Please sign This petition Ian Duncan Smith to live on £53 a week.

neverdespairgirl

bigboybrother wrote: »

There can be no justification on the basis that they don't claim benefits to entitle anyone to occupy a property that is oversized. All that is happening is to make the divide between the renters on benefit and the outright owners that much bigger. Them and us!

There is an absolutely crucial difference.

People who own a house have paid for it, or are continuing to pay for it.

People who rent a house and pay their own rent are sorted.

People who rent a house AND have their rent or part of it paid for them are not in the same position.

gezzerboy

bomb_the_cherry wrote: »

Oh really? I'd happily try self employment if I had any profitable skills, or any ideas for a business, or the finances to start something up. But I have none of those. Any bright ideas for me, seeing as you seem to know so much?

This is exactly why this country is in trouble, you dont have to be a brain surgeon to have ideas, likewise you can learn skills ! go back to school, college , re-educate yourself. You dont get anything for nothing in this world you have to go and get it ... Unless you have 8 kids by 3 different woman then you get a house, benfits and the opportunity to sit on you !!!! all day long

Pollycat

bomb_the_cherry wrote: »

Oh really? I'd happily try self employment if I had any profitable skills, or any ideas for a business, or the finances to start something up. But I have none of those. Any bright ideas for me, seeing as you seem to know so much?

gezzerboy wrote: »

This is exactly why this country is in trouble, you dont have to be a brain surgeon to have ideas, likewise you can learn skills ! go back to school, college , re-educate yourself. You dont get anything for nothing in this world you have to go and get it ... Unless you have 8 kids by 3 different woman then you get a house, benfits and the opportunity to sit on you !!!! all day long

gezzerboy
I totally agree with you.

The problem is that some people expect things to be handed to them on a plate or to drop into their lap.

And it seems that this Govt is determined to change that.

mysterywoman10

skintmacflint wrote: »

Other than asking the potential lodger to pay for his own check if you felt it was so necessary , can't understand the logic in why you'd expect someone else or any government funding to pay it on your behalf?

If you read the link you can't CRB check yourself either unless you are self-employed.

Not that I'm saying a CRB check is essential for having a lodger. Mine are all EU students/interns who are working locally in industry or schools (so have been CRB checked for the latter). I think for a vulnerable person it would be a different matter, to have a stranger in their home.

Ours are not treated as lodgers either, we make them part of the family and help with their English, we provide meals, do a lot of things for them, which is why we get a lot of repeat business and recommendations from companies etc. The other benefit being is they stay for a while and then go again and we get different ones. It is entirely different than someone who might be there for an indefinite period.

Anyway it isn't an option for many until October, because at the moment they would loose benefits so be no better off, worse off if you factor in costs of which they can be more than people think, with extra heating, hot water etc.

I looked last night for private accommodation in our area and I could find barely any house/flat shares at £60 a week about 2 and none would take anyone on benefits. I really don't think someone has a choice about moving from say a 2 bed SH flat on £71 a week, they will have to take the hit of £14 a week bringing them back to the £57.

Those who say they are looking for solutions to cope with the problem is fine to a point, but if there are no jobs being created or accommodation available then a long term solution is much more difficult to come by. Particularly for people aged over 50.

It all hangs on work being available and a decent living wage.

mazza111

Dunroamin - I know how the system works. I worked as a support worker to care leavers. Application is made to housing 3 months before they are due to leave care. If a property isn't found for them within that time, they go onto the homeless list, this happens more often that not. If you can't read that the application should be made first, then you're lacking somewhere. Then to scatter flats, then to their own SH flats/houses. In the meantime many are supported to help them gain independence and hopefully work.

Why on earth should they not be enabled to gain Social Housing? What makes them so difference from the rest of the population? Anyone in the country can apply for social housing. So now we should exclude kids who have no home? Bonkers! Or give them shared private accommodation that costs twice as much? Bonkers! It's doable on £56/week, but it's a struggle for them. It will be more of a struggle for those who have been allocated 2 bedroom flats, especially those in our 2nd tower blocks. I have worked with many kids, who have gone on to build successful lives from this good start. I've seen some fail. I've only mentioned the 2 because those I see regularly.

If they want to bring this in, let's make it a £56 all round. Under 25s. Over 25s. Pensioners. Those on ESA. Can you imagine the uproar?

seven-day-weekend

I think Dunroamin's point was (and it is certainly mine) - why should not these kids who leave care share a place (and therefore share the rent and all the bills and running expenses), like other kids do? It's cheaper for them and for the taxpayer.

And it's all very well saying anyone can go on the housing list - that's as maybe, but how many single people without a disability will be given accommodation? Precious few, certainly not single 17-year-olds. So why should kids leaving care be any different?

My son asked if he could go on the Housing list - 'yes'- and what chance he had of getting anything -'none' was the answer. He was sharing a house with two others at the time, so why is it not possible for care leavers to do this as well? It would be better for them as they could be more independent.

Dunroamin

mazza111 wrote: »

Dunroamin - I know how the system works. I worked as a support worker to care leavers. Application is made to housing 3 months before they are due to leave care. If a property isn't found for them within that time, they go onto the homeless list, this happens more often that not. If you can't read that the application should be made first, then you're lacking somewhere. Then to scatter flats, then to their own SH flats/houses. In the meantime many are supported to help them gain independence and hopefully work.

That may happen in your area but, fortunately, it doesn't happen everywhere.

Why on earth should they not be enabled to gain Social Housing? What makes them so difference from the rest of the population? Anyone in the country can apply for social housing. So now we should exclude kids who have no home?

It's allocating them social housing that makes them different from the rest of the population - nobody else in that situation would have a hope in hell of being given social housing, they'd go and share a place when they left home.

Bonkers! Or give them shared private accommodation that costs twice as much? Bonkers! It's doable on £56/week, but it's a struggle for them. It will be more of a struggle for those who have been allocated 2 bedroom flats, especially those in our 2nd tower blocks. I have worked with many kids, who have gone on to build successful lives from this good start. I've seen some fail. I've only mentioned the 2 because those I see regularly.

I'm glad you think it's doable, so do I. It seems to be other people who don't. Mind you, much more doable to live on this amount in shared accommodation with others to split the bills with.

If they want to bring this in, let's make it a £56 all round. Under 25s. Over 25s. Pensioners. Those on ESA. Can you imagine the uproar?

I have to repeat, we do not want to make healthy young people (whether care leavers or not) too comfortable living on benefits - it's just about the worst thing anybody could do for them.

nannytone_2

care leavers arent the same as other young people though.
most under 25's have families, and homes... if they choose to say at home is a different matter.

a care leaver is forced out at 18

seven-day-weekend

nannytone wrote: »

care leavers arent the same as other young people though.
most under 25's have families, and homes... if they choose to say at home is a different matter.

a care leaver is forced out at 18

But why can't they share with others?

nannytone_2

mp pmr says they cant. but if they are allocated a property, they shouldnt be punished. they are already at a disadvantage to the rest of the population.

no that many 18 year olds are expected to fend for themselves, and care leavers should be no different