Square foot size of room for bedroom tax

mysterywoman10

All of this theorising though will have to be tested a) in the appeals system and b) by the courts.

I personally think they are on a very sticky wicket claiming any bedroom under 50 sq. ft is a bedroom. Regardless of one living room and a kitchen.

cockaleekee

mysterywoman10 wrote: »

Jadey in your case the room would count as a half if it is over 50 sq ft and would be ok for a child under 10. So best thing to do is measure it.

Also check the size of the other child's bedroom because if they were sharing in theory it would need to be 70 - 89 sq ft for one person both children would count as a 1/2 each making one.

To correct you, whether the room would count would depend on the LA's interpretation as to what constitutes a bedroom.

mysterywoman10

I like to think many LA's will see sense in this and if one decides to run with it, then of course it will set a precendent

mysterywoman10

Or a Housing Assocation which has happened here

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

Won't help this poor lady though will it?

http://keepourcouncilhomes.wordpress.com/2012/08/02/victims-of-the-bedroom-tax-sheilas-story/

I think there is going to be so many legal challenges to all of this, if people move into the private rented sector it will end up costing more not reduce the benefit budget!!

I think it is grossly unfair if someone is willing to move if there is no housing stock to move them to either, to expect them to pay in the meantime.

They haven't thought it through and it will come back to bite them in backside!

evenasus

mysterywoman10 wrote: »

I personally think they are on a very sticky wicket claiming any bedroom under 50 sq. ft is a bedroom. Regardless of one living room and a kitchen.

Then there will be an awful lot of estate agents in trouble, for the false description of houses.

There are hundreds of thousands of houses, even newly built houses, that have bedrooms smaller than 50 sq ft.

mysterywoman10

Well sounds like they probably are mis-describing them then Does not surprise me in the least that it has gone unchecked.

Case of left hand not knowing what the RIGHT is doing, such complicated rules etc.

Confuseddot

Just had a quick look on the Miller homes site and not one of the 2nd bedrooms, in their development near me, meets the 50 square feet. It is a very interesting point though so these flats should be classed as 1 bedroom.

evenasus

mysterywoman10 wrote: »

Well sounds like they probably are mis-describing them then Does not surprise me in the least that it has gone unchecked.

Case of left hand not knowing what the RIGHT is doing, such complicated rules etc.

You misunderstand - I was being sarcastic.

I was pointing out that a bedroom of 50 sq ft - is a bedroom.
Plenty of room to put a single bed and a wardrobe.

Good grief, the first house we bought when we married, had a third bedroom 6 ft x 6 ft exactly. 36 sq ft.
It was a new build and all we could afford to purchase at that time.

mysterywoman10

I'm sure it was but times have changed and yes by today's standards it is not a bedroom it's discounted more of a large cupboard !

Sarcasm can sometimes turn out to be a good point and true!

I think some of the new buids 2nd bedrooms sizes are ridiculously small especially in the flats designed for buy-to-let!

Confuseddot

So does that mean that all the building inspectors etc are all breaking the law ? I don't really understand but its late and I may be being blonde