Housing benefit and under occupancy

Popperwell

I am virtually certain I will have to go but like you if things stayed as they are I might be able to stay put but if I do choice may decrease. I don't want to go but what can you do? May be better to have more of a say where you are relocated...

I am starting to get used to losing Mum but this carry on over the change in CT/BT and the worry about if I will still get DLA or the replacement is making me ill...and I suspect when/if I move I will probably be depressed in my new surroundings as smaller properties are few and in horrible areas of the town...

May try and get this year out the way and start looking in the New Year....

In some ways great that I probably will have a roof over my head and not be destitute but on the other hand, it's awful that they can what they like with you...if I thought some of the changes would not be passed and there might be a change of government I'd try and hang on but I don't really believe that is likely...

Some stock of people are going to be affected and many have no idea what's coming...and that includes many households where people are in work...

PippaGirl_2

When it's just me here I plan to turn the gas off and just wear several layers of clothes plus dressing gown in the winter so I can afford the BT if I'm still on HB.

bright_side

It is an awful situation to be in and I really feel for you with everything you have going on

My h/a recommended that I do it sooner rather than later, because when people start getting their official letters, there will be lots of people wanting to downsize.

There is a tiny part of me that's saying 'what if' - were they to suddenly scrap the scheme, I could have jumped ship too soon! However I too can't see it happening. My spare room only became 'spare' a couple of months ago when my daughter moved in with her boyfriend. It is a real concern as to what would happen if things didn't work out for them, but she knows she could still come home.....she'd just have to share a bed with me!!

I can understand why they are doing this, but it would've been great to have more notice and therefore more time for people to get their heads around it.

nottslass_2

This scheme sounds like complete madness to me,and will cause untold hardship to millions of families.
- Its costly to move house - can those on benefits actually afford removal costs in addition to carpets,decorating etc
- if you have kids at school,you'll either have to move schools (and buy yet another set of uniform) or have to find the extra cash for pertol or bus fares. -What if you are working and need childcare - Its not easy to find quality,reliable childcare if you have to move areas.
-What happens if your Workplace is no longer accessible via public transport if you have to move area.
- The Majority of people on benefits hope to only have to claim for a short period of unemployment,what does the goverment really expect people to do ? apply to downsize the minuite they recieve their P45's despite having the hope of getting another job within a few months or be faced with the worry of how they'll manage to stay in their homes in the mean time.

KxMx

elliegirl wrote: »

I have heard today that a friend received an email from her HA stating that she will be under occupied as her son cannot be counted as he is over 16, working and can go find a place for himself.

Can this be right. If so I am in trouble as I have 2 daughters living with me, both working and paying an amount to rent as decided by the housing benefit.

Am I supposed to throw them out on the streets?

That is a little melodramatic.

If there are at least 2 working adults in the house then I am sure you can cover the shortfall between yourselves.

Being part of a family means making sacrifices and there is no reason why your daughters should not chip in more to cover the decrease in benefit.

Doing this would cost your daughters alot less than moving out to their own places!

BigAunty

nottslass wrote: »

This scheme sounds like complete madness to me,and will cause untold hardship to millions of families.

The inconveniences and frustrations that you cite are already experienced regularly by private tenants who generally don't have rental contracts longer than 6 months. It might be news to social housing tenants who have enjoyed significant security for a century but this is just a standard experience of those who don't live in council or housing association.

I think part of the reason for this push is that social housing tenants for decades have been entitled to larger properties as their families have grown in size but no obligation to downsize when their children leave home.

This now means that a very high number of social housing tenants have unoccupied rooms at a time when it is a scarce resource and there are many social housing (and private) tenants who are overcrowded and desperate for larger places.

nottslass wrote: »

...
- The Majority of people on benefits hope to only have to claim for a short period of unemployment,what does the goverment really expect people to do ? ...

The majority of housing benefit claimants are actually in employment (though working age claimants in social housing have much lower employment rates than private tenants, even when accounting for retired folks, disability and so on).

Currently more is paid out in benefits than is received in income tax receipts - this is a gross imbalance, one that was rarely and briefly achieved in the past during economic slumps but, unless action is taken, is set to be the norm.

Labour went on a spending spree with benefits - heating allowance, tax credits, EMA - while they (and other govts) have built next to no new houses and have presided over an immigration boom that caused even more pressure which has led to high rents.

We now have a low pay/high cost economy, thanks to govt mismanagement.

nannytone_2

l do understand what you are saying big aunty .....but ....

if its hard for those in private rentals, is the answer really to make it just as hard for those in social housing?

its always about the lowest common denominator .... yale everyone down to the lower level instead of trying to raise everyone up!

yjr mew reforms coming in wont help the people in private rentals, but it will hurt a lot in social housing.


i remember, when i lived in london, our borough was split in 2 regarding cold weather payments.

half the borough went under heathrow and the other half went under stanstead.

one winter the half under stanstead received 1 more payment than the heathrow ones.

the answer .... they could have moved everyone over to stanstead, but instead moved everyone over to heathrow because historically, heathrow paid out less often.

did the heathrow half gain? not at all.
but the stanstead lot lost.

lowest common denominator....

bright_side

PippaGirl wrote: »

When it's just me here I plan to turn the gas off and just wear several layers of clothes plus dressing gown in the winter so I can afford the BT if I'm still on HB.

I'd do the same if it would save me £1400 a year

bright_side

BigAunty wrote: »

The inconveniences and frustrations that you cite are already experienced regularly by private tenants who generally don't have rental contracts longer than 6 months. It might be news to social housing tenants who have enjoyed significant security for a century but this is just a standard experience of those who don't live in council or housing association.

The difference being that private tenants know where they stand from the word go. Social tenants, some of whom have lived in their homes for a very long time and have spent a huge amount of money on them are suddenly having the goal posts changed. Obviously had social tenants known this would happen, they wouldn't have bothered!

elliegirl

KxMx wrote: »

That is a little melodramatic.

If there are at least 2 working adults in the house then I am sure you can cover the shortfall between yourselves.

Being part of a family means making sacrifices and there is no reason why your daughters should not chip in more to cover the decrease in benefit.

Doing this would cost your daughters alot less than moving out to their own places!

There is no reason for you to tell me or my girls what being a part of the family means. My girls have no problem paying what the council has decided.
It seem that you think working adults equates to good wages. One is on minimum wage doing 17hrs a week and the other is a mum to a one year old, doing 2 part time jobs at minimum wage totaling 18 hours. They also help me care for my husband and when I am ill which is quite often they take care of both of us. To me the caring that they do means family more to me than what they pay.:mad: