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

Dunroamin

dandelionclock30 wrote: »

Foster placements are in very high demand and a lot of Local Authorities want the places freed asap, never mind someone hanging on until they are 21!.

So, you're all for kicking them out at 21 if they want to stay in a settled situation then? Perhaps we should go back to doing this at 16, as used to be the case?

dandelionclock30

No I never said that did I?

rochja

It is so good to see how far this thread has moved away from a silly petition against a politician who hasn't mastered his craft well enough to avoid being blindsided and on to real issues. Mature debate is not dead.

nannytone_2

Dunroamin wrote: »

So, you're all for kicking them out at 21 if they want to stay in a settled situation then? Perhaps we should go back to doing this at 16, as used to be the case?

dandelion clock didnt say that at all!
it was saod previously that care leavers could stay with foster families AFTER the age of 18, but the placements are so in demand for children under 18, that they are in effect forced out to make way for someone younger. thats if they were fortunate enough to be placed with a foster family in the first place.

in response to the post from someone who had first hand experience of leaving care in 1884 you said that 'it was harder then'/
and it's easu npw? with record levels of youth unemployment and benefit cuts?

i have a feeling that bo matter what anyone said, you would find a reason to disagree.

i was suprised that mazza says there are no opportunities to rent a room in her area, but she knows her area, so i accept what she is saying.

in my area there are ample opportunities to rent a room ... but no one to rent them!

Dunroamin

nannytone wrote: »

dandelion clock didnt say that at all!
it was saod previously that care leavers could stay with foster families AFTER the age of 18, but the placements are so in demand for children under 18, that they are in effect forced out to make way for someone younger. thats if they were fortunate enough to be placed with a foster family in the first place.

in response to the post from someone who had first hand experience of leaving care in 1884 you said that 'it was harder then'/
and it's easu npw? with record levels of youth unemployment and benefit cuts?

i have a feeling that bo matter what anyone said, you would find a reason to disagree.

i was suprised that mazza says there are no opportunities to rent a room in her area, but she knows her area, so i accept what she is saying.

in my area there are ample opportunities to rent a room ... but no one to rent them!

The majority of children in care are now in foster homes rather than residential care so "fortunate" doesn't really come into it.

There were major changes to arrangements for care leavers about 10 years ago which meant that they were no longer "thrown out" at 16 as happened to Elle - this was what I meant by improvements, as I explained. As a foster parent at the time (as well as having some professional experience) I was aware of the differences the changes made.

Apart from the reduction of HB to those in 2 bed council flats (which will affect very few care leavers) there have been no reductions of benefits, unless you consider a low rate of increase to be a reduction.

bloolagoon

mazza111 wrote: »

Right I've had a look and there are NO houseshares in this area whatsoever. The closest to rent a room is in Glasgow. At £325/month is more expensive than a 1/2 bedroom council flat. Not to mention if they were putting 2 care leavers in there on benefits... MUCH more.

None of the kids in care I worked with had the option to stay on with foster parents or go back to their parents.

How is it going to be any easier for them in a more expensive flat share than it is in a council place?

Bloolagoon I agree that they can become targets for the vultures. I am happy to say that we managed to avoid those scenarios. I'm not going to say it's easy for these kids leaving care, cos at £57/week coming in at first, it's darned hard. But I don't see sharing as being any more beneficial to them.

My lass chose to leave home as I've said on many occasions and managed well all the time she was working full time. We are in a unique situation (or not... after reading more on these threads) that we have a good stock of 2 bedroom flats. As it turned out, the lass got a 1 bedroom property that had been empty for about a year. Purely because no one wanted to spend the money on it that was required. She had plenty of parental support (well from one parent anyhoo ) but i do feel care leavers should be given more support for longer if they need it. It seems like we abandon them way too early.

I do agree with the mentoring thing to start with and could be an option away from flat sharing. I just don't see how a flat share that is more expensive should be an option, nor do I think they should be penalised for being in care and not given the same chances to apply for SH as everyone else has.

I do not think we would ever agree re people sharing, you seem very against this idea but you have to realise that the entire of the UK is not your back yard. My friends children can be in their 30's and still at home, no one gets offered a place of their own, it's not normal.

Your parents, yourself, your ex and now your daughter have all been allocated social housing, despite working and not being in need when allocated. This is for many in the UK not normality, even those with difficulties are often placed into private rental as there are no social housing available. Your daughters flat lay empty for 1 year due to cosmetic needs yet no one wanted that flat for over a year, can you not see how this isn't the normality for the rest of the country? Just because your area has an abundance of 2 bedrooms and therefore 2 bed I assume are empty (hence no one wanting your daughters initial 1 bedroom without painting it), as the LA would never have allowed a property to go empty for over a year if anyone was on a list.

You have to look at the bigger picture, not just your own small window. We have care leavers, those leaving mental health schemes, disabled and vulnerable in private rental whom have been on the SH list for some time, why they should be denied because someone wants a spare room is beyond me (and them).

If someone only has £56 a week to live off then sharing is cheaper, the bills will be halved and utilities - particularly Standing/Rental charges make up more than the usage, will account for most of their money.

