when she stays for weekends.
“Things are very difficult for Freya and she is struggling to come to terms with the fact she is not like her friends. She gets depressed so we try and have her more to give her mum a break because she has been without carers for two months. If we had more space we could have her more, and we’d love to do that, but we are a bit stuck.”
Lengthy wait
Louise says there are problems adding Freya as a dependent on their housing needs because they do not receive child benefit for her.
Louise said: “I’ve tried to explain we can’t apply for child benefit because mum is the primary carer and you can’t share child benefit.
“They (council housing) said if we have Freya on our case we would be waiting at least 10 years to be housed (for a 4-bed property).
“But we are not asking for a four or five bed adapted house. We’d be happy with a standard three-bed and we could make Freya a bedroom on the ground floor and we’d make that work.”
Louise says they have submitted reports from Freya’s social worker, occupational therapist and surgeon, and have also been in contact with MP Sir Roger Gale.
The couple, who are currently in Band C for housing need, have looked at the private rental market but despite both working they say the rents are out of their reach once they have paid for both family households.
They have also tried mutual exchange but have been on that for seven years with no luck and say bids for Westwood properties have also been unsuccessful.
Louise said: “It just feels like whatever we do we are pushed away, it’s frustrating.”
Louise has been in contact with landlord Orbit and hopes that after twice providing details they are now listed for a managed move, which is an urgent relocation arranged by a social landlord for tenants who cannot safely remain in their current home.
Orbit Housing has been contacted by The Isle of Thanet News for confirmation of a possible managed transfer.
Freya has been taken off the family’s housing case on advice from the council. The situation has now been further complicated as the teen has had to undergo more surgery, meaning it is impossible for her to stay at the flat until she has fully recovered due to the access and space issues.
Cllr Helen Whitehead, Cabinet Member for Housing at Thanet District Council said: “In situations where housing is provided by a Housing Association or Registered Provider it is within their remit to transfer tenants and/or find suitable accommodation for them if needs change.
“If that doesn’t happen, for whatever reason, families needing alternative accommodation can apply to join our Housing Register. In this case I am in contact with the family who have agreed for me to contact relevant agencies to find out what can be done.
“A move recommended by social services that affects a family so significantly should also have an accommodation or funding plan attached to it.
“As a council we are not only producing more accessible and adaptable properties than we have ever done previously, but we are also actively looking to acquire properties to meet very specific needs.
“The reality is, however, that if a Housing Association cannot provide alternative stock, especially in relation to disability access, it is unlikely that the council will be able to immediately provide suitable accommodation.
“Four-bed level access properties are exceptionally rare in Thanet, and we can only build or acquire them; both of those routes take time, but both of those we are doing.”
Working to meet need
Thanet council says that in situations where a family is living in unsuitable housing association accommodation, the provider may be able to offer alternative accommodation. Alternatively, adaptations to the existing property may be possible, following assessments by social services and occupational therapy teams.
TDC says it will always support people who require assistance, and liaise with other services and agencies to ensure anyone who is vulnerable gets the help they need.
The council currently has no four-bedroom level-access properties in its housing stock but says it is working hard to meet the needs of everyone on its Housing Register.
It is building a mix of ‘general needs’ homes and adaptable and accessible homes. Nine homes at the Clements Road development in Ramsgate (part of the Phase 4 programme) are adaptable with one fully accessible home. TDC is also installing flush floor showers in existing ground floor flats, so that they can be allocated to people with disabilities.
The council says it is actively trying to bring forward a mix of homes to suit people on the Housing Register with a range of requirements, and to deliver accessible homes that may not be delivered on the open market.
Approximate waiting times for council-owned properties are listed on the Thanet council website.
I hope the family can be sorted as soon as possible, as this is unacceptable!
Tongue in cheek, but not wishing to sound flippant, perhaps if the family ‘arrived in a boat’, they would be given preferential treatment!
You beat me that comment, with no flippancy either.
Considering that no one seeking asylum can even be accepted on to the Housing Register; no.
What about once they’ve got asylum?
If they get asylum status then they could be legally entitled to be housed. When my mum and I became asylum seekers after the German NAZI’s bombed our street, we ended up sharing a house with two other mothers with todler children. I can still smell boiling nappies!
