Housing Benefit capped at £400 a week!

AMILLIONDOLLARS

Jowo wrote: »

Yes, I agree that those in receipt of LHA sums equal or greater to average earnings are in the very tiny minority. Shelter make it clear that around half of LHA claimants already pay a top up out of their own income and the majority are either in work, disabled or collecting pensions.

And while its sensible to cap LHA, the budget didn't address the root cause of high rents (high demand, low wages and low job opportunities and low supply of cheaper properties).

I think we will be getting some of those pretty soon:D

AMD

Jowo_2

AMILLIONDOLLARS wrote: »

I think we will be getting some of those pretty soon:D

AMD

If the properties being vacated by LHA tenants are heavily mortgaged or the landlord can't secure private tenants at an equivalent rent, then these landlords will sell them which is good news for buyers but not necessarily for renters (as if a landlord is selling up because renting is not sufficiently profitable, then a buy to let landlord is less likely to purchase it for the same investment reasons).

ILW

bouche wrote: »

I think it's scandulous that all those are so bitter re housing benefits. OK cap it, but please would the large minority on this threads stop moaning and get on with your lives. If you don't fancy subsidising those less fortunate than yourself then move to another country.

You DO live in a welfare state!! along with all that entailes

What a bunch of whingers Oye!!

Otherwise, do yourselves a favour and stop working to damned hard

Or vote in a Tory government, who at least do seem to be trying to address the issue.

Gwhiz

bouche wrote: »

Otherwise, do yourselves a favour and stop working to damned hard

It's TOO, not TO, my dear bouche.

diable

BeccaBell wrote: »

My parents never claimed benefits and chose to buy a
bed house in an excellent are so my brother, sister and I could attend the best schools.
I shared with my sister until I moved in with my partner a coup-le of years ago. The only affect it had on me was my clothes and make up would often disappear.. only to turn up a week or two later usually having been worn! :rotfl:

Was that when you started living with your partner ;o)))

poppysarah

bouche wrote: »

You DO live in a welfare state!! along with all that entailes

I think welfare shouldn't mean luxury!
And to spend £104,000 on LHA rent for a family is mad! Thaat's the tax take from 16 average workers...
As landlord above points out you can rent more cheaply elsewhere.

When you pay your rent you pick where you live. When the state pays it then I feel it has a duty to get best value!

poppysarah

bouche wrote: »

I do agree with you, I think 104K pA rent is LUDICROUS to say the least. You could have, at least, argued the toss over an average rent instaed of an extra-emeley excessive one, for your example.

If you had the idea of all were supported by that kind subsidised living hell, - I'd be mad too.:eek:

The point being some landlords would take advantage of that CAP and ensure their rent met it.

We spend such a huge amount on LHA that it's crazy - we could be building homes for people with the 20bn we spend on it!

mandyl

are u lot saying we are all the same?
i worked hard for 20years and then my husband left out of the blue one day.
i live in a very small flat but i like it all the same,i get £523 for my rent.
what else should i have done lived in a box on the street?

ILW

mandyl wrote: »

are u lot saying we are all the same?
i worked hard for 20years and then my husband left out of the blue one day.
i live in a very small flat but i like it all the same,i get £523 for my rent.
what else should i have done lived in a box on the street?

Do you work?

RabbitMad

bouche wrote: »

Anyway, we can't ignore the fact this county is going to football war within an hour or so....

......so..................

Come ON Slovakia!!!!!!

Weren't we playing Slovenia?