Just received 'Housing Benefit changes' letter, not sure of the implications.

perthperson

I would estimate (rather generously) that about 4 or 5% of landlords would be open to reducing their rent by any sort of significant sum. I haven't come across any who would reduce it from the one bed rate to the single room rate.

Sandwich

princessdon wrote: »

The govt is now creating an ethos were work will pay more than benefits and as part of that housing costs have to be considered.

I see what you're saying but the problem I have with what the government is doing is that their new policies are predicated on the notion that people on welfare aren't in work because they're lazy. It's all about 'incentivising' work by making life on benefits more and more difficult. The thing is though, the majority of people on benefits would gladly take any job they are offered and they don't need any more incentive to look for work. For those people, all these reforms do is punish them for being poor.

BigAunty

Sandwich wrote: »

... Almost everybody who spends money pays tax, and besides that, the majority of people on benefits will have worked for extensive periods and paid their taxes, or will go on to work for an extended period and contribute taxes. ...

Are you aware that currently the UK pays out more in benefits and allowances than is paid in income tax?!

This imbalance has only happened once before in recent political history but is set to be the norm unless costs are trimmed and/or taxes raised.

The housing benefit bill nearly doubled under Labour's tenure. This didn't happen in a vacuum. The spending is not sustainable.

I don't know the current stats but in the recent past, nearly 1 in 5 households had no-one of working age in employment, a figure that increased by 25% in a recent 7 year period.

In my city, until very recently, 1 in 5 of those of working age received Incapacity Benefit alone (this doesn't include disability living allowance), a totally shocking statistic.

So we can argue over the causes and the consequences but our country is struggling to pay the benefits bill, hence encouraging the young to share, capping LHA rates, reducing the LHA rate from the average local rent to the bottom third and so on.

Sandwich

BigAunty wrote: »

Are you aware that currently the UK pays out more in benefits and allowances than is paid in income tax?!

This imbalance has only happened once before in recent political history but is set to be the norm unless costs are trimmed and/or taxes raised.

The housing benefit bill nearly doubled under Labour's tenure. This didn't happen in a vacuum. The spending is not sustainable.

I don't know the current stats but in the recent past, nearly 1 in 5 households had no-one of working age in employment, a figure that increased by 25% in a recent 7 year period.

In my city, until very recently, 1 in 5 of those of working age received Incapacity Benefit alone (this doesn't include disability living allowance), a totally shocking statistic.

So we can argue over the causes and the consequences but our country is struggling to pay the benefits bill, hence encouraging the young to share, capping LHA rates, reducing the LHA rate from the average local rent to the bottom third and so on.

It is certainly shocking that in some cities/towns 1 in 5 people are on incapacity benefit and one would have to assume that there is a significant amount of fraud going on there. However, the other figures that you cited don't tell the full story. Here's why.

First of all, we are experiencing the worst recession since the Great Depression. Unemployment is high. Less people are working. That means fewer people paying taxes and more people drawing on benefits. This is a structural economic problem and not an innate flaw of the benefits system. What we need to do is get more people into jobs so that they are contributing taxes and not drawing on benefits, and government spending cuts don't help to achieve that aim.

Secondly, over the past few decades there has been a two-sided squeeze on income tax receipts. At the top of the income scale more and more high-earners have taken advantage of tax havens and other means of minimising their tax bill. And at the bottom of the income scale more and more people have been taken out of paying income tax altogether. Overall, the government is moving its focus away from income tax as its main source of revenue. So although saying the benefits bill is now larger than income tax receipts is shocking at first sight, it's not so shocking if you look into it in more detail.

BigAunty

I do think it's tragic that benefit claimants have started to become criminalised.

But you forget that even before the recession, Labour introduced EMA, heating allowance, tax credits and so forth, a shed load of money given to nearly every post 16 student, every pensioner and nearly all households with children.

Child tax credits, I kid you not, originally meant 9 out of 10 households with children qualified for it. That was stated on the HMRCs own website as fact.

Do you not think it totally ridiculous that 90% of family households were entitled to money from the public purse, so by the time you add in the students and the pensioners, plus the way that IB was set to extend to its 3 million claimant under their tenure, it was all getting a bit unsustainable?

So the imbalance started way before the recession, and naturally there are structural reasons why we've ended up in a low wage/high cost society (lack of house building, immigration, low taxation etc).

Around 50% of children are now born or living in lone parent households which is very costly to the public purse - 7 out of 10 non resident parents do not contribute to their upbringing I believe. These are cultural factors that make the benefit bill get higher each year. The number of lone parents on Income Support has doubled over the last 5 or 10 years.

Dunroamin

perthperson wrote: »

I would estimate (rather generously) that about 4 or 5% of landlords would be open to reducing their rent by any sort of significant sum. I haven't come across any who would reduce it from the one bed rate to the single room rate.

Unfortunately your "estimate" isn't based on fact as about 75% of prospective tenants negotiate rent with it being common to get reductions of around 10%.

http://www.moneyweek.com/investments/property/its-time-to-negotiate-lower-rent-48902

http://propertytalklive.co.uk/letting/1757-75-of-tenants-seek-to-negotiate-rent-reduction

Sandwich

Dunroamin wrote: »

Unfortunately your "estimate" isn't based on fact as about 75% of prospective tenants negotiate rent with it being common to get reductions of around 10%.

http://www.moneyweek.com/investments/property/its-time-to-negotiate-lower-rent-48902

http://propertytalklive.co.uk/letting/1757-75-of-tenants-seek-to-negotiate-rent-reduction

What's the percentage success rate for tenants who ask their existing landlord for a 50% reduction in their rent?

Sandwich

BigAunty wrote: »

I do think it's tragic that benefit claimants have started to become criminalised.

But you forget that even before the recession, Labour introduced EMA, heating allowance, tax credits and so forth, a shed load of money given to nearly every post 16 student, every pensioner and nearly all households with children.

Child tax credits, I kid you not, originally meant 9 out of 10 households with children qualified for it. That was stated on the HMRCs own website as fact.

Do you not think it totally ridiculous that 90% of family households were entitled to money from the public purse, so by the time you add in the students and the pensioners, plus the way that IB was set to extend to its 3 million claimant under their tenure, it was all getting a bit unsustainable?

So the imbalance started way before the recession, and naturally there are structural reasons why we've ended up in a low wage/high cost society (lack of house building, immigration, low taxation etc).

Around 50% of children are now born or living in lone parent households which is very costly to the public purse - 7 out of 10 non resident parents do not contribute to their upbringing I believe. These are cultural factors that make the benefit bill get higher each year. The number of lone parents on Income Support has doubled over the last 5 or 10 years.

I see what you mean. Does seem a bit mad for such a large percentage of the population to be eligible for that particular benefit. I think the thinking behind it was you make it so that everyone (even more wealthy people) benefit from the welfare system and then there will be more support for it. But yeah, still a bit mad.

CKhalvashi

perthperson wrote: »

I would estimate (rather generously) that about 4 or 5% of landlords would be open to reducing their rent by any sort of significant sum. I haven't come across any who would reduce it from the one bed rate to the single room rate.

And that’s in part because we have the banks to answer to, as I know that I owe well over £1m on BTL properties.

Anubis_2

CKhalvashi wrote: »

And that’s in part because we have the banks to answer to, as I know that I owe well over £1m on BTL properties.

You owe a million or more on BTL properties? :eek:

Dunroamin wrote: »

People who rent properties always negotiate on the rent, just as those buying properties do - it's expected.

This can be very difficult in privately rented accommodation as a lot of LL are with agencies (who take their cut) and any issues usually have to be raised withe the agency, and not direct to the LL.