Sadly Helen, one way or another, migrants are a drain on our housing stock and its availability to those in need.
I believe TDC have been ‘buying up’ housing, at a significant cost, with some being earmarked for migrants! I believe this to be unacceptable, certainly to me and my family and do not believe you should be using my taxes to house them!
I note that people with certain views call them Asylum seekers, I prefer to call them Illegal, economic migrants, invading our country, with many being ‘war mongering’, interestingly this is also the view of my many friends, several who are asylum seekers themselves!
Let’s deal with this properly, because a lot of what you’ve written simply isn’t grounded in fact.
First, the idea that migrants are “a drain on housing stock” is a political slogan, not evidence. The UK housing shortage has been building for decades because we stopped building enough homes. The country built roughly 300,000 homes a year in the late 1960s. In recent decades we’ve often built less than half that. That structural shortage is why families end up in overcrowded flats. It isn’t because a relatively small number of asylum seekers exist.
Second, asylum seekers are a tiny part of the housing picture. The UK receives a small share of global asylum claims compared with many other countries. According to Home Office statistics and UN refugee data, the vast majority of displaced people stay in neighbouring countries to the conflicts they flee. Within the UK, asylum seekers represent a fraction of total housing demand.
Third, councils are not “buying houses for migrants” as some special perk. Local authorities sometimes purchase or lease property to fulfil legal homelessness duties. That includes British citizens, families with children, veterans, people leaving domestic abuse, and sometimes people in the asylum system once they have been granted status. Councils do this because the law requires them to house people who would otherwise be homeless. The same housing stock is used for everyone in need.
Thanet District Council’s housing activity sits under those same statutory duties under the Housing Act 1996 and the Homelessness Reduction Act 2017. That duty applies to local residents as well. It is not a migrants-only programme.
Fourth, calling all asylum seekers “illegal migrants invading the country” is simply wrong in law. Seeking asylum is a legal right under the 1951 Refugee Convention, which the UK helped draft after the Second World War. People who arrive and claim asylum are not automatically illegal. Their claim is assessed through a legal process. Some are refused and removed. Others are recognised as refugees.
Finally, the language about “war-mongering migrants” is not just inaccurate, it’s ugly. Many of the people in the asylum system are fleeing wars, persecution or political violence. That is documented by the UNHCR, the Home Office and multiple independent organisations.
The family in a cramped two-bed flat is a real problem. Overcrowding and lack of housing is a serious issue in this country. But blaming migrants for a housing shortage created by decades of underbuilding and planning failure is not just unfair, it distracts from the actual causes.
If we want fewer families stuck in overcrowded homes, the answer is obvious: build more housing and fund local authorities properly. Scapegoating people with the least power doesn’t solve the problem.
I would stand by my comment, as any increase in the population is a ‘drain’ on housing stock. The UK population has increased FACT!
I acknowledge your point about percentages, however I have NO interest in what other countries do, it shouldn’t be our problem, either in terms of numbers, resources, accommodation or COST!
I understand the comment regarding
providing housing for the homeless, especially the veterans, which I fully understand and support. I did not state it was just for migrants. I objected to the manner in which statements, regarding this funding, have included migrants, seemingly as a priority.. I also object to my taxes, being spent providing for migrants, as do many others! I did not state it was ‘migrants only.’
They are ILLEGAL, a term used to describe them in Parliament! Legal routes do exist, which have been used by both friends and family to enter the UK, which I don’t have a problem with!
The 1951 Convention and UNHCR, which you have referenced, are both clearly ‘out of date!’ They are 70+ yrs old, which is a generation and the World has moved on!
I will repeat my comment regarding ‘war mongering’, indeed you might feel it is ugly, but it is clearly the truth and a statement of facts witnessed through my own eyes and experiences!
The influx of migrants has NOT improved our lives, in fact the opposite! If you were to discuss the issue with the migrants who have settled here into our way of life, there state they are worried! Speak to communities! I would also speak to the families of women who have been raped!
In conclusion, population increases have resulted in increased demand for houses, FACT!
If you are suggesting I’m scapegoating the migrants, I am, and they should never have power! I’m not however, scapegoating the least fortunate in our society, especially as many are in that situation, as a result of successive Governments!
I worked in a safeguarding role, within education and therefore realize exactly how poor living conditions impact on achievement.
