BENEFIT CAP-Down almost £7000 help!!!

millie.molly.mandy

Rylynn wrote: »

Can I just say they did not have children out of ignorance as you put it, many had children cos they wanted them and some because birth control was not around in the way that it is now. I thought that was most offensive to say they were ignorant and as my mother and father came from large families you are calling my grandparents ignorant which I do take offence to.

Rant over.

RL

I can assure you that in my father in laws case, it was ignorance of his parents. His mother openly admitted in later life that she wasn't aware of the facts of life.
The OP cannot use ignorance as an excuse, maybe she did want six children, but what we have to ask is in this day and age is it practical whether you want six or not.
Clearly in her case is was not a wise decision in the light of her current position.

MissMoneypenny

redskyatnight wrote: »

Also, with regard to the housing benefit cap in London, again, I feel a bit sorry for them, because although some may say that 'if working people cannot afford to live there, why should people on benefits?' : many people have grown up there and have their roots there, and it's not their fault that the property prices/rents in London are so stupidly high.

I was born and grew up in London: as did my parents, my grandparents, most of my great grandparents and most of my great, great, grandparents etc. That shouldn't give me the right to get other people to pay for me to live in London.

Just because someone was "born in London" doesn't mean that the welfare state (other people) should pay for them to live there. People need to learn to cut their cloth accordingly and before the overly generous welfare payments of the last decade came in, that's what we did. When I couldn't afford a house in London, I moved out and commuted into London for work; but that was in the days before all these crazy high welfare payments came in.

It's wrong that the welfare state should pay for people to live in high rent areas. Those claimants don't want to work as they then couldn't afford to pay their own rents in those areas. It's the welfare state (the bringing in of LHA) that has been pushing up the rents, especially in places such as London and the SE.

The problem is that many claimants have only ever known the generous welfare system of the last 10/15 years and are now finding it a shock that we are going back to what we had before.

It would be much better if we followed the Netherlands latest welfare changes and just have a flat rate of housing benefit for the whole country. At least the UK changes are a step in the right direction but more changes are needed to make people realise that if they want choices in life, then they have to work to be able to pay for them.

BigAunty

edeneve wrote: »

Hi there, I am also the single mum of 6 kids and I really don't understand of you say you cannot manage on only £500 per week?
...

The OP doesn't get £500 disposable income per week - where did you pluck that figure from? I agree that she used to get a sum in excess of this by the sounds of it and was also previously exempt from having to pay towards her council tax (and potentially, the rent).

The OP does receive around £480 per week according to the benefit calculators but immediately loses £15 to council tax. Seemingly it was £90 a week higher to start with with no CT to pay.

I acknowledge that the changes she experiences isn't going to engender much sympathy as the cap appears to be a popular policy with the public by all accounts but why are posters hounding her?.

In context, her benefits have reduced by approx 18% overnight, around £105 per week or £455 a month or £5,500 per year. Who wouldn't feel the pinch of a dip in income of this size, whether its income from student finance, benefits or employment? It's an enormous change to have to deal with. Who wouldn't reel from this?

This is a big sudden drop which has clearly caused a panic to someone who evidently feels that as she couldn't manage on the original £570 per week (and no CT to pay), so how on earth can she cope with this big loss?

I simply re-iterate that this is not the place for judgemental posts and I would prefer if people could follow the forum rules and etiquette and post constructive advice.

I have urged the OP to download the budget planner and take back control of her budget, rather than being engulfed by the chaos of unplanned spend.

She should undertake a systematic review of her household expenses and use this website to identify the cheapest tariffs, how to cut energy consumption, how to shop for cheap groceries, frugal recipes and so forth.

She needs advice on the discipline of budgeting which involves planning how to spend and sticking directly with the plan, tips on how to slash household spending, how to avoid debt.

She clearly has no confidence in her ability to budget, based on her previous experience of not managing on a greater sum, and she needs to know that she can actually get on top of it and get back into control despite her negative experience of managing her money to date. Some positive coaching would help draw her out of her panic and onto the budget planner and money saving research.

Mojisola

BigAunty wrote: »

In context, her benefits have reduced by approx 18% overnight, around £105 per week or £455 a month or £5,500 per year. Who wouldn't feel the pinch of a dip in income of this size, whether its income from student finance, benefits or employment? It's an enormous change to have to deal with. Who wouldn't reel from this?

But it's been known about for ages - plenty of time to make plans and actually reduce spending well before the cap came in and build up a small nest-egg for emergencies.

~Chameleon~

BigAunty wrote: »

In context, her benefits have reduced by approx 18% overnight, around £105 per week or £455 a month or £5,500 per year. Who wouldn't feel the pinch of a dip in income of this size, whether its income from student finance, benefits or employment? It's an enormous change to have to deal with. Who wouldn't reel from this?

Anybody with teenage children leaving FE loses a similar amount per week. People adjust, they have to.

How about people with mortgages when the interest rates rise. They're not going to stay this low forever. Remember the 15% interest rates of the 80s? They have no choice but to pay otherwise their home is repossessed then they have to move to wherever they can find cheaper housing.

That's life I'm afraid!

itch_for_a_glitch

HappyMJ wrote: »

If you choose not to pay your council tax then don't worry about it too much. They'll get a liability order. You then start negotiations with council to pay the council tax direct from your benefit at a rate of £3.60 a week. You will not be going to prison for not paying your council tax.

On behalf of all;) the full council tax payers in the East Midlands, and no doubt the rest of the country,


Thanks for suggesting non-payment of CT is a minor misdemeanor, and increasing costs for councils.
I take it you have suggestions as to where councils should make further cuts, should people decide to not meet their obligations.
I wonder how much it costs to administer someone who decides not to pay their council tax ?


For the OP I post an excerpt from the website of a council near me :-

Bailiff Action

After a liability order has been granted the Council can instruct bailiffs to collect the debt. Before doing this the Council must send a final warning letter advising that it is going to refer the matter to the bailiff and advising of the possible costs involved in this action.
Once an account has been passed to the bailiff, all dealings must be done directly with them.
The bailiffs will visit and try to obtain full payment, if payment in full is made on the first visit a fee of £24.50 will be charged. If the bailiffs have to visit a second time an additional fee of £18.00 will also be payable.
If you are unable to pay the debt in full and require further time to make the payment, the bailiff will normally enter into a walking possession agreement with you. He will make an inventory of your goods up to the sale value of the debt and any costs. You will be required to sign this agreement and there will be more costs added to the debt. Provided you keep to the agreement to pay the bailiff, there will be no further costs. If you refuse to sign a walking possession agreement the bailiff may decide to remove your goods immediately.
When goods are subject to a walking possession agreement they cannot be disposed of without the bailiffs permission. If you break the agreement made with the bailiff he may, if you have a signed the agreement, re-enter your property by force, if necessary, to take the goods.
If the bailiff believes that the goods may be disposed of he may take close possession of them, which means he stays on the premises until the debt is paid, or he may remove goods to the value of the debt immediately. You will have to pay any costs of removal and sale of the goods as well as any storage fees.


It may be that these actions are rarely taken, but money is tight and things change, hows your luck ?