Will The Bedroom Tax Affect Me?

princessdon

Morlock wrote: »

If the housing crisis gets much worse, a logical step is to penalise home owners for under-occupying, they have the highest under-occupancy rate of all housing sectors. The other solution is to preferably build more housing, but that doesn't seem to be an urgent solution as the housing bubble would burst.



But there is no bedroom tax in private rentals, I've seen two cases on this forum alone in the last couple of days where LHA claimants have a spare room with no penalty.

Room allowance is based on occupancy. The rate set at lower 30% so yes there are some allocated more rooms, often in areas people won't want. So lets say an additional room is 15% more costly on average, it leaves half of that 30% that can afford larger places.

If you think there are plentiful then SH tenants who do not want to pay the tax have a lot of choice when they move sectors.

princessdon

Morlock wrote: »

But it can often cover rent on a larger property than the LHA rate dictates with no bedroom tax implications. Also, the one-bedroom rate is often more than the rental cost of a two-bedroom social housing property, there should be no disparity in the amount a social or private tenant is entitled to when claiming housing benefits.

Agreed if the 1.8 billion in grants paid to HA is given to private landlords.

Morlock

notanewuser wrote: »

If you seriously think that's a go-er then you need your head tested.

Whether you think it is a no go-er or not, that is the current housing situation in the UK.

notanewuser wrote: »

Surely that just means they've found a really cheap house?!

With no bedroom tax, as in the social housing sector.

notanewuser

What are your circumstances, Morlock? I'm trying to understand how anybody could believe what you believe!!!

bargainbetty

Morlock wrote: »

Home owners could still be penalised for spare rooms using the same criteria.

OK, not a problem. Take it out of my housing benefit. Oh, that's right, I don't get any. Morlock, an owner already pays a premuim for the extra room in the house price, and in the council tax bandings for larger properties. Seriously, get over it.

Have you even considered the possibility of how to implement such a policy? Would it be based on the local market rental prices, square footage, proximity to public transport or what?

It's also worth mentioning that for the last 18 months, I've had a lodger, who happened to be a good friend moving down from Yorkshire. I charged under market rent because it is a small room (could only have a 4ft wide bed, not a double) and is therefore fairly unsuitable for a 'real' rental room, but fine for a mate who chips in towards the bills.

I'm just sending off the forms for my single person discount now, since he is moving in with his girlfriend this weekend. I will not, however, be taking in another lodger, as I want to redecorate and have a bit of private space. Since it is MY home, that I pay for with MY money, the state can take its council tax and s*d off.

Poppie68

notanewuser wrote: »

What are your circumstances, Morlock? I'm trying to understand how anybody could believe what you believe!!!

I've been wondering the same thing is he a jealous home owner wannabe or someone who is really disgruntled and peeved that his housing benefit is being reduced.

Dunroamin

Morlock wrote: »

But it can often cover rent on a larger property than the LHA rate dictates with no bedroom tax implications. Also, the one-bedroom rate is often more than the rental cost of a two-bedroom social housing property, there should be no disparity in the amount a social or private tenant is entitled to when claiming housing benefits.

I think that's reasonable. Then we could put social housing rents up to a similar level to the private sector and use the excess to build more social housing.

Dunroamin

notanewuser wrote: »

What are your circumstances, Morlock? I'm trying to understand how anybody could believe what you believe!!!

Long time resident of Lala Land?

evenasus

notanewuser wrote: »

What are your circumstances, Morlock? I'm trying to understand how anybody could believe what you believe!!!

Poppie68 wrote: »

I've been wondering the same thing is he a jealous home owner wannabe or someone who is really disgruntled and peeved that his housing benefit is being reduced.

I think you're probably right with both those assumptions Poppie68

ChopinonaBudget

Morlock wrote: »

If the housing crisis gets much worse, a logical step is to penalise home owners for under-occupying, they have the highest under-occupancy rate of all housing sectors.

I literally cannot work out whether you are being serious or not with this.