We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
housing benefit reduction. a solution but the council is blocking it!
Comments
-
You're surely not saying that, if they'd lived in social housing and on benefits, they should have been eligible for 2 bedrooms?
Why would they not? They were both disabled and needed a room to themselves. Even before they retired they slept in separate rooms because of their needs, not because of their wishes. Dad had a lot of equipment needed for his disabilities. There just wasn't room for mum in the same room.4 Stones and 0 pounds or 25.4kg lighter :j0 -
Why would they not? They were both disabled and needed a room to themselves. Even before they retired they slept in separate rooms because of their needs, not because of their wishes. Dad had a lot of equipment needed for his disabilities. There just wasn't room for mum in the same room.
You didn't say all that in the post I replied to, you didn't even say that they were disabled!
"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."
Most of us who live with older men are disturbed throughout the night as they get up and down to use the loo!0 -
Some people are SELF.SELF.SELF. and always will be !0
-
poppasmurf_bewdley wrote: »Please make up your mind.
In one sentence you say: we have surplus social/private housing.
And then you say: its the council that dont have ANY properties of a suitable size that are blocking it.
It can't be both. It has to be one or the other.
It can be both - plenty of two / three bed properties, not enough one bed properties.
I don't know the housing situation as we only have the poster's word that there are not enough one beds, but it can be both situations.There is something delicious about writing the first words of a story. You never quite know where they'll take you - Beatrix Potter0 -
That's rather my impression as well, - as I said before, rather too "pally" an arrangement and not one that encourages independence.
With Direct Payments, you can choose who to employ in order to meet your needs, so yes, it's possible the poster already had a friendship with her PA before receiving DPs.
Personally, I don't see anything wrong in that but, in general, it's not healthy if the person doesn't gain independence where possible as it becomes an enabling disability then, and that's not a good thing, so agree with you there.There is something delicious about writing the first words of a story. You never quite know where they'll take you - Beatrix Potter0 -
TBH 2 things that annoy are the fact that the biggest "state" bill is the benefits paid to pensioner groups and yet again that group is untouched by this. Plus when everyone is feeling the pain why haven't the BBC been forced to cut the licence fee? For the vast majority of people slashing this by say 30-50% would make a big difference.
Ali x
The BBC can't cut the licence fee. The government decides that. It's frozen the fee for six years, and it's making the BBC pay for Channel S4C and the World Service. The licence fee already pays for BBC Radio and BBC Online as well as BBC TV. I'd support a more general licence and more expensive licence to cover all this, with a cheaper radio only licence, and with subsidies for poorer people.0 -
TBH 2 things that annoy are the fact that the biggest "state" bill is the benefits paid to pensioner groups and yet again that group is untouched by this. Plus when everyone is feeling the pain why haven't the BBC been forced to cut the licence fee? For the vast majority of people slashing this by say 30-50% would make a big difference.
Ali x
Are you seriously suggesting that pensioners should have their benefits etc cut? People who have worked all their life, tried to save a little, and for what? They should be allowed to enjoy their old age in comfort, and not have to worry about where their next meal is coming from, or how to heat their homes (I know that can apply to any age group as well though), IMO, they don't get given enough.0 -
You didn't say all that in the post I replied to, you didn't even say that they were disabled!
"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."
Most of us who live with older men are disturbed throughout the night as they get up and down to use the loo!
I do apologise. I thought you would have known that from my other posts
You're usually on the ball for remembering things from previous posts 
They would have been excluded from this anyhoo given their age. But used as an example Didn't make them any less loving. They still had a wee cuddle in before bedtime 4 Stones and 0 pounds or 25.4kg lighter :j0 -
Georgiegirl256 wrote: »Are you seriously suggesting that pensioners should have their benefits etc cut? People who have worked all their life, tried to save a little, and for what? They should be allowed to enjoy their old age in comfort, and not have to worry about where their next meal is coming from, or how to heat their homes (I know that can apply to any age group as well though), IMO, they don't get given enough.
There are quite a lot of pensioners who haven't worked all their lives, or even for much of it.
The universal benefits for pensioners cost a lot, and things such as free / cheaper travel, free prescriptions, winter fuel allowances etc go to all people of the relevant age....much enquiry having been made concerning a gentleman, who had quitted a company where Johnson was, and no information being obtained; at last Johnson observed, that 'he did not care to speak ill of any man behind his back, but he believed the gentleman was an attorney'.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.5K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.2K Spending & Discounts
- 245K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.6K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.4K Life & Family
- 258.8K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards