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

mazza111

And sometimes disabled people have to do what's right for them, whether it appears selfish to some.

If my daughter hadn't accepted that 2 bedroom flat, she would be left rolling around a 1 bedroom flat on her torso to get around the 1 bedroom flat. Yeah that would do her spine the world of good.


Now if any of you were in her position of being unable to walk without crutches, needing the wheelchair for the majority of the time, were in an unsuitable property and were offered an adapted flat are gonna say that they would refuse it, I would think you either live in cloud cuckoo land or have no idea what it's like to have a disability.

There are many other disabled people caught in the trap like her. Many who've had thousands spent on their properties to adapt them to their needs. Shall we put them in unadapted properties, then pay for all the adaptations again? A lot of disability equipment is very expensive.

clemmatis

clemmatis wrote: »

if social housing tenants are to be pushed to downsize, let them be treated as a member of this forum was: let them be helped to find a flat, let them be helped with the cost of moving, and so on.

lighting_up_the_chalice wrote: »

They are.

I see no sign that social housing tenants generally are being helped as the forum poster was. And an SFHA report you quoted, to support your contention of such aid, in fact says that 10% of HAs there, at most, can even consider financial aid, and many have not even considered advice or prioritisation.

When I made this point you did not challenge it. You said that social housing tenants were being given a financial incentive, the bedroom tax. That is, you said

lighting_up_the_chalice wrote: »

Surely, avoiding the bedroom tax IS the financial incentive to downsize.

Cutesy. But no more than that.

clemmatis

mazza111 wrote: »

There are many other disabled people caught in the trap like her. Many who've had thousands spent on their properties to adapt them to their needs. Shall we put them in unadapted properties, then pay for all the adaptations again? A lot of disability equipment is very expensive.

Two Welsh housing associations made this point last year, one in written evidence to the UK government.

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/bedroom-tax-empty-homes-end-2728143


If the "bedroom tax" policy had been properly thought through and if it and other measures to reduce under occupancy had been implemented in stages, as in Fulham Council's offering of limited-term tenure, only, to new social housing applicants, various problems could have been avoided.

Jamie_Carter

clemmatis wrote: »

Two Welsh housing associations made this point last year, one in written evidence to the UK government.

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/bedroom-tax-empty-homes-end-2728143


If the "bedroom tax" policy had been properly thought through and if it and other measures to reduce under occupancy had been implemented in stages, as in Fulham Council's offering of limited-term tenure, only, to new social housing applicants, various problems could have been avoided.

Unfortunately new laws are very rarely thought through properly before they come into effect. They just bring them out, then wait to see what they get complaints about before amending them.

However we are getting off topic, as the thread is about someone who is complaining about not being allowed to jump the system.

lighting_up_the_chalice

clemmatis wrote: »

If the "bedroom tax" policy had been properly thought through and if it and other measures to reduce under occupancy had been implemented in stages, as in Fulham Council's offering of limited-term tenure, only, to new social housing applicants, various problems could have been avoided.

Oh, I see. You want people FORCED from their homes?

Morlock

lighting_up_the_chalice wrote: »

Oh, I see. You want people FORCED from their homes?

Which is no different to what the bedroom tax is doing, those who cannot afford to pay will be evicted.

Morlock

lighting_up_the_chalice wrote: »

They are.

Some are, not all.

clemmatis

lighting_up_the_chalice wrote: »

Oh, I see. You want people FORCED from their homes?

Stop misleading people.

lighting_up_the_chalice

Morlock wrote: »

Some are, not all.

Show me an allocations policy where those wishing to downsize get no assistance at all. Encouraging people to downsize is nothing new. Most providers have been dealing with the issue for many years. Only now, when individual self interest is a factor, has it become big news.

lighting_up_the_chalice

clemmatis wrote: »

Stop misleading people.

OK. Tell me how the introduction of fixed term tenancies DOESN'T address the issue by forcing people from their homes?