Square foot size of room for bedroom tax

CIS

It will possibly be open to a legal challenge. Because it is condratictory legislation.

Independent pieces of legislation can use different definitions without either being contradictory.

A good example is House in Multiple Occupation (HMO) - a HMO as defined by council tax legislation is different to a HMO as used by planning and licensing.

Any legislation is open to challenge but pulling a definition from another piece of legislation is not guaranteed to work, especially when there isn't a standard definition of a size of a bedroom in common usage.

martinthebandit

The thread title puzzles me.

Could someone please explain to me how refusing to give someone extra benefits so they can have more room than they need can be construed as a tax?

CIS

so they can have more room than they need can be construed as a tax?

'Tax' is better in a headline than 'Social sector size criteria'.

Big_is_beautiful

cockaleekee wrote: »

There is no issue to take up, as I have already stated the LA can set their own definition as to what constitutes a bedroom - they may use 70 sq ft as a size boundary, equally they may use 50 sq ft, or they may not apply a size criteria at all. It is up to them, the information you have quoted is irrelevant.

In your opinion, I think I would prefer to trust someone who has the authority to decide, not someone who thinks they have all the answers.

mysterywoman10

I think just because it was quashed doesn't necessarily mean it is a no goer legally, but I accept your point.

For example they put the Welfare Reform Bill through before our judgement in May 2012. So the legislation isn't that tight.

Another scenerio I have thought of severely disabled man in a ground floor extension/bathroom in a "3" bedroom very small terraced house. His Mum + her partner (who works) is a full time 24/7 carer. One other grown up daughter lives in the 2nd bedroom. The 3rd room is a box room (unoccuppied) although grandchildren sometimes use it and her other daughter has left home.

So from what is being said technically the LA could classify the son's bedroom as a 4th bedroom?

So it's going to be a total postcode lottery yet again!!!

Now if they do what I've said above, I'm not sure that scenerio would be covered by the ruling either. This is all such a shame.

And what makes it worse is SOME people ACTUALLY believe that this is fair and it's going to free up houses !!!

It is a tax / cut to benefits it has nothing to do with space apart from in a very small number of cases and most of those are excluded as they are pensioners!

CIS

And what makes it worse is SOME people ACTUALLY believe that this is fair and it's going to free up houses !!!

In principal I have no objections to the idea however the way it is actually being managed is a farce, its something that needs to be worked as a long term housing policy rather than dropping it in as a immediate change from 1 April 13.

Big_is_beautiful

evenasus wrote: »

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.

You are incorrect, to be classed as a bedroom it must be able to contain a bed, chest of drawers and a wardrobe. You could never fit all that in a room of less than 50sq ft, unless you covered the window and climbed over the drawers to get out of bed.

mysterywoman10

A long term sensibly thought out policy taking all these situations into account would be an entirely different matter. Even if there was some transitional arrangements it might be slightly more reasonable.

The other thing is how are LA's going to cope with all of this, with job freezes etc.? It won't even create any more jobs!

Mrs Motivated a question - when you use the term "Direct Payments" does this mean that tenants will get the money and have to pay the LA/Housing Assocation in future? I'm not up to speed on this aspect of it.

Big_is_beautiful

Dunroamin wrote: »

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

How big is your bedroom? Not that small I expect.

CIS

You are incorrect, to be classed as a bedroom it must be able to contain a bed, chest of drawers and a wardrobe.

Where is this definition from ?