We are letting them down and keeping them on benefits whilst giving them 2 bedrooms they cannot afford. What you are suggesting is that someone loses £10 pw from an already limited budget for a spare room, I am saying this is total madness and they need to move, no one should live like that, they need to move if they have been let down.

Long Term then they need to house 2 tenants given 1 bedroom allocations in a single 2 bedroom, this freeing up a whole other house for a family and also lowering their bills.

seven-day-weekend

bloolagoon wrote: »

I do not think we would ever agree re people sharing, you seem very against this idea but you have to realise that the entire of the UK is not your back yard. My friends children can be in their 30's and still at home, no one gets offered a place of their own, it's not normal.

Your parents, yourself, your ex and now your daughter have all been allocated social housing, despite working and not being in need when allocated. This is for many in the UK not normality, even those with difficulties are often placed into private rental as there are no social housing available. Your daughters flat lay empty for 1 year due to cosmetic needs yet no one wanted that flat for over a year, can you not see how this isn't the normality for the rest of the country? Just because your area has an abundance of 2 bedrooms and therefore 2 bed I assume are empty (hence no one wanting your daughters initial 1 bedroom without painting it), as the LA would never have allowed a property to go empty for over a year if anyone was on a list.

You have to look at the bigger picture, not just your own small window. We have care leavers, those leaving mental health schemes, disabled and vulnerable in private rental whom have been on the SH list for some time, why they should be denied because someone wants a spare room is beyond me (and them).

If someone only has £56 a week to live off then sharing is cheaper, the bills will be halved and utilities - particularly Standing/Rental charges make up more than the usage, will account for most of their money.

We are letting them down and keeping them on benefits whilst giving them 2 bedrooms they cannot afford. What you are suggesting is that someone loses £10 pw from an already limited budget for a spare room, I am saying this is total madness and they need to move, no one should live like that, they need to move if they have been let down.

Long Term then they need to house 2 tenants given 1 bedroom allocations in a single 2 bedroom, this freeing up a whole other house for a family and also lowering their bills.

I've quoted this post so that people can read it again, absolutely brilliant post.

Where I live, social housing is like gold dust and most single people, especially single seventeen year olds without a disability and/or children, would not get one. Houseshare is very common for young people in their twenties and early thirties and in fact is considered the norm. Where my son works he has gone up in status in his colleagues' eyes because he has his own two-bedroomed flat at the age of 33.

I particularly agree with the last paragraph in blogaloon's post.

bloolagoon

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

I've quoted this post so that people can read it again, absolutely brilliant post.

Where I live, social housing is like gold dust and most single people, especially single seventeen year olds without a disability and/or children, would not get one. Houseshare is very common for young people in their twenties and early thirties and in fact is considered the norm. Where my son works he has gone up in status in his colleagues' eyes because he has his own two-bedroomed flat at the age of 33.

I particularly agree with the last paragraph in blogaloon's post.

I think personal observations often lead to opinions, I can understand why Mazza does not see merits in sharing as if there are 2 beds that would lie empty it makes no sense for sharing but yes I find this a very unique situation. From her window where SH is empty for a long time, no waiting lists and no one on a waiting list, I understand their view point, but it isn't my normality and certainly not others.

If you look at EllieJMorgan (I hope I have that right), she highlighted perfectly how easy it is for a young care leaver to be placed in a bedsit (with limited space, access to cook meals, access to freezers etc) for a long period of time. That is really the normality. As that poster said, they found it hard to budget, partly due to being in a bedsit and partly because it is existence level benefits.

seven-day-weekend

A houseshare is loads better than a bedsit.

mazza111

Dunroamin wrote: »

How are they being penalised when no other young person would be allocated a council flat? They are actually being put in this position specifically because they have been in care!

To answer that part then the other bits that you answered inside the quote. If they weren't allowed to apply for council housing, then that's a penalty. Anyone can apply for council housing. Because they become homeless they are given priority, like anyone else who is priority. As you suggested they shouldn't be allocated council properties then this would be penalising them.

I don't think that you can possibly say this with any degree of accuracy. I doubt very much that you've spent the night trawling card ads in newsagents windows and the other sorts of places where people advertise, much less know anything about the way people find rentals through word of mouth.

Of course I haven't. I've checked all the online ones and the local paper I had to hand. Which is what most people would do when looking for accommodation. There are none advertised in this area.

Again, I'm afrad that you miss the point that sharing is going to be cheaper because there is at least one other person with whom to share bills and no buildings insurance to pay. If benefits are paying the rent then the amount of money you have to spend on utilities is crucial. In addition, in your own flat, you have to furnish and equip it yourself (although care leavers receive a grant for this) and also cover emergency costs if, for example, your cooker breaks down. In a flat/house share this is the LL's responsibility and one less thing to worry about/pay for.

You don't have buildings insurance in council properties either. You do have contents insurance. Which I personally would have in a shared house too. So that point is moot. I have already said that they would share on bills. And actually a lot of care leavers don't receive this grant now, it was the community care grant, and it's very hard to get, although care leavers got it more easily than other homeless people. Charities are relied on greatly when it comes to homeless people and care leavers furnishing their flats.

So paying double the rent is ok for the tax payers. I honestly believe if they were doing this, you would find something else to moan about.