At least 10% Housing benefit cuts could be on the way

ukcarper

CLAPTON wrote: »

glad to have brightened your day

It must sometimes, get a little depressing that every event always has a down side worth highlighting.

Funnily enough I don't think that and at least I've got an open mind which is certainly something you lack.

jamesd

A possibly easy enough policy solution to this would be enhanced tax relief in designated areas for building "student" pod buildings for the singles on benefits. Including per-pod purchases within permitted investments for pension money would also help.

Permitting social tenants in student buildings would also be useful, at the moment there are reliefs that only apply if all tenants are students. 12 month margin to move on after ceasing to be on means tested benefits to allow reasonable transitions. The mixture of students and social tenants might help to reduce the chance of such places becoming solely benefits claimant ghettos.

A student pod is a small self-contained studio flat, ideal for lowish cost housing for a single person. Modern insulation and relatively small sizes mean that utility bills are relatively low, so ongoing costs that have to be paid out of benefits can also be lower than traditional rental properties.

jamesd

marleyboy wrote: »

Fact is, up North there is no more room at the inn.

Fact is that up north and in the Welsh valleys you can buy proper homes with multiple bedrooms for £40k. High cost area councils making arrangements with landlords to take social tenants and providing rent guarantees could bring some of those into very productive use, bring more business to the low cost areas to provide services to the tenants and cut costs in high cost areas.

Welsh examples on the market today with no significant refurbishment needs include : £25k studio Ferndale, £26,500 one bedroom flat Tylorstown, £30,000+2 bedroom flat Fernhill, £35,000 2 bed terraced house Abertillery, £35,000 3 bed terraced house Ebbw Vale, £42,500 4 bed terraced house Penrhiwceiber.

With property prices that low there's room for eminently acceptable social rents for councils in high cost areas. To find examples use Wales or England as the search location and set a low maximum price.

princeofpounds

A possibly easy enough policy solution to this would be enhanced tax relief in designated areas for building "student" pod buildings for the singles on benefits. Including per-pod purchases within permitted investments for pension...

You are almost on the right track, but this simply isn't necessary. The correct bit is that you have identified housing supply as the problem, rather than thinking you can pump more money in to boost demand (which just raises prices and achieves little else).

But the fact is that building housing is hugely, vastly profitable pretty much anywhere in the UK that has a working economy, you simply don't need to provide financial incentives. That's why people get so rich when they find they can build on previously agricultural or amenity land.

What you need to do is actually allow it to happen - planning rules are what largely throttles housing supply.

Even in London pod type housing isn't remotely needed. Not even high rise. Simply allowing some of the inner suburbs to take on a mid-rise character in places, much like any German city, would help immensely.

jamesd

I agree that planning changes would be a very useful part of the picture but don't think that they are all it'll take. A lot of volume could come from things like converting normal houses to pods and that can be facilitated with assorted things other than just planning permission. Of course if rules for what is considered suitable habitation don't include single people living in places deemed suitable for single students that'd be a problem to solve in the planning system.

CLAPTON

jamesd wrote: »

I agree that planning changes would be a very useful part of the picture but don't think that they are all it'll take. A lot of volume could come from things like converting normal houses to pods and that can be facilitated with assorted things other than just planning permission. Of course if rules for what is considered suitable habitation don't include single people living in places deemed suitable for single students that'd be a problem to solve in the planning system.

in which case, why haven't they already happened?

cells

fordcapri2000 wrote: »

http://www.24dash.com/news/central_government/2015-06-04-Housing-benefit-to-be-targeted-in-Osbornes-welfare-cuts-IFS

This Government should be aiming for a much bigger percentage, maybe they are.
Over the next 10 years as things stand the UK is set to pay on housing benefit alone of £1/3 Trillion, how much social housing could that build.

Time to stop putting money in landlords pockets.

Probably over half of the HB bill is to councils and housing associations and other "social" providers

seven-day-weekend

chewmylegoff wrote: »

Why wouldn't the better properties go to people paying for it themselves? Generally speaking the "better" a property is the more it costs. If I earn £20k a year I am not going to be able to afford to spend as much on housing as someone who earns £100k a year. It seems likely their house will be "better" than mine.

The logical extension of your post is that you think that the poorer quality houses should be occupied by people paying their own way whilst the better ones have benefits claimants living in them. In such a situation why would anyone want to work?

Also with bought houses - the more income you have , the 'better' house you can afford to buy. That's just life!

cells

lisyloo wrote: »

It's certainly not a solution for millions of Londoners - there just aren't the (millions of) jobs and neither for anyone with a London centric job e.g. governemt or investment banking.

For one or two there might be a better standard of living to be found, but how many teachers would you need to move before all the Northern vacacies were filled? 20? 50? I don't know the number but it's certainly a drop in the ocean.

most jobs are created from local demand

If 10% of Londons population migrated from London to other towns we would find almost 10% of Londons jobs move with them

Also London has shed over a million people in its past and the world didnt end. Those Londoners move to elsewhere in England and the jobs with them.

ukcarper

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

Also with bought houses - the more income you have , the 'better' house you can afford to buy. That's just life!

I agree and I can't see how chewy can draw the conclusion he did from my post in general people claiming housing benefit are not able to afford as much as someone not claiming.