LHA gravy train still in full swing in London...

flashnazia

blisk3 wrote: »

Do you know all facts other then prejudiced xenophobe racist rubbish served by daily fail ?

I don't think you can pull the race card on this one.

Had the family been white Chavs I'm sure there would be the same outrage.

StevieJ

ILW wrote: »

They appear to have moved out of a place in Coventry at 1/6th of the rent and demanded housing in an expensive part of London. That has little to do with high housing costs and is all about taking advantage of the system at the expense of others.

Do you actually believe that is the whole story? how can refugees demand anything, especially a move from one City to another. There is obviously a lot more too this, as usual. Are you saying that Joe Bloggs and his brood in Newcastle, if they a fancy a change, can up sticks and rent a nice little pad in Chelsea or Kensington and the taxpayer will pick up the bill? or is it just a perk for refugees?

TedButler

llubdlog wrote: »

It was going to be last April but the warnings were so many would be forced to move away from London, it would be a mass exodus like nothing the UK has ever seen.

The knock on effects would be house prices and rents crashing in London which would crash the housing market in the rest of the country.

So they have postponed it until next year.

If the £500 wk benefit cap does come in next year then thousands of housholds will be forced to move away from London. Or rents would have to be reduced to around £200 wk even for the big houses, because that is all a family can afford out of the £500 cap.

Rents will not fall that much stright away so the thousands of families will be forced to move somewhere cheaper.

More supply and less demand in London means lower rents and with them house prices. Lower prices in London means lower average price for the UK.

I can see the cuts being postponed again when the deadline gets closer, imagine the social unrest as these on low income families are forced to leave London?

neverdespairgirl

ILW wrote: »

What difference does it make?

A refugee is someone who has successfully claimed asylum. He has leave to remain in the UK, and is treated as a British citizen in terms of benefits, NHS, etc.

None of the above applies to those seeking to be recognised as refugees.

ILW

neverdespairgirl wrote: »

A refugee is someone who has successfully claimed asylum. He has leave to remain in the UK, and is treated as a British citizen in terms of benefits, NHS, etc.

None of the above applies to those seeking to be recognised as refugees.

I truly doubt that a non refugee family would be allowed to walk out of a place in Coventry and move into a very expensive place in London because they want to nearer their friends. They would be told they had made themselves intentionally homelsess and tld to sod off.
Or am I missing something.

skater_kat

ILW wrote: »

I truly doubt that a non refugee family would be allowed to walk out of a place in Coventry and move into a very expensive place in London because they want to nearer their friends. They would be told they had made themselves intentionally homelsess and tld to sod off.
Or am I missing something.

yes because this is not local authority housing. had they approached the LA for a house they would not have got anything. the point of this story is that this is a private let with a private landlord/agent. as long as local housing allowance is claimable, you can choose where you live - so yes they can have come from coventry and choosen wherever they want! council housing department doesnt come into it. same way that joe blggs from newcastle could do exactly the same thing.

drc

Imagine if you had scrimped and saved to be able to afford a tiny flat on the same street as this family. After years of hard work you are able to put down a deposit but with the knowledge that you have a huge mortgage to pay down ahead of you, working long hours and sacrificing family time so that you can live in a "nice" area. Then this family gets a house, courtesy of the state, next door and do not have to work for it, plus lots of benefits and they don't even need to speak English. How demoralised and utterly !!!!ed off would you feel? Whether this story is 100% true or whether it is one case and not representative of all people on LHA in London is irrelevant.

Benefits should be based on what you put in and should be time limited. And nobody should have their rent paid for a larger amount than those in work could afford, especially when they have chosen to move from a perfectly good house elsewhere in the country to live in an area of their choice, because their friends and family live there.

Graham_Devon

I was getting worried then reading through this. Nearly a whole page without the racist call.

chewmylegoff

isn't this just a relic of the previous system which is in the process of being dismantled?

chewmylegoff

llubdlog wrote: »

The difference is this time there are loads of families like the one in the first post getting over £1000 every single week to pay there rent.

Some are getting up to £4000 every single week if they have enough kids. That is just rent then they get council tax paid and over £100 JSA and possibly a couple of hundred quid child tax credit depending on how many new little scroungers they mange to pop out.


It has to stop. The £500 ben cap will mean these families will have to move to somewhere like Wales or cheap areas. Even then they will have less than half of their £500 per week cap for rent and still struggle to live on the £250 wk for council tax and other bills and feeding all those little scroungers.

so the answer to my question was "yes", as the govt has already acted, has already changed the situation going forwards so no new situations like this arise, and is in the process of changing the situation retrospectively.