Replying up here as your response to my comment has no reply button.
Graham, you’ve written FACT a few times there, so let’s just slow it down and separate what is actually factual from what is opinion.
Yes, the UK population has increased. That part is true. But the leap from that to “migrants are the cause of the housing shortage” is where the evidence stops supporting the claim.
The housing shortage predates recent migration levels by decades. The UK simply stopped building enough homes. In the late 1960s we built around 300,000 homes a year. For most of the last thirty years we have built 150,000–200,000. That structural shortfall accumulated year after year. That’s the main reason housing is tight today. The Office for National Statistics and the government’s own housing reports have been saying this for years.
On the asylum side specifically, the numbers are much smaller than people imagine. The UK had around 67,000 asylum applications in 2023 (Home Office figures). In a country of about 67 million people, that’s roughly 0.1% of the population in a given year. Even if every single applicant needed accommodation immediately, that is still a very small slice of overall housing demand.
You’re also repeating the word “illegal”, but that isn’t a legal category the way it’s being used here. Under UK law a person can arrive and claim asylum. Their case is then assessed. Some are refused and removed, some are granted protection. The Home Office itself refers to them as asylum seekers while that process happens. People can absolutely argue about how the system should work, but the legal terminology is not what’s being used in the thread.
On the Refugee Convention being “out of date”, that’s an argument people make politically, but it’s still binding international law. The UK helped draft it after the Second World War and has reaffirmed it repeatedly. Changing or leaving it would be a major diplomatic and legal decision, not something that simply becomes obsolete with age.
Where your comment really moves away from fact is the suggestion that migrants as a group are “war-mongering” or responsible for crimes like rape. Crime statistics in the UK are collected by the Office for National Statistics and analysed by academics and the Home Office. They do not support the idea that asylum seekers as a category are driving sexual violence. Individual crimes happen and they should be prosecuted vigorously, but generalising an entire group from those cases isn’t evidence.
And finally, on housing and tax: councils don’t get to choose whether to help someone who qualifies for homelessness support. They have statutory duties under the Housing Act 1996 and the Homelessness Reduction Act 2017. Those duties apply to British citizens as well as others who qualify. Local authorities are legally required to prevent homelessness where possible.
None of this means the housing crisis isn’t real. It clearly is. Anyone who has worked around safeguarding or schools, as you say you have, will know how badly overcrowding affects families. But the evidence points overwhelmingly to long-term underbuilding and planning constraints as the driver of the shortage.
Calling something a fact doesn’t make it one. The data matters.
Looking forward to Graham’s reply. A;ways interesting when people disagree in principle rather than putting their energy in to solutions.
They most certainly would, without question.Messrs Starmer and Co are absolutely petrified about being noted for standing up for the rights and assistance of indigenous BRITISH CITIZENS, it beggars belief… Illegal Aliens ARE afforded priorities, two examples being NOT found sleeping in commercial entrances, park benches, bus shelters or boxes beneath piers. Another GIVEN bus passes for unlimited time use when the vast majority, if not all of UK indigenous BRITISH CITIZENS pensioners a surcharge fund if used pre 09:00 /09:30hrs. WHY
They wait like everyone else, and as most of them are singletons they won’t be accorded a priority.Not being flippant but there is nothing like a bit of racism to start off the morning is there!
For those who pontificate about the undeserving poor and large families, see how easy it is, as in this case, to build a big family.The world has changed considerably since the 1950’s, it’s just that some of us have not moved with the times.
No racism here, but Ms. Whitehead somehow turned the quote “arrived in a boat” into “asylum seekers”, when the term could also refer to successful asylum claimants.
As for the family in the article, I wished them luck via facebook.
So, to be clear; the issue we’re making up today is people who can’t apply to the Housing Rwgister being prioritised for a four bed level access property that doesn’t exist?
At no point, did I mention a 4 bed level access property for migrants, however it has happened when they’ve been awarded citizenship/leave to remain! As someone who is a full time carer for a disabled wife 77, plus a disabled son of 36, I fully appreciate the need for these properties to be available to our people!
Sadly, you are, as the majority of councillors, politicians, missing the point!
I could suggest you, and they, only follow/promote their own agenda, without considering ‘public opinion!’
Such difficult situation for the family and also very difficult for the council to meet the need as reading this, they really need 5 bedrooms some of the time, one of which needs to be wheelchair accessible and ideally a wet room/shower room.
Finding places of this nature, whether long term, or just for a short break is so difficult.
For developers and landlords, is their any funding towards the extra costs involved in making new builds or converts wheelchair accessible?
@helen whitehead
Not sure about help towards building wheelchair accessible housing M4-catergory 3.TDC planning made a stipulation for the development in The Length at St Nicholas at Wade was the building of 3 M4 houses. The developer ( now bankrupt) built non compliant housing instead . They thenn made a retrospective application on the grounds that the site couldn’t accommodate wheelchair access buildings.( you couldn’t make it up ). TDC planning response seems to be a shrug of the shoulders.
Yes Peter, racism is there.
A solution might be to look for a two pr three bed house, with a decent garden,and crane in a small living unit. Or Helen why not contact Bristol where the council and a charity are putting up mini houses in the large gardens that social housing used to have.I remember seeing a BBC article about 3 or 4 years ago which described such a project, I am sure this is an ongoing scheme.Then of course this is Kent, where moaning and blaming is easier than doing.
I meant no racism by me… and, please don’t encourage her. We need less, not more, housing in Thanet, social, anti-social or otherwise!
I’m not sure how that works in practice when we already have local families stuck in overcrowded flats, people on waiting lists for years and young people who simply can’t afford to stay in the area they grew up in.
Thanet has thousands of households on the social housing register and very limited stock to meet that need. That’s public information from the council’s own housing figures. Saying we need less housing when demand already massively outstrips supply doesn’t really address the reality on the ground.
The real argument is about what kind of housing and where, not pretending the shortage doesn’t exist. If anything, the problem has been too much of the wrong type of development and not enough genuinely affordable homes for local people.
Why not move to another district? It would do some Thanet-born residents good to broaden their horizons beyond the Wantsum.
I suggest more house building in Sheppey. There are vast stretches of open fields there.
Of course, there are also LOTS of empty shops (and space above them) in Thanet and elsewhere, some which have no hope of ever being businesses again. Sympathetic conversions should be encouraged rather than concreting over farmland, much as Ms. Whitehead seems to prefer the latter.
We’ve recently obtained planning permission to renovate/rebuild above a shop (our second we’ll have done). The latest one is to be a two bedroom wheelchair accessible loft serviced duplex apartment at 2nd and 3rd floors. The 1st floor is to be a wheelchair accessible holiday apartment as when trying to find accommodation for my parents suitable for them and holiday use, there was so little in Broadstairs. They both passed away before we obtained the planning permission we wanted, but as we’d started the process, we thought we’d continue with the plan. It’s going to be interesting to see the difference in the cost of making something wheeelchair accessible and just building to make money.
The planning reference is F/TH/200835 if you’d like to look at what we’re trying to do.
I got the reference wrong its
F/TH/25/0835
Application Received Tue 22 Jul 2025
Application Validated Tue 02 Dec 2025
Address Sweet Yesterdays 33 High Street Broadstairs Kent CT10 1JR
Proposal Erection of 4-storey building accommodating 2no. retail units to ground floor level, 1no. 1-bedroom holiday let unit to first floor, and 1no. 2-bedroom maisonette to second and third floor, together with roof terrace and bin/cycle store
Status Decided
Decision Grant Permission
Decision Issued Date Mon 26 Jan 2026
That’s certainly one solution and I agree I think it’s one of those situations where some thinking out of the box is needed. It sound like they need 3 bedrooms all the time and 4/5 some of the time, but that is difficult to find and once you add int the need for wheelchair accessibility, it gets even more challenging. So many larger properties are older and not suitable for conversion and if they are would be very costly.
It’s not a case of a housing shortage, it’s down to money. There is a 3 bedroom Bungallow in Michelle Gardens, 3 bedrooms and has wheel chair ramps and access. walking distance to schools and shops. It’s been for sale for sometime, but no one interested. It’s perfect for the family.
I assume from what you’ve said it’s for sale rather than to rent and this family are renting.
So, 10.8% of the population are on disability benefits. How many percent of the claimants are cheating the system? Once you have worked that out, is that number greater than the 0.8% immigration figure?