Square foot size of room for bedroom tax

mysterywoman10

LOL Good point! Not sure but it does seem srange how new buildings are beng created with bedrooms that are not bedrooms in terms of size!

mysterywoman10

Well seems a very grey area but did find this saying that LA's state minimum sizes when granting extensions etc.!

http://www.homebuilding.co.uk/advice/existing-homes/extending/20-things-you-need-know-extending-your-home

bright_side

My thoughts exactly! The house I recently downsized from had 2 teeny tiny bedrooms. It was only built 15 years ago so I don't see how it was 'allowed' to be built that way if according to the housing act, bedrooms have to be of a certain size?

mysterywoman10

I think it's another case of the left not knowing what the right is saying/doing so it isn't actually in Building Regs but seems to being enforced if you want to extend which seems very bizarre!
But not for new builds!

I think there is a strong case that a "box room" under 50 sq ft is not actually a bedroom and that Estate Agents should be describing it accordingly.

mysterywoman10

It also says that landings should be a minimum of 90cm wide ours is 800cm house is 25 years old and it's a very bad feature of it such a narrow landing.

Still no one could possibly sleep in it!

mysterywoman10

Well the housing act 1985 defines overcrowding not how buildings should be built.

But it does clearly state that a room under 50 sq ft is not suitable to sleep in! It isn't actually that small an area 50 sq ft it's just over 7ft x 7ft which is 49 sq feet!

mrs_motivated

cockaleekee wrote: »

You could use it as support towards an argument where you do have a very small room, but the LA could choose to follow a different line of reasoning for the simple fact that this definition is not directly applicable to this measure.

It is as simple as that - the definition of a bedroom is entirely at the discretion of the LA.

Spot on!

I only know of one landlord who is re-classifying 500 of its 3 bedroom properties into 2. There are other reasons behind them doing this not just the bedroom tax and they are in a position where it makes more sense to take the hit on the reduced rent they will have to charge.

Mysterywoman posted a link to the Guardian article about them.

Dunroamin

mysterywoman10 wrote: »

I think it's another case of the left not knowing what the right is saying/doing so it isn't actually in Building Regs but seems to being enforced if you want to extend which seems very bizarre!
But not for new builds!

I think there is a strong case that a "box room" under 50 sq ft is not actually a bedroom and that Estate Agents should be describing it accordingly.

But 7' by 7' is quite a reasonable size for a single bedroom and certainly not just a boxroom.

mysterywoman10

I appreciate this but it is discounted when assessing overcrowding. Many rooms will be much smaller than this.

Yes LA's can discount it, but it is an issue that hasn't totally been covered by the "new" legislation i.e. Welfare Reform Billwhich is secondary legislation. It will possibly be open to a legal challenge. Because it is condratictory legislation.

mrs_motivated

In spite of what I am saying. I am totally against most of the welfare reforms. whilst reform was needed, it has been rushed without proper thought about the consequences and anomalies between one change and another and it severely impacting on the most vulnerable in society.

I think you are onto a loser about the bedroom sizes , the was raised by housing providers in the very early days and was quashed.

I have spoken to over 170 tenants face to face who are affected by this and asked them what they were planning to do. Some wanted to downsize ( however ten months later, I have only managed to help 3 people to do that). Most said they would pay and stay (even if it meant doing without food one day a week). None of the ones I interviewed thought that getting a job was a realistic option, NOT I hasten to add because they are lazy (some would love a job but are well aware they will not get one primarily due to health, low educational ability and a whole host of other problems which in an employers eyes makes them unemployable, particularly in a pick and choose job market).

Virtually The whole housing sector is against what is happening and direct payments is scaring the hell out of them.

Lets hope there is a rethink on some of the most crazy reforms.

PS. Next week, there will be an article on a variety of people (all in different circumstances affected by this) in a credible national newspaper. I will post the link when it is published.