This so called Bedroom Tax

suki1964

Robbie64 wrote: »

You may have been better off buying the house in the past, you could have bought it (like many others have done) with a generous discount. It's funny how people who complain about someone living in a 3 bedroom council house for 25 years aren't critical of people who decided to buy their council house and then sell it on, often at a handsome profit..

Dont even get me started on that one :mad:

One neighbour, bought cheap, sold high, blew the lot, defaulted on a mortgage, was once again rehoused by the housing exec, and is now back on full housing benefit AND is having new kitchen and bathroom fitted ....

kelpie35

It makes me so angry when I see people who are not grateful for what they have.

If it is causing you so much anger, frustration or whatever OP then move to a smaller property and that will no doubt help someone in your area who is overcrowded.

I do hope you appreciate how lucky you are to have a nice home supplied by your council/housing association.

Jennifer_Jane

claire2k wrote: »

I know it does not affect me and yes it is a reduction in housing benefits AKA bedroom tax does nobody get what i am saying here.
If the council see fit to house you in a property that is too big then how can they say at a future date it is too big. They put you there in the first place

In the totally private world of renting, your landlord can sell the property and kick you out, or put up the rent, decide s/he doesn't like you, and so on. It would be madness to consider your privately-rented accommodation as your "forever home" except in the most exceptional and lucky circumstances. Landlords can die and their beneficiaries decide to live in the house, or sell.

So someone in Council accommodation has never had to worry about that. In my mind, they have been very, very lucky. In addition, people who are single (like my partner who lives and works in London) have to share their privately-rented accommodation with strangers - there are 5 living in his house, in 4 bedrooms. He earns about £26,000 a month, not a high-earner for London.

Why should his - and others', of course - tax go to subsidising people in better accommodation than his. Is that fair?

So that's the world of private renting. Add into that, the fact that there are families who are suffering in insufficiently large accommodation while others have spare rooms. Is this fair?

I think that the era of "entitlement" to a taxpayer-subsidised home for life is unfair to those who don't get it. Yes, get the subsidy, but only for the accommodation you require - or pay the difference.

To those saying that there are no one-bedroomed properties, I refer to my partner's situation above (5 people in a 4-bed house with shared bathroom and communal kitchen and living spaces).

I understand that this is difficult for people, and I'm sympathetic: the choices are difficult (move; suck-up the reduction; or take-in a lodger), but I think this subsidy reduction (which has many exclusions), brings the luxury of having your housing subsidised a little more in line with the world of most taxpayers.

Perhaps, that's why people are not 'getting' your post? Especially, since it doesn't apply to you anyway.

Robbie64

Elzmumof3 wrote: »

I have always said that there should be a clause in council tenancy agreements that states once we dont need the bedrooms we will downsize - half the problems with the housing situation in this country are caused by people being giving a family home 20/30/40/50 years ago, and still being in them when they no longer have children living at home! (and yes i will downsize when my brood leave home in about 20 years haha)!

Actually a lot of the problems with the housing situation were caused by people in the 80s (especially) and the 90s buying their council homes and taking them out of public stock.

It seems that those people who bought their house were treated as being excellent citizens whereas those people who refused on principle to buy their house but continue to live there are somehow the problem.

If someone has lived in the same house for decades it is difficult to give up the property, especially if they have a lot of emotional investment in the property. Yes, people who own their own homes often have to downsize but they can have often then have spare cash as a nice bonus.

Dogger69

claire2k wrote: »

The council gave me the house in the first place with just 1 child, it was technically too big for us then so how can they decide in the future it is too big. :mad:
xx

No one 'gave' you the house, it was not a gift, and it is not yours to keep.

I find that term quite bizarre - you never hear of private tenants referring to being given a house. More evidence of this sense of entitlement associated with social housing?

dandelionclock30

I wouldnt worry about it too much.At the next election Labour will get in and this will be scrapped anyway.

ILW

Robbie64 wrote: »

Actually a lot of the problems with the housing situation were caused by people in the 80s (especially) and the 90s buying their council homes and taking them out of public stock.

It seems that those people who bought their house were treated as being excellent citizens whereas those people who refused on principle to buy their house but continue to live there are somehow the problem.

If someone has lived in the same house for decades it is difficult to give up the property, especially if they have a lot of emotional investment in the property. Yes, people who own their own homes often have to downsize but they can have often then have spare cash as a nice bonus.

And the people who have been paying (in effect) discounted rents for years and years could have saved their own bonus. The sense of entitlement amongst the benefits/social housing types amazes me at times.

kafkathecat

Council homes were meant to be homes for life so that people could put down roots and develop communities. Also far from being subsidised they made a surplus before all the best were sold. There are not enough one bed council properties so people will be forced out into the private rented sector where landlords can charge very high rents and there is little security of tenure. People then complain about the Housing Benefit bill and now people are being moved to parts of the country where jobs are thin on the ground to save money. The ability to do joined up thinking is a rare thing these days. OP you feel like the government have pulled the rug out from under you. It has happened to many people and may happen to some of those whoo have replied so negatively.

atlantis187

This government is all about the rich people
The sooner people realise that the better.

The only thing the poor get from them is cuts, cuts and more cuts

jackieblack

Robbie64 wrote: »

Actually a lot of the problems with the housing situation were caused by people in the 80s (especially) and the 90s buying their council homes and taking them out of public stock.

The problems were not caused by people buying their council homes, but by the councils not re-investing the money from the sale of council homes in building new public housing stock.