New Housing Benefit cuts: what effect will they have?

Shakethedisease

in this situation harsh in my view but the bigger picture that "working people are more important" is very true and 100% correct.

I've pointed out several times most people on HB/LHA ARE working ? Didn't you get it ?

People who want to buy are always told on here if they can't afford in a certain area then move to another part of the country etc. Should be the same for benefit claimants.

If their jobs are there then they certainly won't move. That would be a crazy move to make. The majority will simply rent and attempt to save up a deposit for a house in the same area, or affordable commute from where they work. No-one is ever going to be silly enough to move away from the area their job is accessible.

The difference for 'benefits claimants' is that they will be forced to. Again, most of them work and need the top up LHA because of the very expensive rental prices they pay.

There are plenty of folk outside the capital who are forced to own a car and commute to work, and thats not cheap either.

No-one is 'forced' to own a car. It's a luxury. And commuting, as demostrated above is practically unsupportable on low wages.

plus there's (a) already shed loads of people living in local authority housing in central london who are unemployed and could do the menial low paid jobs; and (b) loads of immigrants not claiming benefits and living in high density households who are prepared to do the menial low paid jobs.

a) shed loads of people who are living in LHA housing in central London will not be able to very soon. As per the thread topic regarding LHA caps etc. So they're out of the equation. They'll have to move unless their landlord drops the rent drastically.

And b) Immigrants not claiming benefits and living in high density households.. do you mean illegal immigrants by any chance ? That's more than any 'good' employer wants to take on being caught employing a few of those, what with the fines that go with it. If that's not what you meant then I'm afraid I don't have any idea what or who you're on about. People that don't claim any benefits and live 6 to a room aren't usually legit in the Uk. ( Feel free to correct me ).

there is no economic need to bus more people into central london from the outskirts when there are already many more unskilled people than unskilled jobs there already.

You missed the point. The unskilled 'en mass' won't be able to live there any more. So they will in fact have to be 'bussed in'. The unskilled and low-paid won't be able to pay the rents in central London. Travel/public transport costs a fortune ( as demonstrated ) for someone on minimum wage. Ok when you live a few bus stops or a tube ride away but when there are swathes of London taken out of your local hospital cleaner's or bin man's reach for living locally ?

All the unskilled workers won't BE there anymore and won't be able to affordably GET there to work either. Hope that's simple enough for you.

They still have a responsibility where there are children involved.

I have no idea where they are going to house them all. This is an accident waiting to happen IMHO. An acute lack of social housing and an acute lack of private housing reduced even further ( disregarding those that already won't take those on LHA).. to just the lowest 30% of what is available from those that do = lots of homeless families and singles. I don't honestly think the council's will be able to cope.

chewmylegoff

Shakethedisease wrote: »

a) shed loads of people who are living in LHA housing in central London will not be able to very soon. As per the thread topic regarding LHA caps etc. So they're out of the equation. They'll have to move unless their landlord drops the rent drastically.

people living in social housing, which is what i was referring to, are not going to have to move out.

And b) Immigrants not claiming benefits and living in high density households.. do you mean illegal immigrants by any chance ? That's more than any 'good' employer wants to take on being caught employing a few of those, what with the fines that go with it. If that's not what you meant then I'm afraid I don't have any idea what or who you're on about. People that don't claim any benefits and live 6 to a room aren't usually legit in the Uk. ( Feel free to correct me ).

no, i mean legal immigrants - chiefly east europeans, who cram themselves into overcrowded houses to get their living costs down. plenty of them around - how else do you think they can survive in london working in coffee shops.

You missed the point. The unskilled 'en mass' won't be able to live there any more. So they will in fact have to be 'bussed in'. The unskilled and low-paid won't be able to pay the rents in central London. Travel/public transport costs a fortune ( as demonstrated ) for someone on minimum wage. Ok when you live a few bus stops or a tube ride away but when there are swathes of London taken out of your local hospital cleaner's or bin man's reach for living locally ?

All the unskilled workers won't BE there anymore and won't be able to affordably GET there to work either. Hope that's simple enough for you.

there will be plenty, there are sink estates all over london owned by the local authorities / housing associatons which are full of unemployed people who could be doing unskilled jobs.

furthermore, anyone who can afford a second hand bicycle (which is pretty much anyone) can commute into central london from, say, zone 4, and a bus pass isn't exactly cripplingly expensive. even if they cannot afford a bus pass, it would make more sense to move them out of central london and give them a free bus pass, than it would to pay for them to live in a privately rented house in central london.

Generali

There are plenty of cheap central suburbs: Elephant and Castle, Bermondsey, Archway, Whitechapel, Cable Street, Wapping (away from the river), Isle of Dogs, Hackney and a couple each working 40 hours a week on the minimum wage will pull in £400 a week between them. Not great riches but enough for a flat on a grotty estate, to pay the bills and commuting costs, put food on the table and to have a cheap annual holiday.

