This so called Bedroom Tax

nannytone_2

i have never come acroos a social landlord that supplies carpets and whiye goods. in fact, if a previous tenant leave carpets/fitted wardrobes/additional kitchen cupboards, they are usually removed before a new tenant takes posession. so unless you can back up your claims, then i find it almost impossible to believe

wriggly

kafkathecat wrote: »

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.

The government should give these people an allowance to help defray the additional costs of being disabled. Housing Benefit pays for the minimal cost of housing, and the allowance pays for the required adjustments, including the cost of an extra room.

They could call it Disabled Living Allowance or maybe Personal Independence Payment.

nannytone_2

wriggly wrote: »

The government should give these people an allowance to help defray the additional costs of being disabled. Housing Benefit pays for the minimal cost of housing, and the allowance pays for the required adjustments, including the cost of an extra room.

They could call it Disabled Living Allowance or maybe Personal Independence Payment.

it has been before the courts and is now LAW, that disability living allowance is not for housing costs. it is additional money paid out to enable the disabled person to meet the additional costs of daily life

Dogger69

nannytone wrote: »

i have never come acroos a social landlord that supplies carpets and whiye goods. in fact, if a previous tenant leave carpets/fitted wardrobes/additional kitchen cupboards, they are usually removed before a new tenant takes posession. so unless you can back up your claims, then i find it almost impossible to believe

All because you have never come across it, that doesn't make it untrue. As usual you're getting a bee in your bonnet about nothing.

nannytone_2

and just because you say it is true doesnt mean that it is!
people often embellish the truth in order to try to make their point

Morlock

Dogger69 wrote: »

Sorry, it is a relatively small HA and very easy to identify where I am referring to on their website, hence why I am not willing to give the information.

Okay, I was genuinely interested as I have never hear of a social landlord that does, it's unbelievable to me, perhaps some do through recent developments.

sammyjammy

kafkathecat wrote: »

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.

Ever so slightly overdramatic :think:

Morlock

nannytone wrote: »

and just because you say it is true doesnt mean that it is!
people often embellish the truth in order to try to make their point

I've yet to see evidence that any social landlords provide anything but an empty shell to tenants, so I'll take it with a big pinch of salt.

Pineapple88

Morlock wrote: »

Social landlords have a responsibility to maintain certain housing standards, private landlords do not. In the above scenario, politically speaking, the left wing is the housing association landlord, improving living conditions for the tenant on a non-profit basis. The right wing is the private landlord, creaming as much profit as possible, whilst making no improvements to the property for 20 years, leaving the tenants in squalor.

The vilification of social housing tenants, and subsequent erosion of tenants rights will help to ensure we are all firmly living in the 'right' camp.

Under s11 Landlord and Tenant Act private landlords have a duty to maintain certain standards as well. The fact that many of them do not and it is very difficult to take action against them is another matter and is a matter that needs to be addressed by future Governments irrespective of whether they are left or right wing.

My point was not to address politics but simply to agree with Dogger69 that just as there are good and bad examples of social landlords just as there are good and bad examples of private landlords. Equally I have seen some very bad examples of local authority housing where it has been almost impossible to get the local authoity to address it (this is the same local authority which is refitting their older housing with new kitchens)...its very difficult to have a cut and dry distinction of good/bad landlords and to say one if left wing and one is right wing.

DCodd

Morlock wrote: »

I've yet to see evidence that any social landlords provide anything but an empty shell to tenants, so I'll take it with a big pinch of salt.

They do in sheltered accommodation, well that is my Mother had a fridge freezer and built in oven in hers.

I know that new builds are subject to ever more stringent efficiency regs for both private and social landlords, maybe they would provide a flooring of some kind i.e. underlayed laminate or carpet to meet potential future EPC requirements? just a thought.