Housing Benefit under occupancy Help

lighting_up_the_chalice

Heycock wrote: »

Lighting up the Chalice...yes I can.
"Scousers believe anything they're told".........
source https://www.beano.co.uk

Ha! Just as well I had the good sense not to include you in the bet. I would have gotten away with it to, if it wasn't for that pesky scouser.

Reminds me of the one about the scouser who turned down a b-job because he thought it might effect his JSA.

lighting_up_the_chalice

nixe wrote: »

bless him, and your nan did he ever find out?
i would love to stick to this if i was healthy then i would
if it was only me being evicted.
i seriously cant do it, no way i can live on the streets
much prefered prison.

Well, you may get your chance with the CTB changes!

Morlock

lighting_up_the_chalice wrote: »

Read the passage from the allocations policy you quoted. The important 3 words are "suitably sized flat". Now, can you find a definition, within the same policy, of what is deemed "suitable"? ie is there anything to suggest that a 2 bed flat would NOT be suitable for a single person?

'Suitably sized' reflects their entitlement, which is a one-bedroom flat. Any offers of two-bedroom properties indicate a lack of demand for those properties, so they are offered to candidates with less priority. This is made clear in the allocation policy for all of the local housing areas.

lighting_up_the_chalice wrote: »

Oh yes you did. In fact, you said that the contrary view was "Absolute rubbish".

Oh no I didn't.

nixe

lighting_up_the_chalice wrote: »

Well, you may get your chance with the CTB changes!

i dont get ctb. one in full time work and other at uni.

lighting_up_the_chalice

Morlock wrote: »

'Suitably sized' reflects their entitlement,

So far so good.......

Morlock wrote: »

which is a one-bedroom flat (or MO for under 35s).

Could you point out where it says that in the allocations policy?

Morlock wrote: »

offers of two-bedroom properties indicate a lack of demand for those properties, so they are offered to candidates with less priority.

Priority and property size entitlement are two very different things.

Morlock wrote: »

This is made clear in the allocation policy for all of the local housing areas.

Great. Then you will be able to quote the pertinent passage, I'm sure.

Morlock wrote: »

Oh no I didn't.

Oh yes you did.

lighting_up_the_chalice

nixe wrote: »

i dont get ctb. one in full time work and other at uni.

Maybe you could show solidarity with those hit by the changes to CTB by with-holding an appropriate amount of CT from your usual payments?

nixe

lighting_up_the_chalice wrote: »

Maybe you could show solidarity with those hit by the changes to CTB by with-holding an appropriate amount of CT from your usual payments?

i knew it was gonna happen,
can you explain withholding an appropraite amount of ct from your payments?

but yep great idea will join the ctb lot in there protests,
it was gonna affect eldest daughter she paid high taxes
and she got pregnant about 4 months ago
so she changed her job and is now under the 50.000.
its a stupid law i can understand for those who go out do it for benifits
and have 10 kids but most people are are not like that.
ps she did not change her job so she could get £20 a week ct.

Morlock

lighting_up_the_chalice wrote: »

Could you point out where it says that in the allocations policy?

I don't need to quote the allocations policy to know that single people are only entitled to a one-bedroom, social housing property with few exceptions, being a shared carer is not a valid exception. It is what the bedroom tax bases its housing benefit savings on, tenants with extra rooms that they are not entitled to according to local housing allocation policies.

lighting_up_the_chalice

Morlock wrote: »

I don't need to quote the allocations policy to know that single people are only entitled to a one-bedroom, social housing property with few exceptions, being a shared carer is not a valid exception. It is what the bedroom tax bases its housing benefit savings on, tenants with extra rooms that they are not entitled to according to local housing allocation policies.

OK. You've given your opinion. However, as you have already said....

Morlock wrote: »

That post proves nothing, it just advertises two-bedroom properties as "Suitable for a single person or couple". The local housing allocation policy will override any advertising sound bites.

So where does the allocations policy referred to support your opinion?

Oh. Before you waste too much time reading through the finer points, I should probably tell you that I helped write the thing and am, as a result, quite familiar with its content and intention.

lighting_up_the_chalice

nixe wrote: »

i knew it was gonna happen,
can you explain withholding an appropraite amount of ct from your payments?

but yep great idea will join the ctb lot in there protests,
it was gonna affect eldest daughter she paid high taxes
and she got pregnant about 4 months ago
so she changed her job and is now under the 50.000.
its a stupid law i can understand for those who go out do it for benifits
and have 10 kids but most people are are not like that.
ps she did not change her job so she could get £20 a week ct.

I think we may be at crossed purposes. I was referring to Council Tax (CT) and Council Tax Benefit (CTB).