MSE News: Thousands of tenants to get bedroom tax rebate

northerntwo1

nannytone wrote: »

i am inclined to speak about the things 'i know' to do otherwise would be wrong and patronising.
I suppose disabled homeowners alwaays have the option to sell and realise thier assets. I admit that i am inclined to look at things from the point of view of those who have nothing ( apart from their disability )

That's fine and your ASD will add to that. But look at the viritol towards pensioners not included. Age means sadly that you have more disabilities as you get older. That is a fact we all face.

Yet people want pensioners who logically will have an increased chance of disability to pay. It wasn't their fault they are exempt but they are targeted because they weren't chosen to pay. Many posts on here saying to make them pay too.

Then people complain of divide and conquer.

Indie_Kid

Confuseddot wrote: »

Those figures covered those with a stutter as it covered those within equality act, show me some proof to back your argument that truely "disabled" are suffering and I will happily support you to the cows come home. Under those rules I would be considered disabled and certainly do not need a spare room of any way shape form.

I can think of at least one person who lies in an adapted house which was done via a disbaled facilities grant. Her house is bigger than her needs; so pays bedroom tax. Can't downsize because she'll then have to pay back the grant.

I'm sure her situation isn't unusual.

http://www.housing.org.uk/media/press-releases/new-report-reveals-impact-of-bedroom-tax-100-days-on

http://news.sky.com/story/1174155/bedroom-tax-leaves-disabled-fearing-eviction

http://www.theguardian.com/housing-network/2013/dec/11/disabled-people-bedroom-tax-welfare-reforms-affected

Just because you don't need a spare room, doesn't mean other disabled people don't.

Confuseddot

regbrown wrote: »

There aren't too many things that make me bothered enough to comment on this or other forums, but the way this bunch are treating the sick and disabled really angers me.

You would just hope for a base level of decency in society where we dont attack certain groups, I am sure the majority would put the disabled in that category.

A quick read of the fact check site will give you all the info you need about this policy, sadly for a small % pushing their warped agenda or party politics is just more important.

I kind of hope they are just conservative party members, it would not surprise me if the local associations tell their members to go out and actively promote their policies online

Thank you so much for giving me much needed entertainment tonight. :rofl:


I have looked at many fact check sites and have yet to see and no-one has yet to point me towards one that backs your view. The 66% is based on the equality act and I as much as I feel sorry for someone with a stutter I don't really think they should automatically be given an extra bedroom.


Ps I think I would die that vote tory

northerntwo1

regbrown wrote: »

amazing, what a shame you cant put the same effort into focussing on those who DO need the help and ARE suffering from this policy.

a broken set of priorities... I wonder if your a party member, a DWP employee or just one of the small % who are incapable of considering the situations of others?

Of course. I'm a Tory supporter who works for DWP.

And I read the Daily Mail of course. Because only those can question the impact study.

nannytone_2

Confuseddot wrote: »

You are missing my point, I am not sure deliberately or not.


Each individual has a basic need for shelter and that is what housing benefit in general is for. Ideally this shelter would meet you're wants as well as your basic need.


You as a disabled person get extra money to help meet your wants as you cannot at this stage earn the money needed to satisfy these wants. It is up to each individual how this money is spent, yes it can only be spent once and yes it may not be designed for housing but surely if community etc. means so much to individuals then this money should be spent on housing.

I DO UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU ARE SAYING, AND NOW I WOULD BE IN A POSITION TO DO THAT.
BUT BEFORE MY dla WAS INCREASED, I HAD £140 A WEEK.
MY dla WAS ALREADY SPENT ON ADDITIONAL COSTS FOR MY pa. PETROL. PARKING ETC ( SHE WAS BEING PAID, BUT I HAD TO MEET THE EXPENSES OF HER JOB OTHERWIDE IT WOULDNT HAVE BEEN WORTH HER WORKING FOR ME)
THEN I HAD £30 A WEEK UTILITIES, LEAVING £70. £20 FOR RENT/COUNCIL TAX LEFT ME $50 FOR FOOD/CLOTHES/LRIDURE. NOT A KINGS RANSOM.
I AM NOT COMPLAINING FOR MYSELF BECAUSE I AM SORTED, BUT MANY, MANY OTHERS DONT GET THE DIRECT PAYMENTS NOR THE dla AND ARE DISABLED AND EXISTING ON £100 esa A WEEK AND PAYING RENT!

custardy

nannytone wrote: »

so the disabled should be grateful for being allowed to exist?
How patronising

Lol.what do you expect the state to do? According to another post you get about £2k a month.you have a property, medical care etc.so what else do you expect from the state?

nannytone_2

wildwestfan wrote: »

but it would be ok to make people aged 80+ move away from everything they are used to because your granny was lucid at 104 and we can't allow them to live in a house too big for their needs because someone with an ingrowing toenail needs it? And yes people have claimed sickness benefits for ingrowing toenails so must make them disabled.

Do you honestly think that most people of 80+ will not have some form of disablement?

theres the difference between us.
I dont think its right to do that to a granny..... But you think its ok to do it to a disabled person

Confuseddot

sh1305 wrote: »

I can think of at least one person who lies in an adapted house which was done via a disbaled facilities grant. Her house is bigger than her needs; so pays bedroom tax. Can't downsize because she'll then have to pay back the grant.

I'm sure her situation isn't unusual.

http://www.housing.org.uk/media/press-releases/new-report-reveals-impact-of-bedroom-tax-100-days-on

http://news.sky.com/story/1174155/bedroom-tax-leaves-disabled-fearing-eviction

http://www.theguardian.com/housing-network/2013/dec/11/disabled-people-bedroom-tax-welfare-reforms-affected

Just because you don't need a spare room, doesn't mean other disabled people don't.

That's what the DHP are for and she should be getting some, the facts they are using are the ones that class anyone who comes under the equality act as disabled.

Indie_Kid

Confuseddot wrote: »

I as much as I feel sorry for someone with a stutter I don't really think they should automatically be given an extra bedroom.

No idea why you think someone with a stutter would get an extra bedroom. They won't. You'd only get an extra room if you have an overnight carer, which you certainly won't need if you've only got a stutter.

~Chameleon~

regbrown wrote: »

There aren't too many things that make me bothered enough to comment on this or other forums, but the way this bunch are treating the sick and disabled really angers me.

You would just hope for a base level of decency in society where we dont attack certain groups, I am sure the majority would put the disabled in that category.

A quick read of the fact check site will give you all the info you need about this policy, sadly for a small % pushing their warped agenda or party politics is just more important.

I kind of hope they are just conservative party members, it would not surprise me if the local associations tell their members to go out and actively promote their policies online

I completely agree! The only reason I'm even engaging in these topics currently is to try redress the balance and that I happen to have a lot of free time on my hands at the moment so in desperate need of distraction. I honestly despair if some of the views on this forum represent the wider public. Somehow I doubt that as no one I know (in real life) shares the same views as the antagonists here.