Family given £2m house... after complaining 5-bed London home was in "poor area" - DM

Fang_3

skcollobcat10 wrote: »

Many British people have done nothing of the sort, despite being 100% able bodied. If one was interested in the "ladder" some would place him above many British citizens who have done nothing.

First off, I AM NOT A RACIST, I will just let you know that.

1) He, his wife and 7 children, (did he not know birth control??) will never, never be above ANY OTHER BRITISH CITIZEN, born here.

I remember the days when disabled people were 3rd class citizens, forbidden from working, spoken about as if they werent there " does she take sugar". Personally find it ever so appalling. Perosnally Im glad that we have moved on from that, when people with disabilities were "the lowest rung of the ladder" an embarrassed to be holed away in hospitals never to be seen or have a life or freedoms.

I would just like to know what age you are, because I know that I am older than you, and you are talking a load of rubbish. I have only been disabled for 10 years, so the above is not relevant to myself. I also had a career before becoming disabled.

Oh, and you spell personally like this, not perosnally.

I think its a great shame that people pass judgement, be it on race, sexuality, gender or even looks. Think it is quite pitiful really.

I am not interested in race, sexuality, gender or even looks.

having said that, doesnt mean I agree with "the system" the biggest cause of this system was mismanagement of the economy. Not one small family, but the way this economy has been governed so I dont see why heaping the blame and vitriol on one family does anything but detract from the real issues at hand here.

Its a family that does not belong here in the uk, it is a family that have turned up and whined and cried for our help. Would you not think at some point the husband, the wife would be glad of the uk's help?

Of course you're not racist.

In the same way that I'm in no way hoping that you roll too close to an open lift shaft.

Spartacus_Mills

What a tedious debate. Mr Nur is unemployed but at least he is trying to get a job to be fair to him. He is trying to get work. He deserves some credit for that.

I am also disappointed that "The_White_Horse" has not dropped by into this thread. Quite frankly having second raters like Fang in this thread is rather disappointing. We need TWH's view on this.

princeofpounds

What a tedious debate. Mr Nur is unemployed but at least he is trying to get a job to be fair to him. He is trying to get work. He deserves some credit for that.

I very much doubt he is, though I wouldn't dispute he may have been a worker in the past. He is likely to just be saying that but conveniently 'unable' to find a job.

He would be mad to work now - there is no way he could afford such a standard of accomodation and he would lose his LHA.

This is a big part of the problem (and in one sense it's not his fault) - if people are literally paid sums bigger than they could ever earn in order to remain unemployed and on state support, why on earth would they every seek to return to work?

There's probably a bunch of starbucks and similar shops who would love to have more staff, but it's hardly an attractive option for him is it? People with this massive level of support are not cash-rich but their standard of housing is well above the norm.

lynzpower

But he wouldnt lose his LHA would he!He might lose a proportion of it. ( for example should he secure work on the NMW) Lets all remember, LHA is paid to low paid workers to help them secure accommodation in the UK, especially in the most expensive areas ( London & the south east for example). Hence the budget announcement that next year the rules will be changed. Until then, and the official guidance be written and distributed to local authorities I would expect that local authority workers will be expected to work with the decision-making guidance that has been given.

I remember the days when disabled people were 3rd class citizens, forbidden from working, spoken about as if they werent there " does she take sugar". Personally find it ever so appalling. Perosnally Im glad that we have moved on from that, when people with disabilities were "the lowest rung of the ladder" an embarrassed to be holed away in hospitals never to be seen or have a life or freedoms.

I would just like to know what age you are, because I know that I am older than you, and you are talking a load of rubbish. I have only been disabled for 10 years, so the above is not relevant to myself. I also had a career before becoming disabled.

Oh, and you spell personally like this, not perosnally.

I used to live opposite a hospital for disabled people in the late 80s which housed disabled people and was starting to be decanted by the time I left in the mid 90s. I know how to spell personally, but I type with one hand as I am also disabled.

