Housing Benefit under occupancy Help

lighting_up_the_chalice

nannytone wrote: »

[Bsearck got me
1 bed [rp[erties in shirebrook derbyshire.... oh rgwewa ibe ib a block rgar no one wants lo live in cos the mail boxes are broken into and the front door is kicked in .... just the place for a visually impaired person

[/B]

But if you choose to be a bit more flexible.....

http://www.mansfield.gov.uk/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=4272&p=0

Morlock

lighting_up_the_chalice wrote: »

As 2 bed houses tend to be let to families with 1 or 2 children, simple logic dictates that there will be a significant proportion of first time mums among their number (ie with 1 child).

So it's not the majority that are first time mums now, but a 'significant proportion', dictated by 'simple logic'. The majority could be parents with a first child, or parents with a second child, or two-person households, all being logical conclusions.

Unless you assume that the majority of social housing candidates waiting for two-bedroom properties are single mothers with one child, your logical conclusion is irrelevant compared to any facts, that you have yet to produce.

lighting_up_the_chalice

Morlock wrote: »

So it's not the majority that are first time mums now, but a 'significant proportion', dictated by 'simple logic'. The majority could be parents with a first child, or parents with a second child, or two-person households, all being logical conclusions.

Unless you assume that the majority of social housing candidates waiting for two-bedroom properties are single mothers with one child, your logical conclusion is irrelevant compared to any facts, that you have yet to produce.

As someone so keen on "facts", you also seem very keen to misquote/misrepresent what I actually said.

Perhaps you should re-check your own interpretation of the "facts" of my earlier statement before questioning its validity?

Morlock

lighting_up_the_chalice wrote: »

Perhaps you should re-check your own interpretation of the "facts" of my earlier statement before questioning its validity?

This is what you wrote:

lighting_up_the_chalice wrote: »

In most areas, the highest demand in Social Housing is for 2 bed properties. All those first time mums, see?

Apart from your 'simple logic', I've yet to see any convincing evidence that your statement is anything but anecdotal.

lighting_up_the_chalice

Morlock wrote: »

This is what you wrote:

Apart from your 'simple logic', I've yet to see any convincing evidence that your statement is anything but anecdotal.

I stand by my statement. Higher demand for 2 beds ( which you initially denied was the case) is DRIVEN by first time mums. They can only bid on 2 beds.

Morlock

lighting_up_the_chalice wrote: »

I stand by my statement. Higher demand for 2 beds ( which you initially denied was the case) is DRIVEN by first time mums. They can only bid on 2 beds.

So where is your proof that there is a higher demand for two-bedrooms (which I don't believe I did deny) and that most of the demand is DRIVEN by first time mums?

The fact that they can only bid for two-bedroom properties does not prove anything, as many other candidates can also bid for two-bedrooms.

lighting_up_the_chalice

Morlock wrote: »

So where is your proof that there is a higher demand for two-bedrooms (which I don't believe I did deny) and that most of the demand is DRIVEN by first time mums?

The fact that they can only bid for two-bedroom properties does not prove anything, as many other candidates can also bid for two-bedrooms.

If one sector of the community can only bid for one type of property, they become a driver of demand for that property if their numbers are high enough. Which bit of that are you struggling with?

Demand for 2 beds compared to 3 beds was demonstrated by the example given for your chosen city of Bradford.

Dunroamin

nannytone wrote: »

its too late for that ... its already been passed.

im only pm ;pe ratr DLA... because for a sensory impairment, you need to be blind and deaf fpr ot tp impact on your life!

my now seceased nother in law got high rate... she was very disabled with emphasemia... but in her mobility scooter... she was far beetter off than i am .... a scooter can make an imobilr prtdon mpno;e ... nothing can compensate for sight

She might have been more mobile than you are but that does't make her better off.

Morlock

lighting_up_the_chalice wrote: »

If one sector of the community can only bid for one type of property, they become a driver of demand for that property if their numbers are high enough. Which bit of that are you struggling with?

But you haven't shown any evidence that the numbers are high enough, just 'simple logic', that is the bit I am struggling with.

lighting_up_the_chalice wrote: »

Demand for 2 beds compared to 3 beds was demonstrated by the example given for your chosen city of Bradford.

Unless you can demonstrate that the demand for those two-bedroom properties is dominated by single mothers, it is irrelevant. All it proves it that more people bid on two-bedroom properties in Bradford than three-bedroom properties during the month of October.

Dunroamin

nannytone wrote: »

i totally understand that people not on benefits will judge people that are.
but there are those of us that have no choice, and we are the ones that are being dingled out.
i may be ib ny 40's but i could still give birth!
but i sont want another child because im not in a position to support it


excuse me ... i can have babies that i cant support but im not allowed to be disabled

My goodness - from your postings I thought you were older than me!