Bedroom Tax and kids living away??

lazer

haras_nosirrah wrote: »

Surely a better way is the plan to give people 5 year tenancies so that if people no longer need the council houses they are moved into private to give someone else a chance.

I remember reading a while ago about someone on here who made my blood boil. She was part of a couple in a council house who paid £400 a month for a 3 bed house in the country somewhere. Between her and her husband they earned £120k a year (own business) and said that they weren't going to move - why should they as they were entitled to the house. They said that they might move one day if they have enough in the bank to buy a house outright and a holiday home in France. If people like this didn't milk the system dry then others like the disabled probably wouldn't be as badly affected as they are now

I disagree - IMO all rentals should be a home for life if they tenents want it and can afford to pay for it (unless landlord wants to sell, move back in etc)

I take it some of you campaigning for 5 year tenancies etc have never rented?
Social Housing is a wondeful thing and people should not be excluded from it because they work and earn their own money, it is the security of tenure (not the cheap rent) that makes it attractive to people even if they can afford to rent privately.
TBH I would sooner give a social house to a working family than a non working (Not disabled) family - the working family do not have the time to cope with the constant moving that private rentals may result in - the non working family do.

The genuinely disabled should be given priority though.

The private rental sector needs reformed with rent caps and more security - who wants to rent a house where the landlord can throw you out on a whim?

Additionally - the landlords need more rights to evict problem tenents.

Social Housing is not subsidised - it is simply cheaper than the extornionate private rentals.

The bedroom tax - In principle I support it but it should be majorily reformed
Your Housing Benefit should not be reduced if:

1) You have applied for a smaller place and not offered any (If you have been offered one and turned it down then reduce the benefits)
2) You have shared care of your children and have them overnight (I always think it is very unfair that the PWC gets all the benefits and the NRP is expected to live in aporperty big enough to house the children, feed and entertain the children while in their care and pay maintenance (even out of benefits)
3) The additional room is a box room (especially in 3 bed houses as the 3rd is often tiny) - or at least the reduction in benefits should not be so high in this case.
4) You are pregnant or other circumstances which mean you will need the house of your current size in the very near future (ie: within 2 years).

plum2002

MissMoneypenny wrote: »

The other problem is that that was a protest about paying something to the government. It happened before in the early 1980s when Red Ken decided that every household in Greater London would receive an additional council tax bill as he wanted to make the tube train fares very cheap. Those of us who had to use the normail rail service to get to work as we didn't have any tube stations near us, also got this additional bill. Too many of us refused to pay the extra tax and they couldn't jail us all, so that was the end of Red Ken's plan. And those that had got a rebate on their annual tube ticket, had to repay that rebate (even though many had spent it).

I know I said yesterday that it is too late for social tenants' on benefits to protest this bedroom benefit reduction as they and other claimants did nothing when this happened to private renters on benefits, but benefits are about taking something from the government, or rather the taxpayer.

People can refuse to pay taxes to the government as the people control their own money, but with benefits, you are asking for money to be given to you and the government control the welfare states money. Plus the government will have a lot of support with these 'housing according to needs' benefits reductions, from those who pay taxes and don't claim income based benefits.

I am aware of that, I was involved in peaceful protests during that time. My point was that if people want to protest and create change there is a precedent.

Incidentally, I don't claim ANY benefits, and I don't live in a rented property, social or otherwise, doesn't mean I think this plan has been well thought through especially with regard to those who are disabled.

Morlock

evenasus wrote: »

I was just pointing out your statement is incorrect.

I know it doesn't apply solely to social housing - but it certainly includes them.

It is not unknown for people to believe that social housing is rent free, which of course it isn't. Rent free, and having full rent covered by housing benefit, are not the same thing.

evenasus

Morlock wrote: »

It is not unknown for people to believe that social housing is rent free, which of course it isn't. Rent free, and having full rent covered by housing benefit, are not the same thing.

So if a family is living in a council house, having all their rent and council tax paid for by the council - they are not getting it free?

Can you please explain why it isn't free to them?

plum2002

evenasus wrote: »

So if a family is living in a council house, having all their rent and council tax paid for by the council - they are not getting it free?

Can you please explain why it isn't free to them?

But the property is not rent free, rent is being paid.

evenasus

plum2002 wrote: »

But the property is not rent free, rent is being paid.

Silly me, of course it is - by tax payers/council tax payers - like myself!

Certainly not by the people living in it - it's free to them!

Lip_Stick

There's an article about this in my local paper today, and apologies if it's already been pointed out but it states...

Under the new law, tenants are allowed one bedroom for every adult couple, one room for any other single adult aged over 16, one room for any two children of the same sex under 16, any two children under ten and one room for any other child whose main home is elsewhere.

So wouldn't the OP be ok where they are or is the info wrong?

Mojisola

Lip_Stick wrote: »

Under the new law, tenants are allowed one bedroom for every adult couple, one room for any other single adult aged over 16, one room for any two children of the same sex under 16, any two children under ten and one room for any other child whose main home is elsewhere.

That can't be right otherwise a child who didn't live at the house would be entitled to a room of their own while those who lived at the house would have to share.

notanewuser

Lip_Stick wrote: »

There's an article about this in my local paper today, and apologies if it's already been pointed out but it states...

Under the new law, tenants are allowed one bedroom for every adult couple, one room for any other single adult aged over 16, one room for any two children of the same sex under 16, any two children under ten and one room for any other child whose main home is elsewhere.

So wouldn't the OP be ok where they are or is the info wrong?

Can you link to the article please?

Witch_Hazel

notanewuser wrote: »

Can you link to the article please?

Google threw this up
http://www.thisishullandeastriding.co.uk/Bedroom-tax-force-Hull-couple-20-years/story-18190460-detail/story.html#axzz2LN0W14nz

But I suspect the paper got their facts incorrect, as many NRP who have their children at the weekends wouldn't be up in arms about the bedroom tax.
As I thought:

'Bedroom tax' will affect council and housing association tenants under retirement age.
The size of the home you can rent without being affected by this cut will be:

• one bedroom for a couple
• one bedroom for a person aged 16 or over
• one bedroom for two children aged under 16 of the same sex
• one bedroom for two children aged under 10 (boys and girls are expected to share a room)
• one extra bedroom if you or your partner needs an overnight carer to stay.

You won't be allowed to claim housing benefit for rooms above this limit that are used for:

• foster children
• couples who use separate bedrooms because of illness
• children visiting a divorced or separated parent
• disabled adults.

http://england.shelter.org.uk/get_advice/housing_benefit_and_local_housing_allowance/housing_benefit_changes_2013