Just FYI.

brit1234

skcollobcat10 wrote: »

1) British born and raised people "don't contribute" (your wording).

They are higher up the rung of the ladder than the likes of that scrounger!

Sorry but planet are you on. British people who don't contribute are equally as bad, cost the economy and should be exiled as well as the others.

Proper refugees who want to work I haven't got a problem with. Infact I know people from other countries here who work 1000 times more than British scroungers.

AMILLIONDOLLARS

Malcolm. wrote: »

So you're suggesting children have to move away from their School in the middle of their GCSE's to another county, because the area is more expensive than the north east? As a teacher I thought you'd be more considerate.

Housing benefit needs to be set according to area. There are no cheap bits in Surrey. Should HB be limited to stop people living in luxury properties, yes. Should it stop them living in a particular county, no.

I don't think it would be possible to have both, if you set it according to area then this person would just carry on renting at the same rate he is now, so nothing will have changed. If you choose to want to live in a particular area, then you have three options, pay the rent yourself if you are working, or pay the shortfall if you're benefit is not enough, or live elsewhere. I'd love to live in Kensington, but my monthly salary would no where near cover the cost. So like thousands of others I've had to make compromises and live within my means and commute to my place of work.

This guy wants to live a champagne lifestyle with us taxpayers picking up the tab, in the next couple of months he'll have to put his hand in his pocket and pay for the next round. Nothing wrong in that!

AMD

ruggedtoast

It didnt take long for this to degenerate into a freeloading foreigners thread. Surely its up to us, as a country, to decide who we let in and how much we pay them to do nothing when they get here?

Pennywise

Just my random thoughts from this thread.

1. Surely it would be better if the local authority had the right & obligation to check that they know exactly who is the beneficial owner of the property, i.e. to know who is behind a foreign property company? It should be a condition of the rental agreement being subsidised by the taxpayer that there is open disclosure - if the landlord won't give such information, then the local authority should refuse to subsidise.

2. The rent level should be set by a qualified surveyor/EA, not just agreed between landlord and tenant.

3. Would it really be such a bad thing for property prices to be evened up a bit across the UK? Would the S/E really suffer if house prices didn't rise for a while to let the rest of the UK catch up. To my mind the high living costs and high wages in some sectors in the S/E is a bad thing, not a good thing.

4. I wonder if high levels of rent subsidies actually fuelled the house price rises seen in the past decade or so, not just in the S/E but across the whole of the UK. Time and time again, I've looked at house & flat prices and wondered who on earth was buying them at such high levels when you consider the average wage levels. It's never made any sense and has been completely unfathomable to me. I'm having a hard time to think of anyone I know who is a homeowner and has moved in the past decade. All my friends and family are "trapped" in their homes because they can't afford to move up the property ladder, and that includes workers with good steady jobs and professionals.

5. Now I'm beginning to wonder whether seemingly limitless amounts of housing benefits was partly responsible for the house price bubble. Hopefully, reigning in the bills down to more reasonable levels will take the heat out of the housing market and hopefully a few years of stagnant house prices will enable wages to catch up and open up the housing market to workers again.

RDB

Pennywise wrote: »

Just my random thoughts from this thread.

1. Surely it would be better if the local authority had the right & obligation to check that they know exactly who is the beneficial owner of the property, i.e. to know who is behind a foreign property company? It should be a condition of the rental agreement being subsidised by the taxpayer that there is open disclosure - if the landlord won't give such information, then the local authority should refuse to subsidise.

There have been a few found to be renting off themselves. They own the company who owns the property and they get us taxpayers to pay their up to 2K per week rent to themselves. How many havent been found out and are getting away with it still?
This is bound to have pushed up rents and house prices.

roll on next April when we will see a sharp fall in rents in London.

The_White_Horse

i haven't read any of this thread, but the answer is obvious - just send the police round and throw these scum bags out onto the street.

then, and perhaps more importantly, find the cretins at the council that authorised this theft and bang them up for a long time.

what an idiotic country this is.