Unfortunately unskilled workers are always likely to get the worst of housing and pretty much everything else. This is assuming a worst case scenario for people that are working - there is no good reason for a couple to both spend their entire lives in minimum wage jobs. A quick google shows plenty of warehouse and other unskilled work paying £7-8/hour. A lorry driver can make £10/hour and that is a job where there is a skills shortage (I believe) but it is relatively simple to get qualified.

woody01

epz wrote: »

I missed the budget but one thing that caught my interest but hasn't been discussed much is the capping of housing benefit.

as much I can gather the benefits are capped at
£250 for a one bedroom property
£290 for a two bedroom property
£340 for a three bedroom property
£400 a week for a four bedroom property


Or 30% of local median rents.


I haven't really confirmed this more than the 1st search on google but this seems like it could be pretty brutal for some low end BTL'ers.

I hate this government, but they have got this bang on right.
£400 PER WEEK!

Why should the tax payer be paing over £1500 a month for someone to live.

dktreesea

woody01 wrote: »

I hate this government, but they have got this bang on right.
£400 PER WEEK!

Why should the tax payer be paing over £1500 a month for someone to live.

Because the taxpayer, courtesy of the various governments of our time, doesn't build enough housing, social or private, to meet the needs of our ever burgeoning population. A population that in the last 2008/2009 year, grew by just under 400,000 (source: Office of National Statistics) to bring our estimated population as of 2009 (can't quite remember the month) to 61.8 million. Presumably in the meantime we have has managed to add a couple of hundred thousand more.

The price of housing is no doubt influenced by over generous LHAs, but the other influence is our population growth.

carolt

Shakethedisease wrote: »

I've pointed out several times most people on HB/LHA ARE working ? Didn't you get it ?



If their jobs are there then they certainly won't move. That would be a crazy move to make. The majority will simply rent and attempt to save up a deposit for a house in the same area, or affordable commute from where they work. No-one is ever going to be silly enough to move away from the area their job is accessible.

The difference for 'benefits claimants' is that they will be forced to. Again, most of them work and need the top up LHA because of the very expensive rental prices they pay.



No-one is 'forced' to own a car. It's a luxury. And commuting, as demostrated above is practically unsupportable on low wages.



a) shed loads of people who are living in LHA housing in central London will not be able to very soon. As per the thread topic regarding LHA caps etc. So they're out of the equation. They'll have to move unless their landlord drops the rent drastically.

And b) Immigrants not claiming benefits and living in high density households.. do you mean illegal immigrants by any chance ? That's more than any 'good' employer wants to take on being caught employing a few of those, what with the fines that go with it. If that's not what you meant then I'm afraid I don't have any idea what or who you're on about. People that don't claim any benefits and live 6 to a room aren't usually legit in the Uk. ( Feel free to correct me ).



You missed the point. The unskilled 'en mass' won't be able to live there any more. So they will in fact have to be 'bussed in'. The unskilled and low-paid won't be able to pay the rents in central London. Travel/public transport costs a fortune ( as demonstrated ) for someone on minimum wage. Ok when you live a few bus stops or a tube ride away but when there are swathes of London taken out of your local hospital cleaner's or bin man's reach for living locally ?

All the unskilled workers won't BE there anymore and won't be able to affordably GET there to work either. Hope that's simple enough for you.



I have no idea where they are going to house them all. This is an accident waiting to happen IMHO. An acute lack of social housing and an acute lack of private housing reduced even further ( disregarding those that already won't take those on LHA).. to just the lowest 30% of what is available from those that do = lots of homeless families and singles. I don't honestly think the council's will be able to cope.

Sorry, but I find your horror that people might actually have to move out to the sticks and pay huge commuting costs faintly amusing, in an ironic kind of way.

My OH commutes from zone 6 - together with parking charges (horrendous) we pay over £2500 per year for the privilege.

We moved out here (from London zone 3) because we couldn't afford (to rent or buy) a house of any size, even 2 bed, for our (at the time) 2 kids.

We cut our coat to fit our cloth, and we pay all of those commuting costs ourselves, I should add - no help from employer, benefits etc. And no LHA.

If the employers in central London can't find anyone to do the jobs that need doing on current low wages, they'll have to raise salaries. I'm with others in suspecting that London, at least, has a large enough immigrant population who is less precious about their 'rights' and will do these jobs at current salaries; if I'm wrong, then salaries will have to rise.

Either way, there is no need for the taxpayer ie me to subsidize people to live in central areas that we ourselves moved from because we coukdn't afford them!

Shakethedisease

Sorry, but I find your horror that people might actually have to move out to the sticks and pay huge commuting costs faintly amusing, in an ironic kind of way.

My OH commutes from zone 6 - together with parking charges (horrendous) we pay over £2500 per year for the privilege.

You both work though. If it's hard for you as a 2 income family, it'll be twice as tough for those that aren't. £2500 off two wages is a whole lot different from that of a worker paying £2500 off miniumum wage.