This so called Bedroom Tax

Claire212

Commercial Rents? Please don't get me started on this!

Yes, it is reasonable to assume that people who are under occupying houses owned by the council should be required to downsize whatever the cicumstances. Working or claiming HB or LHA. If you refuse to downsize then yes, you should have to contribute to costs.

However, private and council houses differ dramatically. As do the tenancy agreements. Council housing in our area comes with no carpets, can be in any state of repair/decoration ranging from reasonable, down to bare plaster. You are required to decorate/fill in the holes in the walls etc as part of the agreement, essentially leave the house, often in a better state of repair than you found it. If you don't the council can refuse repairs.

If you are lucky and the council come round to sort out the massive damp issues, tear down your wall paper in the process and damage the carpet. Tough. You are responsible for decorating again. No compensation. I understand this is often council policy, although there may be exceptions.

So, by all means charge people commercial rent for the council houses, but firstly they all need to be decorated, carpeted and brought up to a standard you would expect for the going rents. Because that is not how they are given.

This is why people are so against this bedroom tax. 25 years of decoration and care going into a house. Furious at the thought of having to pay more for it, just because they have an extra room. And I understand that but many will put up with this because of the promise of a secure tenancy.

It's a tough one.

Morlock

kafkathecat wrote: »

Also far from being subsidised they made a surplus before all the best were sold.

Don't let facts get in the way of the 'social housing is subsidised' argument.

kafkathecat

ILW wrote: »

Think it was mainly "poor" people who got to buy council houses at massive discounts.

Think a lot (not all) of the moaning poor need to look at why they are poor.

Yes, I think they should. Lets see - extortionate rents, overpriced privatised utilities, wages that aren't enough to live on, not enough jobs to go round, shall I go on?
I wish poor people really would question why they are poor when the gap between them and the richest gets larger all the time.

kafkathecat

A group who have been massively affected by the bedroom tax is disabled people who have had their housing adapted for them. No only do they often need the extra room for equipment or to sleep separately from their partners but what are the chances of a private landlord adapting a property for them and teh cost of that adaptation has gone to waste. More joined up thinking.

Pineapple88

Claire212 wrote: »

This is why people are so against this bedroom tax. 25 years of decoration and care going into a house. Furious at the thought of having to pay more for it, just because they have an extra room.

The rent will remain the same you won't be paying more for it. The rent has always been that amount (obviously changing with inflation), what is changing is the amount of benefit some people are getting to cover that rent. For people (like you) who are paying their rent in full there is no change to the rent.

As many people have said, this does not affect you at present so there is little point getting wound up about it. Currently pensioners are not affected by the change and this may be the same in the future when you are retired, if you need to claim PC/HB at that point. We don't know what will happen after this Government ends in 2015. In 10 years time things may be completely different so there is little point trying to apply the changes that are happening now to one potential future situation for you.

Dogger69

Claire212 wrote: »

Commercial Rents? Please don't get me started on this!

Yes, it is reasonable to assume that people who are under occupying houses owned by the council should be required to downsize whatever the cicumstances. Working or claiming HB or LHA. If you refuse to downsize then yes, you should have to contribute to costs.

However, private and council houses differ dramatically. As do the tenancy agreements. Council housing in our area comes with no carpets, can be in any state of repair/decoration ranging from reasonable, down to bare plaster. You are required to decorate/fill in the holes in the walls etc as part of the agreement, essentially leave the house, often in a better state of repair than you found it. If you don't the council can refuse repairs.

If you are lucky and the council come round to sort out the massive damp issues, tear down your wall paper in the process and damage the carpet. Tough. You are responsible for decorating again. No compensation. I understand this is often council policy, although there may be exceptions.

So, by all means charge people commercial rent for the council houses, but firstly they all need to be decorated, carpeted and brought up to a standard you would expect for the going rents. Because that is not how they are given.

This is why people are so against this bedroom tax. 25 years of decoration and care going into a house. Furious at the thought of having to pay more for it, just because they have an extra room. And I understand that but many will put up with this because of the promise of a secure tenancy.

It's a tough one.

If you think private sector properties are any better you are very much mistaken. You get a range of properties in both sectors - the latest social housing in my area are new builds complete with white goods and carpets.

kafkathecat

Mojisola wrote: »

It is really so strange that people living in privately rented or mortgaged houses don't expect someone living in a lower rent council house to be treated better than they are?

Council housing rents should be means tested - if people living in council houses are earning good wages, they should be paying commercial rents. They should also be on a fixed term tenancy - if their needs change, they can then be rehoused in bigger or smaller properties.

Surely it would be better to improve the rights of private tenants?
And what has happened to the idea of community. If people are constantly being moved they cannot build up relationships. Moving house is one of the most stressful events in people's lives but poor people are expected to do that whenever their circumstances change or at the whim of their landlord. It damages children's education as well.
As long as people in this country want to worsen other people's lives instead of improve their own lot nothing will get better.

Pineapple88

Dogger69 wrote: »

If you think private sector properties are any better you are very much mistaken. You get a range of properties in both sectors - the latest social housing in my area are new builds complete with white goods and carpets.

True, in my area 25% of new build houses have to go to the HA, and the older HA properties are have all had solar panels fitted in the last few years and are getting new kitchens and bathrooms over the next few years. Conversely, the private rented property accross the road from me looks like it hasn't had a lick of paint since the house was build 20 years ago!

dodger1

dandelionclock30 wrote: »

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

Labour will almost certainly get in but they will most definitely not change anything the Tories have done.

Morlock

Dogger69 wrote: »

...the latest social housing in my area are new builds complete with white goods and carpets.

Do you have more information on which social housing provider this is? It is very unusual for social housing landlords to provide white goods and carpets.