Boom-time on benefits: The 140,000 families who claim £20,000 a year in handouts

mvengemvenge

Max_Headroom wrote: »

Would'nt know mate, I'm not a landlord...

As I said, genuinely not aimed at anyone particular, just that all the BTL LL's round my way rake in thousands from benefit tenants. Presumably many more soon as jobs are lost?

beingjdc

space_rider wrote: »

Wouldn`t you have to endure living in a B&B before they found you somewhere?

You could probably get somewhere straight away if you said your husband was violent, but then the police would be angry when they found out he wasn't. After that, you'd get told to go away by the housing part of the Council, and have to make an application under the Children Act. They'd probably find you somewhere under that, but equally they might decide the kids should go back to your husband, or decide you're both numpties and get them fostered.

Here's who gets emergency / top priority housing (this is for Hillingdon, but it's the same across much of the country)

• You have a life threatening medical condition, which is seriously affected by your current housing, (or you are an in-patient in hospital unable to return home as the property is unsuitable for medical reasons).
• You are homeless, in priority need and in temporary accommodation and the landlord wants the property back and it is not possible to find you suitable further temporary accommodation.
• Housing have agreed to a recommendation by social services that you need to be provided with permanent accommodation to ensure fostering or adoption.
• You are a tenant whose life is threatened if you remain in your home, because of violence. (Please note that this applies to Council Tenants only).
• You are an ex service tenant whom the council has a contractual obligation to re-house.
• You are a tenant who needs to move because your home is about to be demolished or redeveloped within three months.
• You are a tenant in an adapted property you no longer need which could be used by someone else.
• You are a tenant of a property with two or more bedrooms and you are willing to move to a one-bedroom home or give up two bedrooms.
• You are a non-statutory successor of a council tenancy and approved for a move to a studio or one bed or you are giving up two or more bedrooms.
• You are occupying a property, which is subject to a compulsory purchase order and/or where the council has a Statutory Duty to move you.

Here's "Urgent" (don't be fooled, it doesn't mean what it sounds like...)

• You have an urgent need to move for medical or social reasons, as approved by the council.
• You are homeless, the Council has accepted a duty to re-house you, and you are staying in bed & breakfast or a hostel
• You are statutorily overcrowded.
• You have more than one serious housing need.
• Welfare agency referral (as agreed by panel).
• You need move-on accommodation as agreed with partner organisations.
• You are a tenant occupying larger accommodation, but are willing to give up a surplus bedroom, but still need two or more bedrooms.
• You are a tenant and your home is to be demolished or redeveloped.
• You are a non-statutory successor of a council tenancy and approved for smaller accommodation comprising 2 or more bedrooms.
• You are an ex tenant whom the council, at the time you relinquished a former tenancy, undertook to re-house at a future date.

PasturesNew

Or to keep it brief .... probably not you. Certainly not me.

Every area's stock of social housing is different too. There is more of it per 1,000 people in cities than in rural areas. Where I lived I was (just out of spite) on the list for 12 years and I phoned them up to check and they said it might be another 15-20 years before they could probably get me into a shared house. I only went on the list out of annoyance that I knew I'd never get housed. Yet a couple I knew got housed pretty quickly at the time, for being a couple who were getting married. Then they split up and the 2nd one was also given a council house. Their total relationship/marriage/split up lasted about 4 years, there were never any kids involved, that's just how the lists there worked back then: couples had precedence over singles. Even though they were both 5-6 years younger than me, both worked (so had more chance of affording to pay a private rent) and joined the list about 4 years after me. I did think about finding a single man who wanted a council house and proposing we get married just to do that

Since then the lists have got longer. I then moved to an area where the waiting list for me would have been 20 years. Now I've moved again. You can't move and be on the list. Each time you move, or change jobs, you might be taking yourself off the list if you end up working/living outside of the list area.

mvengemvenge

PasturesNew wrote: »

Or to keep it brief .... probably not you. Certainly not me.

