So I`m losing my home... :(

Marisco

tomjonesrules wrote: »

I think they based it on the situation in the south east, where many people do share houses in their thirties because of the high cost of living.

They just failed to think about the impact on the rest of the country.

This is why it's so disgraceful IMO! They seem to think a "one size fits all" will do!! Don't expect much sympathy OP, when I posted something about how wrong this policy was (it doesn't affect me one jot, but I still think it's all wrong!!) answers varied from "well, they'll have to move" to "lot's of professionals do it in London"!! Just because the rentals are so high down South, it's no reason to penalise everyone in the rest of the UK!!

Lady_gaga

I also feel it's an unfair change, most people of 35 have been in a relationship that's broken down and lots of them have children, not easy to have your kids stay for weekends and holidays when your sharing a home with someone not related to them, wouldn't fancy my kids being subject to a house mate coming out the bathroom in the altogether during the night etc, might be OK to share a house with someone but would you necessarily want your children sharing with them too?
Doesn't affect me at all but I still think it's unfair /

Marisco

Lady_gaga wrote: »

I also feel it's an unfair change, most people of 35 have been in a relationship that's broken down and lots of them have children, not easy to have your kids stay for weekends and holidays when your sharing a home with someone not related to them, wouldn't fancy my kids being subject to a house mate coming out the bathroom in the altogether during the night etc, might be OK to share a house with someone but would you necessarily want your children sharing with them too?
Doesn't affect me at all but I still think it's unfair /

This is another aspect that hasn't been thought through properly either. When you think of all the rigmaroll folk have to go through to work with kids, CRB checks etc, it seems to go out the window in these situations. Yet people will be expected to take a child/ren to a house full of strangers! Mind, personally I think we are OTT in this country regarding checks for working in schools, e.g builders and volunteers needing CRB's, but that's another subject !!!

MissMoneypenny

Marisco wrote: »

Don't expect much sympathy OP, when I posted something about how wrong this policy was (it doesn't affect me one jot, but I still think it's all wrong!!) answers varied from "well, they'll have to move" to "lot's of professionals do it in London"!! Just because the rentals are so high down South, it's no reason to penalise everyone in the rest of the UK!!

A lot of those on welfare in London are going to have to move too as they are having their rent cut to the 30 percentile. This welfare cut will mainly affect London claimants (plus Cambridge and Bristol too from what the papers have said).

The idea behind all these wekfare changes is to promote "work pays" and to get the welfare state back to a basic safety net only, instead of the lifestyle choice it has become.

BigAunty

locutus12 wrote: »

...

What they don’t even bother to think about is HOW am I supposed to move? I have no money for removals, nor deposits on new places. .

Many councils operate deposit guarantee schemes for those on low incomes.

Sell some of your unwanted/excess things on ebay to raise the money for the removals.

Or get permission from the landlord to find a second tenant for your spare room - you advertise and interview them and he issues them with a tenancy. You are going to have to downscale substantially and probably share a property, this way you get to stay in the same place and choose your fellow tenant.

The context to these swingeing changes that were brought in is because the LHA bill doubled to £20 billion under labour who ended up paying out more in benefits, allowances and credits than employees paid in income tax.

lynnysinger

i may be wrong but if you get a joint tenancy then the dwp will look at it and you may need to then make a joint claim for your other benefits.
ive seen it on other threads. people trying to prove that their friend who they are sharing with are not their partners. the dwp seem to take the view that you are a couple , and you have to prove that you're not!
if your landlord agrees to getting in someone else to share the house with another tenancy agreement then he may have to apply for planning permission to do so, as it then becomes a multiple occupancy and different laws apply.its classed as two households, so the facilities have to be to a certain requirement i think.

is it because you are underoccupying now that the hb is being reduced? how much is the lha for your area for a single person of your age? underoccyping should only come into account if you are in social housing if the rent you are paying is within the lha as far as im concerned. its a disgrace that young people are treated like this.
i'm an oldie, and i would not like to be in your shoes. things are going to get worse with this goverment. of course there are people out there who need a good kick up the !!!!, we've been a soft touch for too long. But in cases, where people are trying to find work, losing their jobs through no fault of their own, struggling to make ends meet, it makes me rage!!!!!!!:eek:

it's a shame you cant find a little job for a couple of hours a week to pay the top up. Are you allowed to earn a little , say £20 weekly even on benefits?
maybe advertise in a local shop for handy man, car cleaning,window washing,dog walking etc. sounds patronising, but it's really meant with the best intention. if its only a small amount, i would just do what i have to do to survive. if someone was advertising near me, i would certainly need someone. there could be a lot of people out there who may use that type of service, because it's not too expensive. it might work, and you can stay in your little home with the cat, and not have to share with a stranger.
good luck anyway.:)

BigAunty

locutus12 wrote: »

.. what about the damned cat?! .

A site like Spareroom has a search facility for pet friendly landlords. On accommodation websites, you will be able to place a 'wanted' ad to specify your requirements.

See if there are any cat rescue/fostering projects who will home your pet temporarily until you are back on your feet. I don't know if they operate this way (I know they cover periods when people are in hospital) but if you contact some local organisations, they will let you know if there is a fostering scheme that meets your needs.

Oldernotwiser

Marisco wrote: »

This is another aspect that hasn't been thought through properly either. When you think of all the rigmaroll folk have to go through to work with kids, CRB checks etc, it seems to go out the window in these situations. Yet people will be expected to take a child/ren to a house full of strangers! !

Nobody has a CRB done when they move in with a partner, neither are their relatives cleared.

As most child abuse is done by family members and step parents, this could be seen to be more of a problem than a threat from a random (if resident) stranger.

Oldernotwiser

Marisco wrote: »

This is why it's so disgraceful IMO! They seem to think a "one size fits all" will do!! Don't expect much sympathy OP, when I posted something about how wrong this policy was (it doesn't affect me one jot, but I still think it's all wrong!!) answers varied from "well, they'll have to move" to "lot's of professionals do it in London"!! Just because the rentals are so high down South, it's no reason to penalise everyone in the rest of the UK!!

It's not just a question of "lots of professionals in London" do it but sharing at 30 is far more common generally in the south east and cities, where people often earn the most. I really cannot see why people in decent jobs are prepared to share but people on low incomes and on benefits think they have a right to their own place.

The OP's in his twenties, has been mainly unemployed for 2 years and during this time has had the rent paid for him on a two bedroom house, which strikes me as totally unnecessary!

Marisco

Oldernotwiser wrote: »

Nobody has a CRB done when they move in with a partner, neither are their relatives cleared.

As most child abuse is done by family members and step parents, this could be seen to be more of a problem than a threat from a random (if resident) stranger.

Maybe so, but can you not see how some PWC's will use this as an excuse not to let NRP's see their kids? Apart from that it's just plain wrong, if someone has been somewhere for years, put in the work on a place, why should they have to "up sticks" and move? The age limit IMO is far too high, 25 is more than adequate. Plus, not only do you have to move, you also (if you have kids) have to find "room mates" who are "child friendly". Not everyone want kids running round the place every weekend!! I certainly wouldn't!!