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

mazza111

lighting_up_the_chalice wrote: »

So, the bedroom tax is applied as a result of her disability. Isn't that an extra living cost associated with her care/mobility needs... ie the whole point of DLA?

Not really, her whole DLA is used up on transport costs, which is what it was intended for. She doesn't drive, and other than me taking her out, she has to get taxis, her nearest bus stop is a about a mile away, and until she gets her electric chair, she just doesn't have the upper body strength (+ the dislocating wrists) to self propel there. She has managed to book dial a bus on about 3 occasions, all the rest of the time it's been fully booked. What would you describe accommodation as? A care or mobility need?

I think you need to remember that not all people who have a disability are in receipt of DLA.

She's applied for DHP, it's just a matter of wait and see.

lighting_up_the_chalice

mazza111 wrote: »

Not really, her whole DLA is used up on transport costs, which is what it was intended for. She doesn't drive, and other than me taking her out, she has to get taxis, her nearest bus stop is a about a mile away, and until she gets her electric chair, she just doesn't have the upper body strength (+ the dislocating wrists) to self propel there. She has managed to book dial a bus on about 3 occasions, all the rest of the time it's been fully booked. What would you describe accommodation as? A care or mobility need?

I think you need to remember that not all people who have a disability are in receipt of DLA.

She's applied for DHP, it's just a matter of wait and see.

All very emotive. But the fact remains.... If they ain't got it, you can't have it. I'm sorry, terrible for you, awful situation, etc etc etc, but there it is.

mazza111

lighting_up_the_chalice wrote: »

All very emotive. But the fact remains.... If they ain't got it, you can't have it. I'm sorry, terrible for you, awful situation, etc etc etc, but there it is.

So if it happened to you or someone you cared about you would sit quietly and take it?

The more vocal we are the better chance we have of being heard

And I will continue to campaign and shout about it as much as I can. As I've said, I feel it's unfair on those who can't downsize. And I do believe in downsizing. I just wish I was able to go on some of the marches, unfortunately my days of doing that are long gone


I don't want your sympathy btw, I just want a fair deal for those who can't downsize. I can totally see the need for those in 3+ bedrooms to downsize, but where there is a lack of 1 bedroom properties, I believe those in 2 bedroom properties should be excluded. Both in the social and private sector, we have a definite lack of 1 bedroom properties, even less so for those with mobility needs

nannytone_2

lighting_up_the_chalice wrote: »

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

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

the council say the had NO 1 beds so it was pointless going on the list, this oroperty has hust been reclassified[/B]

lighting_up_the_chalice

mazza111 wrote: »

So if it happened to you or someone you cared about you would sit quietly and take it?

The more vocal we are the better chance we have of being heard

And I will continue to campaign and shout about it as much as I can. As I've said, I feel it's unfair on those who can't downsize. And I do believe in downsizing. I just wish I was able to go on some of the marches, unfortunately my days of doing that are long gone


I don't want your sympathy btw, I just want a fair deal for those who can't downsize. I can totally see the need for those in 3+ bedrooms to downsize, but where there is a lack of 1 bedroom properties, I believe those in 2 bedroom properties should be excluded. Both in the social and private sector, we have a definite lack of 1 bedroom properties, even less so for those with mobility needs

Unless there is demand, there will never be supply. How would you propose dealing with under-occupation in such a valuable, oversubscribed, public resource as social housing?

My sympathy, BTW, is reserved for those waiting for social housing while, at the same time, being asked to contribute towards empty rooms for those already in social housing. THAT is unfair.

lighting_up_the_chalice

nannytone wrote: »

that isnt my LA, I SIBT KIVE UB DERBY!

All right. No need to shout!! All the LA's in the area have open lists and online applications. But you should already know that.

nannytone_2

Dunroamin wrote: »

I made the exception for age related accommodation.

My late parents had a 1 bed council flat and they would have been thrilled to swap with someone who had a 2 bed, if for nothing else than the fact that we could have had a bedroom when we went to stay, rather than sleep on a sofa bed. The 2 beds would have been just as convenient as their 1 bed - they don't necessarily stick the same size flats all together!

Mind you, it would have cost them more because they paid their own rent.

so it's ok for some people to choose to under occupy?
those not affected by the cut in council tax.
but those that are affected should just move to an unknown area without support or just stay put and pay?
hypocracy.
you clearly dont care about the 'families that are overcrowed' inless the person with the extra unwanted room is claiming benefit

lighting_up_the_chalice

nannytone wrote: »

so it's ok for some people to choose to under occupy?
those not affected by the cut in council tax.
but those that are affected should just move to an unknown area without support or just stay put and pay?
hypocracy.
you clearly dont care about the 'families that are overcrowed' inless the person with the extra unwanted room is claiming benefit

Those who pay their own rent have been effected by a bedroom tax for decades now. Where was your protest for them?

Hypocrisy.. Such a wide reaching word.

nannytone_2

lighting_up_the_chalice wrote: »

Many providers (including Nanny's) are doing just that.

no they arent. they are prioritising homeless

lighting_up_the_chalice

nannytone wrote: »

no they arent. they are prioritising homeless

Of course they are. The homeless have NO home. But they are also prioritising those effected by the bedroom tax. It's all in the allocations policy.... YOU should have a look.