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

nannytone_2

bloolagoon wrote: »

I am very pleased for you Nannytone, it must be a weight off your mind.

Does this mean from now on we can see a "bedroom tax" thread that doesn't turn into a nannytone can't downsize.

obviously that wont be the point. but i will continue to argue on other peoples behalf that are in the situation that i was until today.

it is only because the new flat has been reclassified that it is available to me. it is one of two for a population of 10, 000.
i was only given favourable treatment because i am already a teneant of the HA

lighting_up_the_chalice

nannytone wrote: »

because he doesnt have a tenancy with the HA yet. even if he had accepted the flat he would only have signed for it today at the earliest. they probably wouldnt have made such a rish if it hadnt been for the fact that they want me to move a s a p.

A bank holiday week and they've already carried out viewings, pre-tenancy checks and done 2 sign-ups? This story gets more incredible with each post.

I don't know why the HA would want you moved "ASAP", they get the rent either way. Unless they just want you off their case!

nannytone wrote: »

you just dont like the facyt that i am on benefits and have bee lucky enough to find a place where i wont need to top up the rent.

I've never commented on your receipt of benefits.

nannytone wrote: »

you would have obviously preferred that i either stayed here, so you could complain that i am under occupying and enjoy the thought that i was losing money that i couldnt afford. or that i moved into some dump with £69 of LHA that left me even more financially struggling and with no security.

I'd rather allocations were done in accordance with an allocations policy which is fair, transparent, has been fully consulted on, meets it's legal requirements and is open to public scrutiny and challenge. When people start to manipulate a system for selfish gain, corruption is always close behind.

nannytone wrote: »

seems to be what you think disabled people should have life harder than they already do.

Your disability is something else I haven't commented on.

nannytone wrote: »

but i dont care... because i m settled now and dont have to listen to your diatribe anymore

A mutual sentiment, I assure you.

lighting_up_the_chalice

nannytone wrote: »

obviously that wont be the point. but i will continue to argue on other peoples behalf that are in the situation that i was until today.

it is only because the new flat has been reclassified that it is available to me. it is one of two for a population of 10, 000.
i was only given favourable treatment because i am already a teneant of the HA

So, again, existing tenants are given priority as a result of the bedroom tax. Glad you confirmed that as others on here were claiming there was no such priority.

lighting_up_the_chalice

nannytone wrote: »

it was ioen for bids from 29 th aoril ubtil 5th may

Not what you said in your OP. Still, with the bank holiday, they have been UNBELIEVABLY quick in administering a fairly complex let.

lighting_up_the_chalice

nannytone wrote: »

is it an effort to be ridiculously inane?

bidding started april 29th. i found out on 2nd may that it had been reclassified. i phoned the HA the same day. 3ed may the HA xontacted the council who refused to withdraw it, bidding closed 5th may.
nominations to the HA on 5th May. phoned the nominated person 6th may. phoned and visited me today.

is that clearer for you now?

Perhaps you should edit your OP, as that version of events differs considerable from the one above. Some may think you are changing the story to match your later statements.

nannytone_2

the counbcil do the checks before you are accepted onto the list. they did my checks.
i accept it was a bank holiday, so the council must have nominated tuesday.

when i was initially nominated, the HA phoned me with 30 minutes for a viewing the next morning.

as o said, the other tenant hasnt signed anything yet.
they want me moved a s a p so as not to inconvenience the new tenant.
you havent commented on my benefit, yet you happily say that people that receive HB shouldnt be allowed to over occupy because they are 'keeping a family in overcrowded conditions' yet say that people who under occupy but pay rent have been paying 'befroom tax' for years. so presu,ably because they are lucky enough to be able to work they can have as many unused bedrooms as they like? ( in social subsidised housing)

you also havent commented on disabilty apart from insist that disabled people should be prepared and expected to move where ever the 1 beds are regardless of where there support is..

just because people are unfortunate enough to be disabled doesnt mean that they dont contribute to their community. theyre not just deadf weight, they just need a bit more support.

nannytone_2

lighting_up_the_chalice wrote: »

So, again, existing tenants are given priority as a result of the bedroom tax. Glad you confirmed that as others on here were claiming there was no such priority.

you make me dies.
you spout on about people helping themselves, and when they do they are still wrong!

yes my HA will allow existing tenants to transfer to another HA property before advertising it to new tenants
they actually agreed for 2 reasons. the fact that i was striggling with the rent ( it is their interests to make sure that they are paid for their rental properties) and because of the garden, so in future i will be able to have a guide dog.

the tenant who is moving into my current place is the one who made the decision on where he WANTED to live... i just happen to have got what i needed too.
why is that so wrong?

nannytone_2

lighting_up_the_chalice wrote: »

Not what you said in your OP. Still, with the bank holiday, they have been UNBELIEVABLY quick in administering a fairly complex let.

in my OP i said i had phoned the HA but the council had blocked it.

nannytone_2

i wont edit the OP. My PA told me the person was moving out. actially it was up for bid because the previous tenant had abandoned the property and left it full of 'stuff' ( old bed and sofa.....carpers/curtains, ild oven etc)

would you like me to take pictures of both properties both inside and outside so you can see for yourself?

lighting_up_the_chalice

nannytone wrote: »

you make me dies.
you spout on about people helping themselves, and when they do they are still wrong!

yes my HA will allow existing tenants to transfer to another HA property before advertising it to new tenants
they actually agreed for 2 reasons. the fact that i was striggling with the rent ( it is their interests to make sure that they are paid for their rental properties) and because of the garden, so in future i will be able to have a guide dog.

the tenant who is moving into my current place is the one who made the decision on where he WANTED to live... i just happen to have got what i needed too.
why is that so wrong?

My comment was, as indicated, aimed at others who have stated that there is NO priority offered to existing tenants effected by the bedroom tax. I stated that I was glad you cleared that up. It certainly wasn't an attack on you as they SHOULD offer a priority under such circumstances. I don't believe hurdles such as priority should be placed in the way of those wishing to downsize. I'm all for it being encouraged.