Rent-A-Room scheme and Pension Credit....

2»

Comments

  • daysdream wrote: »
    This means if I have a lodger to stay I would need to pay full council tax = £138p/m, plus lose Pension Credit = £72p/m plus I'd need to restart buying a TV licence (I don't have a TV at present) = £12p/m, giving a total loss of £222 - this is without counting the loss of benefits having Pension Credit brings - eg: free dental treatment, etc.

    Sorry but this does not work out in my head...

    If your CT would be £138p/m, then you are currently paying 75% of this which is £103.50p/m. Therefore, if you took in a lodger you would get £350 but lose £34.50 CT, £12 TV and £222 Pension Credit leaving you with £81.50.

    Or have I missed something?
  • Pricivius wrote: »
    Sorry but this does not work out in my head...

    If your CT would be £138p/m, then you are currently paying 75% of this which is £103.50p/m. Therefore, if you took in a lodger you would get £350 but lose £34.50 CT, £12 TV and £222 Pension Credit leaving you with £81.50.

    Or have I missed something?

    If the OP is getting guarantee pension credit, he gets full council tax exemption.
  • Once again some highly critical people who have not got a clue about managing on benefits. The dubious 'benefit' of another person in your HOME comes at a price, your bills do go up, there is no incentive for a 'lodger' to economise and be miserly as a lot of pensioners are. OP does not even have TV. Wear and tear, and the essential maintenance costs are born by the owner, and 'tenants' can be very demanding for the pittance they are actually contributing.

    And as for " you'd stop being a drain on the resources of the country and the council by not claiming pension credit or council tax credit."

    I think you will find that there is a whole underclass of pensioners who have worked hard for low wages, and have not been able to "save' or afford a good private pension scheme during their working lives.

    So now you would ,
    "I used to be a Conservative, but I'm better now."!!!!!!!!

    Be perfectly happy to subject any of our older generation to being forced into spending their 'golden years' with a bunch of freeloading strangers in their home if it saves a bit of 'tax-payers money'.

    I have worked extensively with older people, including benefit advice work, and I think if you look up the stats there is still more unclaimed benefit than the vast amounts of tax dodged by the wealthier in society.

    The "poverty trap" is alive and living in Britain. I understood that the 'rent a room scheme' was brought in to not only go some way to easing the shortage of lone person accommodation, but to provide affordable homes to some who were also unable to buy or rent elsewhere.

    To offset this, and induce homeowners to co-operate, 4250 p.a. of rent in accomodation shared with a home owner was tax free, but no expenses were allowed against this. To claim expenses took a resident landlord out of the scheme.

    I also seem to remember that at one time it did not affect income related or any other benefits. Now? I am not finding references that this is the case any more.

    So those who are tax payers can gain 4250 a year tax free (less what it 'costs' them that cannot be claimed as an offset.

    But if you are POOR and reliant on anything means tested you are stuffed for trying to get above the 'poverty level'.

    Just how much is 4250 worth to eg pensioners? As stated, your lodger makes you liable for council tax, and your bills go up. That brings you down to a net gain of around half - if you don't incur other costs due to the tenant - how many of you critical tax payers would take a stranger in for what in most cases is less than 40 pounds a week, gross?

    What a pensioner loses as already pointed out does not compensate for the hassle. The pittance of actual 'profit' is much less than the total value of lost benefit.

    What would you advocate? Reducing benefits even further for pensioners? Take their homes from them- this is waiting if and when they become infirm and need residential care - or maybe just don't grow old!
  • nannytone_2
    nannytone_2 Posts: 12,945
    Name Dropper First Anniversary First Post Combo Breaker
    Forumite
    the thread is over a year old!
    i would assume the OP sorted their problem out a long time ago
  • yes, for the original poster, but the principles remain the same for many others who will be trying to stretch tiny resources and not managing.

    The attack ethos by some people on this site to those who are obviously less fortunate than themselves does need addressing. people post for help, and to get an outside perspective, not to be lambasted .

    Forums should be for SHARING INFORMATION, not personal criticism that must put many people off asking for help.

    I probably took particular offence as when I lived alone in a house too big for my needs was always asked the either / or question, move smaller OR take in lodgers.

    The double edge sword with no middle ground. Why is there an assumption that smaller is cheaper? to maintain maybe, but not necessarily to buy! My large but crumbling 'castle' eventually was sold to a developer, at a time that was of my own choosing, but the trade 'down' was not less expensive.

    And why bring irritations into your own long term home? Bad enough that you can hear all through your neighbouring walls without having no control over it inside your own home. (Just as well they are friends, not total strangers.)

    But the neighbourhood where you have roots is not lightly abandoned to fit in with other people's ideas of how anyone else should lead their lives. People are not and should not be treated like cattle, to be moved on at the whim of a political philosophy to save a few miserable pounds for re-distribution to those who are wealthier but morally bankrupt.
  • nannytone_2
    nannytone_2 Posts: 12,945
    Name Dropper First Anniversary First Post Combo Breaker
    Forumite
    you are really on the wrong thread.
    there have been many benefit changes since this thread was finished and a lot of the information is out of date.
    everyone that claims housing benefit and has a spare room is under attack, and on the whole, people agree with the reform. trying to argue against it on these forum is pointless
  • BigAunty
    BigAunty Posts: 8,310
    Combo Breaker First Post
    Forumite
    y....

    The attack ethos by some people on this site to those who are obviously less fortunate than themselves does need addressing. people post for help, and to get an outside perspective, not to be lambasted .

    ...

    But do you feel sorry for the OPs 'ex' who he is reluctant to pay off when they downsize?

    We don't know their economic circumstances (or if they are a joint owner, for example), only that their interest in the property is seen as a nuisance and the fear of having to pay towards their perceived share is one of the main factors why the OP continues to rattle round in a property too big for their needs.
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 342.5K Banking & Borrowing
  • 249.9K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 449.4K Spending & Discounts
  • 234.6K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 607.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 172.8K Life & Family
  • 247.4K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 15.8K Discuss & Feedback
  • 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards