Welfare Reform

Depth_Charge

Hi

Interesting recent'ish article on the bedroom tax - Housing Trust takes a 'bold management decision' it says.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/housing-network/2013/feb/26/tenants-exempted-bedroom-tax-reclassify

It could get a little interesting as the clock ticks down.

samtoby

I completely hear what people are saying but if you have privately rented for years the rules that are coming in have always applied. So in my eyes its bringing everyone in line. But that is my opinion.

I hear so many people moaning and moaning about Social Housing and my answer to that is - if you don't like it go a private rent. I privately rented for years and would have loved a Council property but I had no chance as I wasn't going to play the system and I wasn't in priority need. But I was a single working Mum. With a huge amount of debt.

Social housing can be given back. And now the rules about housing benefit are coming in line with persons who claim for private renting you would be in the same boat claim wise.

I have seen so many reems of posts and I am not saying all but most moan about their house, where it is, the size of the rooms and even the size of the garden and are having all their rent paid have a 3 bed house and only a two bed need with all their housing benefit paying their rent where as if I had been in a three bed with a two bed need I would have had to make up the shortfall because rent on a three bed would have been way above the 2 bed Local housing allowance rate.

gemini12

U was surprised to learn the so called bedroom tax will affect fosterers in that foster children do not count. As I understand it there is already a shortage of fosterers how will this help?

tpl

The welfare system needs reforming - it is common knowledge from what I've read on these forums since I've been on this website, that in a lot of cirumstances people are 'better off' on benefits, than going to work. That isn't fair on people who go to work, pay the taxes and still struggle. There are also alot of people who do take the '...ss' out of the system, and a lot of people who don't too, of course. I have worked with people who claim disability allowance, and then go on to have another 3 children (whilst not being able to work, even though well enough to have 4 children!), and then ask to be housed in a 4 bedroom house (social housing) because they haven't got enough room due to overcrowding!! - everything is paid by the tax payer - that is not right. Some people do need to take more responsibility for themselves. Let's get real, there is nothing wrong for people in social housing to pay for extra rooms they don't actually need if they want to stay there. Why not? They don't have to move out. Unfortunately, now there is not enough social housing for everyone, Thatcher ensured that. That's what people have to do in private rental sector where rent is much higher than in social housing....and lots of people in the private sector struggle financially. The other end of the spectrum needs to be sorted out too...companies and wealthy individuals not paying tax through loopholes and the banking system, well that's another story.

There is reform needed. I don't exactly know the best way to do it. But it is needed. Governments usually get it wrong, so the bottom line is, we all need to be taking more responsiblity for ourselves, using our own natural ethics, rather than waiting to be 'told' what is right by someone else and or just doing something because we 'can' and the current (flawed) system lets us. We all have the ability to do that. That would hopefully ensure the people who really need help get it; as well as not alienating the people who don't get help, but still struggle.

eyeopener2

Rent controls would help immensely.

Depth_Charge

Hi

Interesting comments and balance

For those with time to spare below is a good, very interesting and thought provoking report from a combined number of church organisations on poverty, myths of etc

http://www.jointpublicissues.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/Truth-And-Lies-Report-smaller.pdf

Its a good read in my opinion.

My opinion is that there is a high percentage of people that are likely to be affected by these reforms (especially the fast approaching bedroom and council tax) who still do not realise the impact these may or will have on their finances.

Speaking recently with a few people from a number of local authorities my way, the feeling and mood is one of worry for what may lie ahead.

If you are already struggling with debts / expenditure or are worried about these changes, best prepare, maybe get advice early to avoid potential problems. Priority debts / expenditure may need extra attention especially if you have existing court orders for rent arrears etc.

The face to face agencies such as Citizens Advice are already feeling the pressure on Welfare Reform with the indications being that enquiries could be set to rocket.

Growurown

tpl wrote: »

The welfare system needs reforming - it is common knowledge from what I've read on these forums since I've been on this website, that in a lot of cirumstances people are 'better off' on benefits, than going to work. That isn't fair on people who go to work, pay the taxes and still struggle.

I agree the system needs reforming and I think that this is the intention of the Universal Credit that is coming in soon. I have been a community worker in a deprived area and have seen that the benefits system actively discourages people from working in some instances. People can't take jobs that are more than 16 hours but less than 30 because those jobs don't pay. If you do a temporary job it takes so long to sort your benefits out when the job finishes, that people won't take the risk of being penniless for weeks on end until the benefit payment kicks in, and I can't blame them especially when they have children. Many jobs, for example supermarkets, will only give you a contract for a few hours a week. One week you may work a few hours and the next 40 hours but the benefit system doesn't cope well with this either. In my county it takes three months to get a housing benefit claim through the system. How many private landlords are willing to wait three months for their rent?

tpl wrote: »

there is nothing wrong for people in social housing to pay for extra rooms they don't actually need if they want to stay there. Why not? They don't have to move out.

I think the point here is that many people in social housing can't afford to pay the extra rent. If you are single and on JSA which is about £70 a week then to take over £20 per week out of that to fund the extra rent is going to be very difficult. The bedroom tax only applies to people in receipt of housing benefit, and most people claiming this benefit are poor already.

tpl

I agree the system needs reforming and I think that this is the intention of the Universal Credit that is coming in soon. I have been a community worker in a deprived area and have seen that the benefits system actively discourages people from working in some instances. People can't take jobs that are more than 16 hours but less than 30 because those jobs don't pay.
People can 'take' jobs, and the jobs do pay; they just choose not to 'take' them, because the benefits pay more - which is exactly the point! Ridiculous. And why not 'take' a job over 30 hours per week - particularly if you are single and on JSA - full time hours are usually 37 hours.

In my county it takes three months to get a housing benefit claim through the system. How many private landlords are willing to wait three months for their rent?
I'm not sure what point this is trying to make (apart from the system isn't working very well) - people need to pay their rent (or be in arrears or evicted) regardless of where they live.

I think the point here is that many people in social housing can't afford to pay the extra rent. If you are single and on JSA which is about £70 a week then to take over £20 per week out of that to fund the extra rent is going to be very difficult.
I think you can work 16hrs/wk and still claim JSA, so income can be increased. JSA is a temporary solution, not a permanent one, and if you are single and looking for work there are other housing options (eg. renting rooms in the private sector) - you don't need a 2 or more bedroom house, if you can't afford the extra money per week. It is still subsidised. In the private sector, if you can't afford a 2+bed house, you can't rent or buy it.

The bedroom tax only applies to people in receipt of housing benefit, and most people claiming this benefit are poor already.
Are you sure the majority of people claiming housing benefit are poor already, compared to people working below average or average wage jobs and renting in the private sector? I don't know the statistics, or even if there has been any research into this. There are a lot of other people in a range of situations claiming various benefits that add up to more than someone working full-time (on an average and above average wage). This, unsurprisingly, breeds resentment. The welfare state was not created for people to 'earn' more money through benefits than being in a full time job. It was created to help people in need.

Yes, the system is flawed (well the whole economic system is flawed!) but a lot of people (from all socioeconomic backgrounds) take advantage of those flaws, instead of taking responsibility and being guided by their own ethical reasoning and thinking about what would be of benefit to everyone, including themselves.

Depth_Charge

Hi

Strictly on the debt effect side of welfare reform (if that is the right phrase)

I wonder if any eventual combined decrease in disposable income as a result of this welfare reform will bring people under the £50 per month rule where potential Debt Relief Orders (DROs) are concerned.

In other words those who currently are not eligible on the above rule (maybe no real alternative presently other than a lengthy'ish DMP) may find themselves in a position to maybe look again at a DRO (if appropriate of course)

Strange things can happen with this type of change (unforseen side effects you could say)

Its early days in a way but food for thought at the very least

seven-day-weekend

Growurown wrote: »

A friend of mine is a foster carer and is currently in a privately rented house and looking to move. She was told by the housing association that if she signed on their books her foster child wouldn't count in the bedroom allowance. This is appalling. We are desperately short of good foster parents in our area, the local council pay really low money to foster carers and now they are going to have to pay extra towards the bedroom tax. I can't understand how the government have allowed this to happen. It is so shortsighted.

I think the idea is that they use part of the substantial allowance they get for fostering to pay the extra for the child's bedroom.