House buying and deprivation

Housing_Benefit_Officer

racon wrote: »

Hey, are you absolutely sure about that??
I had a decision many years back that was found to be wrong, not because of the facts but because of the way the decision maker used them. It originally was a supersession back to the date of a change of circumstances, when I queried it as it didn't look right, they then changed the supersession and did a revision of the original decision which left me with a large overpayment.
You could say that the DWP can have more than one bite of the cherry

Yes. We are talking specifically about deprivation of capital here and not any other issue.

GirlFromMars_2

Ames wrote: »

It was this one https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5146034

If I own a home and need care then I wouldn't need the home anymore. It's actually a reason to buy a house really, so that I can get better care if I need it in the future.


Girl From Mars, you didn't upset me. It's just that this whole thing has been going on for four years now, and I just want it to be over. Plus dad sent me a happy birthday text the other day, as if the last year hadn't happened.

I just can't see how I'd possibly get permission to buy a property that suits my needs less than the one I'm in. I'd then also need permission to adapt it.

And as I said - what happens if in ten years the boiler packs in or roof needs replacing? Or since it's likely to be ex LA, what happens when they refurbish an area and give me a bill for 10k for external works? That's just too much uncertainty.

If I'd got what the house was originally valued at, or the amount sister turned down without my knowledge, and I'd be getting close to 60k then home ownership would be viable. But it'll be closer to 45k, and once fees etc for buying are taken into account there's no way I could buy more than a quarter of somewhere remotely suitable, and I wouldn't be able to keep a buffer of 10k for repairs.

There are schemes which are for disabled people, like the HOLD one, but it states clearly that it's to improve living standards. My flat is as good as anything I could hope to part own, so I probably wouldn't qualify anyway. A quick look on Rightmove doesn't show up anything that's in my price range and suitable without me needing to pay for adaptations.

And what it all comes down to is what do I put in a letter to a DM? Surely I'd have to prove that it wasn't for the purpose of claiming benefits. But I can't think of any benefits of home ownership that are strong enough for me to want to take the gamble.

Possibly, if there were help with service charges, then I'd look into Right to Buy. Who knows what's going to happen to benefits and my secure tenancy in a suitable flat could easily end up far less secure. But again, what do I do if/when I get a bill for rendering the flat and developing the shared gardens?

I just want to get my flat sorted, nice carpets over the blood and !!!!!! stains, bright paint on the walls instead of the current black and brown, shut the door and get on with my life. Moving into this flat left me suicidal, I just can't face moving again.

Sorry that this is all a bit stream of consciousness.

I'm sorry about your dad, sometimes family can be properly insensitive! Really doesn't sound like you've had an easy few years of it, and I can completely see how you would want to move along with your life and forget about it.

If you would like to go through the HOLD scheme my advice would be to phone them and ask what your chances are. You may be right, you may have no chance, but you won't know until you ask.

I had no expectations of my housing association accepting me, in fact I knew nothing about them in advance of a random phonecall that changed my life. After all the trauma of dealing with benefits & tribunals and appeals I can honestly say buying a house with them was the most astoundingly different experience. Even filling out their form was completely surreal, it included questions about whether I wanted to own a pet, whether I wanted a garden, and the question that asked what size house I wanted to buy told me that I should add on a spare room to enable guests to visit, or for a carer, or to allow me to have room for hobbies.

I agree entirely about the risks of shared ownership where you have to pay service charges, and potentially astronomical repair costs. I would be petrified of living in a flat long term if I knew I could be presented a bill to cover a roof repair that I simply couldn't afford.

I hope if you do stick with your current flat that you take the opportunity to decorate it to your own tastes. You should live somewhere that makes you happy, especially if you have difficulty getting out and about, it is very important that your home environment is a good one, and that is what I wish for you.

Good luck with whatever you decide!

racon

Housing_Benefit_Officer wrote: »

Yes. We are talking specifically about deprivation of capital here and not any other issue.

Hey I know, but the statement was made that when a decision maker makes a decision then it is final. I know and have had experience that that isn't the case. They can change any decision at any time for any reason. In my case they made a supersession decision to apply only from the date the change of circumstances arose. I pointed out that it was wrong as they had misread/misinterpreted the facts so they changed it to a revision of the original decision which resulted in the whole of the monies paid having to be paid back.

AngelOfTheNorth

Ames wrote: »

It's actually a reason to buy a house really, so that I can get better care if I need it in the future.

Unless you're talking about buying somewhere expensive, is that really going to make much difference? Because even if the limits are eventually removed and all equity can be used, the fees are pretty high. Can be 1k a week. You'd burn through that fairly quickly, so if there was any possibility of you needing long term care, you'd go to somewhere the LA would fund even if you were going to self fund for the first couple of years. I guess I can see how that would make sense if you were buying somewhere worth like 500k, not so much for 80k. Apologies if this has already been covered, but like several pps I'm coming in on the tail end of a discussion!