housing benefit reduction. a solution but the council is blocking it!

lighting_up_the_chalice

mazza111 wrote: »

But that's not possible for disabled people of those who are caring for them. That's the bit you don't seem to understand.

Of course it is. There is housing just about everywhere in this country. However, if an individual doesn't wish to move to where suitable properties are, they will just have to pay the surcharge.

Unless you have a viable alternative option?

bloolagoon

mazza111 wrote: »

But that's not possible for disabled people of those who are caring for them. That's the bit you don't seem to understand.

I appreciate this is not a personal solution as you have a child at home too but what valid reason generally is there for 2 people living in 2 bedrooms - 1 disabled and 1 their formal or informal carer not to share a 2 bedroom?

If they require a 1 bedroom then the assumption is they live alone or a couple, why can they not share with the disabled they care for therefore no one has the under occupancy charge.

And if the Studio style flat is still available as no one wants it then there is certainly an option for those that do not require adapted specifications.

Also why on earth can families not live in those 2 bedrooms? In London they cram families and disabled in high rise with none working lifts as private rentals are often none affordable. It seems that Scottish have hugely superior Social Housing and that is unfair.

Dunroamin

mazza111 wrote: »

Of course they are! I was one of them for many years. I still don't think that gives us the right to under occupy a home.

If someone's paying their own way, they can pretty well do as they like and I don't know how you can argue otherwise.

Confuseddot

Mazza have you thought of putting in for a 3 bed which would suit your daughter and you and your son which may solve some of your issues. Just a thought ..

Dunroamin

Confuseddot wrote: »

Mazza have you thought of putting in for a 3 bed which would suit your daughter and you and your son which may solve some of your issues. Just a thought ..

Considering that Mazza's daughter chose to move out (and was allocated a 1 bed flat!) before she was ill because of family rows, I doubt that she would consider this a satisfactory option.;)

Dunroamin

bloolagoon wrote: »

I appreciate this is not a personal solution as you have a child at home too but what valid reason generally is there for 2 people living in 2 bedrooms - 1 disabled and 1 their formal or informal carer not to share a 2 bedroom?

If they require a 1 bedroom then the assumption is they live alone or a couple, why can they not share with the disabled they care for therefore no one has the under occupancy charge.
.

Some time ago (and on a very similar thread) I remarked that I wouldn't dream of sleeping separately from my disabled husband but that my late MIL (who cared for my late FIL with exactly the same condition) chose to sleep separately because of his problems. Had we all been in social housing and claiming benefits, it seems ridiculous that that they could argue that they needed one bedroom more than we do just on the basis of personal choice.

mumcoll

Our HA is going through the process of re-designating some hard to let 1 bed properties (flats with no lift etc) from OAP to General Needs.

mazza111

lighting_up_the_chalice wrote: »

Of course it is. There is housing just about everywhere in this country. However, if an individual doesn't wish to move to where suitable properties are, they will just have to pay the surcharge.

Unless you have a viable alternative option?

It's not possible for disabled people to move away from their support. Or their carer's to move away from those they care for. That would cost thousands. I thought this was aimed at saving money?

Alternative option - Don't charge the BT for people who can't downsize. Not through choice but through needs. I don't have all the answers, just find it really unfair on those who can't downsize where there is no property available.

bloolagoon wrote: »

I appreciate this is not a personal solution as you have a child at home too but what valid reason generally is there for 2 people living in 2 bedrooms - 1 disabled and 1 their formal or informal carer not to share a 2 bedroom?

If they require a 1 bedroom then the assumption is they live alone or a couple, why can they not share with the disabled they care for therefore no one has the under occupancy charge.

Just on that part. My dd is in a flat that would house 3 people on paper. There's the double bedroom which is adapted. There is a single carer's room that she can't access. It was designed as a carers room. It would sleep one. There is room for a single bed and nothing else. So really, the only way it would sleep 3 is if the disabled person was part of a couple.

And if the Studio style flat is still available as no one wants it then there is certainly an option for those that do not require adapted specifications.

Also why on earth can families not live in those 2 bedrooms? In London they cram families and disabled in high rise with none working lifts as private rentals are often none affordable. It seems that Scottish have hugely superior Social Housing and that is unfair.

You can only have a room for carer if you receive middle or higher care rates of DLA unfortunately. And no it wouldn't work me and my dd living together in answer to your question. We'd be ready to kill each other within a couple of weeks. I love her dearly but couldn't go back to living with her full time. Even if there were properties available.

As for the high rise flats. That's the council's policy. But in fairness to them. One block is for homeless, the others that are set aside for the over 50s/disabled. The homeless units reek of urine and other things, where they put families while they find a property for them (usually around 2 weeks.) The other ones that are set aside are great, concierge, immaculate, really working brilliantly.

The studio flat I mentioned is a private let, and in a very poor state of disrepair. Which is why it's probably not been let since we viewed it 18 months ago.

Dunroamin wrote: »

If someone's paying their own way, they can pretty well do as they like and I don't know how you can argue otherwise.

I was paying my way when I gave up my 3 bedroom house so that someone else could get the benefit of it. They are in such short supply why should I or anyone else not downsize where possible?

Confuseddot wrote: »

Mazza have you thought of putting in for a 3 bed which would suit your daughter and you and your son which may solve some of your issues. Just a thought ..

See above answer. That's not to mention what we would do with all the dd's furniture etc. Again I'll reiterate, 3 bedrooms are very much in short supply here, even more so when it comes to adapted properties.

Dunroamin wrote: »

Some time ago (and on a very similar thread) I remarked that I wouldn't dream of sleeping separately from my disabled husband but that my late MIL (who cared for my late FIL with exactly the same condition) chose to sleep separately because of his problems. Had we all been in social housing and claiming benefits, it seems ridiculous that that they could argue that they needed one bedroom more than we do just on the basis of personal choice.

They don't always count it as sleeping in separate rooms though, maybe the spare room is there to hold equipment that's needed for the person that's disabled. Things like scissor hoists can take up a lot of room. DD doesn't have that problem as she has a rail hoist. We have placed it over the bath until time comes for her to need it.

My parents slept in separate bedrooms for the last 10 years of their life. It saved them disturbing each other when they were up through the night. Mum was a light sleeper, dad was always up and down most of the night because of his break in his back.

seven-day-weekend

I can actually understand why Nanny does not want to move away from her area. Familiarity with an area must be very important if you can't see.

As it appears she has a very nice flat in an area she wants, rural and without much social housing, then I think she has two options. One is to get a lodger (and I will re-iterate for the umpteenth time it does not have to be the nearest axe murderer off the street, it could be somebody you already know, or know of), or pay part of the rent.

The latter option, whilst not ideal from a small income, seems to me to be a small price to pay for having a nice flat on a secure tenancy in an area she wants to stay in.

Is there another way to generate extra income, such as doing e-bay?

Norman_Castle

Alternative option - Don't charge the BT for people who can't downsize. Not through choice but through needs. I don't have all the answers, just find it really unfair on those who can't downsize where there is no property available.

I used to live in one of three flats in a large terraced house. Due to major repairs all three flat tenancies were rehoused. The house was converted into a single four bedroom house with the top floor blocked off due to a lack of four bedroom properties. I believe it has since been opened up to make it a six bedroom property. Blocking access to unused bedrooms for tenants in oversized properties may be an option in areas where smaller properties are not available.