We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
What is a bedroom ? and is it a tax ?
Comments
-
It Depends, if the 2nd reception is used as a dining room and the kitchen is too small to eat in then probably not.
Remember this is not a tax, it is a reduction in housing benefit for those living in social housing (council house).
If you rent privately it has alreay been applied as LHA.
If you are an owner occupier you will not be affected as you wont be paying rent or claiming housing benefit to pay the rent.
Our old place didn't have room for table in kitchen. When the lass moved out, we made her downstairs bedroom our diningroom while we waited to downsize. It's still classed as a bedroom and still would be for HB purposes.4 Stones and 0 pounds or 25.4kg lighter :j0 -
It Depends, if the 2nd reception is used as a dining room and the kitchen is too small to eat in then probably not.
Remember this is not a tax, it is a reduction in housing benefit for those living in social housing (council house).
If you rent privately it has already been applied as LHA.
If you are an owner occupier you will not be affected as you wont be paying rent or claiming housing benefit to pay the rent.
- of course it is .. .. a tax unless your real name is Goebbels
- if it was a window or even a newspaper, if money is attached to it by our legislators .. .. its a tax
- if its not a tax then the intended savings of 480mi££ion would not be the intended result of the change in legislation
- BTW that tax of 480mi££ion has already been revised upwards to 505mi££ion of tax
It started elsewhere some months ago, but continues with Knowsley Housing Trust who are reclassifying 566 of its 14,000 properties as 2 bedroom smaller homes good for them, good for the people who were to be unfairly taxed, good for the poor of these Islands who by definition are the current and intended future beneficiaries of social housing.Disclaimer : Everything I write on this forum is my opinion. I try to be an even-handed poster and accept that you at times may not agree with these opinions or how I choose to express them, this is not my problem. The Disabled : If years cannot be added to their lives, at least life can be added to their years - Alf Morris - ℜ0 -
To be fair though why should we fund big houses for people who only need one or two bedrooms, because they never thought of downsizing as there was not an incentive too previously.
I appreciate the issues surrounding property not being available that is smaller, but they have had there cake, now its time to eat it, why should others have to fund it.0 -
To be fair though why should we fund big houses for people who only need one or two bedrooms, because they never thought of downsizing as there was not an incentive too previously.
I appreciate the issues surrounding property not being available that is smaller, but they have had there cake, now its time to eat it, why should others have to fund it.
If a person in need is allocated a larger property, because there are no single bed properties at all available, how is this any fault of theirs?
Even if they requested downsizing - this could not be done.0 -
Richie-from-the-Boro wrote: »- of course it is .. .. a tax unless your real name is Goebbels
- if it was a window or even an outside toilet, if money is attached to it by our legislators .. .. its a tax
- if its not a tax then the intended savings of 480mi££ion would not be the intended result of the change in legislation
- BTW that tax of 480mi££ion has already been revised upwards to 505mi££ion of tax
It started elsewhere some months ago, but continues with Knowsley Housing Trust who are reclassifying 566 of its 14,000 properties as 2 bedroom smaller homes good for them, good for the people who were to be unfairly taxed, good for the poor of these Islands who by definition are the current and intended future beneficiaries of social housing.
Calling it a bedroom tax implies that everyone with a spare room will be expected to pay this tax to HMRC, and causes unnecessary worry to people who wont be effected either because they are owner/occupiers or who are in private rentals where the reduction in housing benefit has already been applied.0 -
All I know is ... it'll end in tears!Signature removed for peace of mind0
-
Calling it a bedroom tax implies that everyone with a spare room will be expected to pay this tax to HMRC, and causes unnecessary worry to people who wont be effected either because they are owner/occupiers or who are in private rentals where the reduction in housing benefit has already been applied.
You call it the way you see it my friend, and I'll do the same.
As of just this afternoon IDS has apparently "already issued an instruction" to officials at the Department of Work and Pensions saying, "let's look at this again" in the light of disabled people and families caring for disabled family members. Yeh right ! with only a month to go we will see, you never know.Disclaimer : Everything I write on this forum is my opinion. I try to be an even-handed poster and accept that you at times may not agree with these opinions or how I choose to express them, this is not my problem. The Disabled : If years cannot be added to their lives, at least life can be added to their years - Alf Morris - ℜ0 -
It's a step in the right direction though Richie. A tiny step, but may allow those disabled people who sleep in separate bedrooms to remain in their homes without downsizing.
I hope they will now look at other people who have no options about where they can live. Example: people living in adapted properties that have an extra room. Or singles/couples in 2 bedroom properties where no one bedroom properties are available.4 Stones and 0 pounds or 25.4kg lighter :j0 -
And now they've said there will be no u turn.... Sad sad sad!4 Stones and 0 pounds or 25.4kg lighter :j0
-
Last year the NHF, the lobby group for HA's released internal data that not one single body either side of the argument disputes, of the 670k affected 180k are single people living in 2 bed social housing properties, in that same year only 68k 1 bed social housing properties were let. So ok there are not enough social 1 bed dwellings available :
- that means that if all 180k wanted to downsize to a 1 bed which GOV say is fair
- then 68k could move to a 1 bed social property
- but the other 112k would have to move to a 1 bed private property
- a 1 bed social housing property is about £10pw cheaper than a 2 bed social housing property
- so the HB saving is £10pw for 68k dwellings that's £680Mi££ionpw or £35.5Mi££ion per year
However
- a 1 bed private property is about £35pw more than a 2 bed social property
- clearly then the HB bill goes up by £35pw for 112k claimants
- an overall increase for those claimants of £3.92Mi££ion per week or 204.5Mi££ion per annum
- so the simple act of downsizing single people from 2 bed social to 1 bed private would increase HB by £169 Mi££ion per annum
- in short the £169Mi££ion per annum increased HB cost is a megga underestimate of how much MORE the bedroom tax will cost the public purse
Or the GOV again has lied when it said it will save money, clearly it does not .. .. save money. They lied about the 75% are faking it when they attacked the old & disabled. They lied about the number of successful appeals when they attacked the old & disabled. Why not lie with the 'bedroom tax' imposed on the nation many of whom are old, ill & disabled.
Old, ill, disabled and supported by their family, friends and communities in a place where they are known, protected and assisted by the mere fact that they have lived in that community for many years. Yes, without a single hint of compassion for those people who were less fortunate or struggling to make ends meet on breadline benefits, the UK GOV's persistent targeting of the poor by trying to remove those claimants who they believe do not deserve benefits – the well-publicised “scroungers”. They have very successfully persuaded the general public [BBC “Saints and Sinners”] that somehow, the responsibility for the state of the economy lies with people who are on welfare benefits, and the media perpetuates that myth. Lets move them elsewhere, it worked before, for example there are places like Auschwitz, Majdanek, Treblinka and others that are currently underutilised and available for immediate re-occupation.Disclaimer : Everything I write on this forum is my opinion. I try to be an even-handed poster and accept that you at times may not agree with these opinions or how I choose to express them, this is not my problem. The Disabled : If years cannot be added to their lives, at least life can be added to their years - Alf Morris - ℜ0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply

Categories
- All Categories
- 352.1K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.5K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.2K Spending & Discounts
- 245.1K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.7K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.5K Life & Family
- 258.9K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards