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

nannytone_2

bestpud wrote: »

So you didn't actually apply to go back on the list, or they have refused your application?

I would appeal if they have refused it.

i tired but they refused as they said there were no suitable properties in existance

bigboybrother

nannytone wrote: »

i think security is something everyone should have,
but because others dont, you seem to think that no one should have any.

Security? try telling that to the 10's of thousands that rent privately. Many that I know that rent privately move at least every year if not every 6 months depending on how far the LL puts the rent up by.

At worst I know of one retired couple that have lived in 10 different properties in the past 7 years. Their current 6 monthly tenancy is up for renewal in June and they have been told that their rent for a 1 bed flat is to go up from £425 a month to £500 a month. Their maximum housing allowance is £86.54 a week (£375 a month).

You are unique and it is about time that you faced the reality of the rental market. Why should you have security of tenure when those in the private rental market have so little or none?

Either be grateful for what you have now and put up with the extra cost or go find a private let and see where that gets you.

Talk about wanting your cake and eat it.

lighting_up_the_chalice

nannytone wrote: »

i tired but they refused as they said there were no suitable properties in existance

The list is open. You can even apply on-line...

http://www.derbyhomefinder.org/Data/ASPPages/1/165.aspx

As this issue is clearly very important to you, I am surprised that you have made so little effort to educate yourself on the subject.

clemmatis

paulineb wrote: »

Well I certainly agree about downsizing or losing benefit part. In my local area North Lanarkshire in Scotland, there are 90 1 bedroom properties and 85 of those have already been earmarked for people, so there are 5 left. That was reported in last weeks local paper.

I live in one town in that council. Its all very well people lining up to have a pop at people because they are on benefits and therefore should be grateful about having a roof over their head that is part paid for. But when you have a political party that is cutting this housing benefit in order to get people to downsize, did no one actually stop and think that in many towns and cities in the UK, there are no smaller properties to downsize to?

And when people quote figures about what people are paying or what most people do, how do you know this? Rents vary from area to area. And so do the availablity of private lets on offer.

There should be more 1 bedroom council flats available. For people no matter what their circumstances. And more low cost family homes as well. Pushing people into private renting is not the answer.

Its actually hard enough trying to make ends meet when you are on a low wage and getting housing benefit when people automatically judge your life and your circumstances. Im not on JSA, I get some housing benefit but am still on a fairly low wage and finding the extra rent is not going to be easy. I dont believe anyone should have to give up a secure tenancy to move into an insecure tenancy just because they claim housing benefit and because the political party running the country didnt actually have the foresight to realise that there arent enough smaller homes to go around for the people who might need to downsize.

Both in the private and council housing sector. There are very few one apartment homes where I live and also very few flatshares. And there are also plenty of empty flats in the specific area I live in.

In Wales, according to a survey of local authorities, there are more than 28,000 households in social housing now considered under-occupied; most now only need -- it's considered -- one-bedroom accommodation; there are under 400 one-bedroom properties to which they could move.

lighting_up_the_chalice

clemmatis wrote: »

In Wales, according to a survey of local authorities, there are more than 28,000 households in social housing now considered under-occupied; most now only need -- it's considered -- one-bedroom accommodation; there are under 400 one-bedroom properties to which they could move.

In Newport alone, over 130 one bedroom social housing units have been let this year.

http://www.homeoptionsnewport.co.uk/Data/ASPPages/1/56.aspx

mazza111

Dunroamin wrote: »

As pensioners don't have to pay the "bedroom tax", I think they'd be pretty pleased to get a 2 bed flat rather than a 1 bed. Unless these flats have an age restriction, downsizing in your area should be a piece of cake.

It's not a piece of cake. Pauline has reiterated what I said about a similar area here in Scotland. We simply do not have enough 1 bedroom properties. The few that we do have are usually earmarked for the disabled or elderly. There are still only 5 private lets in my town.

lighting_up_the_chalice

mazza111 wrote: »

It's not a piece of cake. Pauline has reiterated what I said about a similar area here in Scotland. We simply do not have enough 1 bedroom properties. The few that we do have are usually earmarked for the disabled or elderly. There are still only 5 private lets in my town.

Well, if they haven't got what you want, you will have to look elsewhere... Such is life. It's no good just complaining that, as an example, you can't get a loaf of bread in your local builders merchant... go to the bakers instead!

Dunroamin

mazza111 wrote: »

It's not a piece of cake. Pauline has reiterated what I said about a similar area here in Scotland. We simply do not have enough 1 bedroom properties. The few that we do have are usually earmarked for the disabled or elderly. There are still only 5 private lets in my town.

You've misunderstood the point I was making. Pensioners in 1 bed properties (unless age restricted) would be able to swap with people in 2 bed flats without incurring extra payments and would get larger accommodation.

PasturesNew

To be fair, the homeless person might be homeless because they are sleeping on their mum's sofa since Wednesday after their gf threw them out as they'd been cheating. There are 1001 ways one can be classified as homeless.

So ... the OP should bid on the property. Their position would probably trump a homeless person whose situation wasn't dire, health-threatening or long-standing.

mazza111

Dunroamin wrote: »

You've misunderstood the point I was making. Pensioners in 1 bed properties (unless age restricted) would be able to swap with people in 2 bed flats without incurring extra payments and would get larger accommodation.

I don't misunderstand at all, the pensioners don't want to move. Their usually in custom built flats. Usually all close to amenities and/or on bus routes etc. TBH I wouldn't move if it was me. You want what's best for you..We also have a lovely high rise block of flats, that's almost run like sheltered housing, with consierge, just for over 50s....

lighting_up_the_chalice wrote: »

Well, if they haven't got what you want, you will have to look elsewhere... Such is life. It's no good just complaining that, as an example, you can't get a loaf of bread in your local builders merchant... go to the bakers instead!

BS and you know it. Many people can't move out specific areas because they have family commitments. I'm done with moving. I moved to the south east for work in the 80s, back to Scotland in the naughties. These days, I'm also caring for my disabled daughter, so moving out the area is not an option. And JFTR, I'm not affected by the BT. I downsized when the dd moved out, before there was any mention of BT. My next move, will be my last I hope. And it will still be in this area.

It's costing me a fortune already in fuel and it only takes me 5 minutes to get to the dd who was previously within walking distance.