Every area's stock of social housing is different too. There is more of it per 1,000 people in cities than in rural areas. Where I lived I was (just out of spite) on the list for 12 years and I phoned them up to check and they said it might be another 15-20 years before they could probably get me into a shared house. I only went on the list out of annoyance that I knew I'd never get housed. Yet a couple I knew got housed pretty quickly at the time, for being a couple who were getting married. Then they split up and the 2nd one was also given a council house. Their total relationship/marriage/split up lasted about 4 years, there were never any kids involved, that's just how the lists there worked back then: couples had precedence over singles. Even though they were both 5-6 years younger than me, both worked (so had more chance of affording to pay a private rent) and joined the list about 4 years after me. I did think about finding a single man who wanted a council house and proposing we get married just to do that

Since then the lists have got longer. I then moved to an area where the waiting list for me would have been 20 years. Now I've moved again. You can't move and be on the list. Each time you move, or change jobs, you might be taking yourself off the list if you end up working/living outside of the list area.

In our area, you only get three offers. If you don't like those, your chance has gone. Not sure about other areas of the UK.

PasturesNew

mvengemvenge wrote: »

In our area, you only get three offers. If you don't like those, your chance has gone. Not sure about other areas of the UK.

That is if you EVER reach the top of the list. Which I (and many others) wouldn't.

I know some areas offer a better system now than the "3 offers" type of deal. They band you into a type of property. Then when one of those comes up they advertise/list it and people who qualify for that sort of housing put themselves forward. The one that applies that is the highest on the list would get it. That means if you're desperate you can apply and get higher up the list just because nobody higher than you fancied that one. Or if you're picky but near the top of the list you can sit it out until one comes up you do want.

carolt

beingjdc wrote: »

You could probably get somewhere straight away if you said your husband was violent, but then the police would be angry when they found out he wasn't. After that, you'd get told to go away by the housing part of the Council, and have to make an application under the Children Act. They'd probably find you somewhere under that, but equally they might decide the kids should go back to your husband, or decide you're both numpties and get them fostered.

Here's who gets emergency / top priority housing (this is for Hillingdon, but it's the same across much of the country)

• You have a life threatening medical condition, which is seriously affected by your current housing, (or you are an in-patient in hospital unable to return home as the property is unsuitable for medical reasons).
• You are homeless, in priority need and in temporary accommodation and the landlord wants the property back and it is not possible to find you suitable further temporary accommodation.
• Housing have agreed to a recommendation by social services that you need to be provided with permanent accommodation to ensure fostering or adoption.
• You are a tenant whose life is threatened if you remain in your home, because of violence. (Please note that this applies to Council Tenants only).
• You are an ex service tenant whom the council has a contractual obligation to re-house.
• You are a tenant who needs to move because your home is about to be demolished or redeveloped within three months.
• You are a tenant in an adapted property you no longer need which could be used by someone else.
• You are a tenant of a property with two or more bedrooms and you are willing to move to a one-bedroom home or give up two bedrooms.
• You are a non-statutory successor of a council tenancy and approved for a move to a studio or one bed or you are giving up two or more bedrooms.
• You are occupying a property, which is subject to a compulsory purchase order and/or where the council has a Statutory Duty to move you.

Here's "Urgent" (don't be fooled, it doesn't mean what it sounds like...)

• You have an urgent need to move for medical or social reasons, as approved by the council.
• You are homeless, the Council has accepted a duty to re-house you, and you are staying in bed & breakfast or a hostel
• You are statutorily overcrowded.
• You have more than one serious housing need.
• Welfare agency referral (as agreed by panel).
• You need move-on accommodation as agreed with partner organisations.
• You are a tenant occupying larger accommodation, but are willing to give up a surplus bedroom, but still need two or more bedrooms.
• You are a tenant and your home is to be demolished or redeveloped.
• You are a non-statutory successor of a council tenancy and approved for smaller accommodation comprising 2 or more bedrooms.
• You are an ex tenant whom the council, at the time you relinquished a former tenancy, undertook to re-house at a future date.

But if I had no income, or v little, as would if 'separated' from my OH, I wouldn't be able to pay the rent on my own. Thus presumably I woud get LHA to pay my current rent? And assuming that was sufficient, wouldn't actually have to have the bother of moving at all let alone joining the queue for appropriate housing?

Obviously, what my example missed was that, presumably, in that situation my OH woud get chased by the Child Support Agency or whatever they're called now to contribute through maintenance payments. But doubt it would be as much as he 'contributes' now. And it would still be topped up by a raft of other benefits.

And for those who partners were harder to trace - not previously married to them or named on birth certificates - presumably it would be even easier to avoid the partner needing to contribute at all?

NB I am comparing my situation to 'pretend' single mothers, who have a live-in partner but claim not to, for benefits purposes, rather than 'real' single mothers, who have to get by on their own.

classy_shazz

I have (for the first time in my life) sat down and read this entire thread. Was actually looking for advise about gardening, regardless... I work for as a Surveyor for a housing association/council houses and am in and out council houses all day everyday. Do occasionally met 30 year old grandparents and generations of families who have never worked between them. Also met genuinely lovely people, who take pride in the properties and try their best to cotnribute to society, whether it be through working and therefore paying taxes, community activites or education/training. There is serious problem of a culture of benefits.

Not that everything is amazing in Australia- but there is a system called work for the dole. Out of work for more than 6 months (3 in some states) you are out of your house at least 3 days a week doing community projects, eg planting trees, litter picking, painting, gardening, etc. If people dont turn up, their benefits are decreased. Simple. Also increases people self esteem, teaching responsiblity and getting into a work like routine.

Also I'm Australian- ie non EU citzen, my husbands British and we do not qualify for child beneift or anything like that. Both our children were born here and have both nationalities. My first work visa (for 2 years) was £500, the first leave to remain visa was £900 and now about to pay £700, plus test fees for my indefinate leave to remain visa. Am disgusted on a daily basis on how people born outside the EU are portrayed. Have had people come up to me in the supermarket (after hearing my accent) telling me I have taken a job from their son/daughter/friend, etc. Also been told to go home, on numerous occasions. Really nice stuff. Probably explains why The Sun is so popular.

Lotus-eater

classy_shazz wrote: »

Have had people come up to me in the supermarket (after hearing my accent) telling me I have taken a job from their son/daughter/friend, etc. Also been told to go home, on numerous occasions. Really nice stuff. Probably explains why The Sun is so popular.

Yeah, there are a few people on here like that. Sorry from the British people, most of us are ok.

mewbie_2

margaretclare wrote: »

You don't come here wanting to bomb us, or set up cannabis farms, or force a foreign religion on to us.

tbh I don't think the chances of me getting bombed is very high, and I am not interested in religion whether foreign or not. That leaves cannabis factories and I am in two minds about this. On the one hand it is a business and God knows we need them! It's also fairly green, and I guess organic although I am no expert. I believe it's also legal now, or was that last week - it's a bit confusing. Slightly unfair of the goverment to keep reclassifying it, when you need to concentrate on getting that four fingered roll just pat for showing off to your mates.

Smoking cannabis does give young people something to do. I believe it makes them less likely to commit acts of violence say, than alcohol.

Obviously we'd prefer them to belong to the local Church of Christian Fellowship of course.

edit: Obviously the Rastafarian religion is perfectly acceptable. And getting bombed has more than one meaning.

leveller2911

mewbie wrote: »

tbh I don't think the chances of me getting bombed is very high, and I am not interested in religion whether foreign or not. That leaves cannabis factories and I am in two minds about this. On the one hand it is a business and God knows we need them! It's also fairly green, and I guess organic although I am no expert. I believe it's also legal now, or was that last week - it's a bit confusing. Slightly unfair of the goverment to keep reclassifying it, when you need to concentrate on getting that four fingered roll just pat for showing off your mates.

Smoking cannabis does give young people something to do. I believe it makes them less likely to commit acts of violence say, than alcohol.

Obviously we'd prefer them to belong to the local Church of Christian Fellowship of course.

edit: Obviously the Rastafarian religion is perfectly acceptable. And getting bombed has more than one meaning.

One thing to add Mewbie, a lot of multiple sclerosis sufferers smoke it , my uncle use to as it was a good for pain relief. Good evening by the way :rotfl: