MSE News: Thousands of tenants to get bedroom tax rebate

Confuseddot

~Chameleon~ wrote: »

Which is exactly what I said originally. Hurrah!! We've finally come around full circle and you're now agreeing with me :T

The other point I was trying to ascertain was whether pensioners in SH would be able to afford to pay rent on a pension and, if so, whether they should actually be living in SH.

So again you are saying if pensioners can pay their own rent then they shouldn't be in SH so should this apply to everyone ?

~Chameleon~

sh1305 wrote: »

Discrentionary housing pyaments. Used to top up rent. But they're usually time limited and not everyone who applies will get one.

Thanks, minor brain blip!

I was thinking it referred to almost extinct versions of DWP

nannytone_2

~Chameleon~ wrote: »

Only if someone claims CA for them. If they live alone they then lose their SD premium.

NOT NECESSARILY.
IF SOMEONE GETS VARE FROM SOCIAL SERVICES... EVEN DIRECT PAYMENTS ...
IF THEY USE IT FOR OBERNIGHT CARE THEN THEY WOULDNT LOSE hb

Confuseddot

~Chameleon~ wrote: »

Thanks, minor brain blip!

I was thinking it referred to almost extinct versions of DWP

I assuming you will edit your attack on me with regards this now then

~Chameleon~

Confuseddot wrote: »

So again you are saying if pensioners can pay their own rent then they shouldn't be in SH so should this apply to everyone ?

Of course it should! There should be an income threshold for eligibility for SH in my opinion. After all, it was originally introduced for low income families that couldn't afford a mortgage. I don't see why that should be any different today.

In fact I'd go as far as doing annual checks and when a household raised above a certain level of income they were invited to leave SH and either buy or rent a property elsewhere.

Indie_Kid

northerntwo1 wrote: »

It is a far better indicator of need than qualification under DDA. Have you ever read the act? I can find a link for you

How is it a better indication? It's not. Many won't qualify for DLA / PIP because they're expected to be able to self care. DLA ignores things like work. Many disabled people work and need reasonable adjustments to allow them to do this. Both of my parents are classed as disabled as per DDA / Equalities Act but neither are entitled to DLA. Yet, they both still have some form of physical disability.

~Chameleon~

Confuseddot wrote: »

I assuming you will edit your attack on me with regards this now then

Done. Perhaps you might also rethink your attack on me earlier this evening

~Chameleon~

nannytone wrote: »

NOT NECESSARILY.
IF SOMEONE GETS VARE FROM SOCIAL SERVICES... EVEN DIRECT PAYMENTS ...
IF THEY USE IT FOR OBERNIGHT CARE THEN THEY WOULDNT LOSE hb

Sorry, don't understand what you're saying.

Confuseddot

sh1305 wrote: »

How is it a better indication? It's not. Many won't qualify for DLA / PIP because they're expected to be able to self care. DLA ignores things like work. Many disabled people work and need reasonable adjustments to allow them to do this. Both of my parents are classed as disabled as per DDA / Equalities Act but neither are entitled to DLA. Yet, they both still have some form of physical disability.

So would you class them as needing an extra room due to their disabilities ?

northerntwo1

nannytone wrote: »

NOT NECESSARILY.
IF SOMEONE GETS VARE FROM SOCIAL SERVICES... EVEN DIRECT PAYMENTS ...
IF THEY USE IT FOR OBERNIGHT CARE THEN THEY WOULDNT LOSE hb

And also if their carer wasn't a spouse. Far too many ill informed rantings on here to take seriously. Which is sad as debating with people uninformed is pointless.