Warm Home Discount Catch 22?

Spoonie_Turtle

parchedpeas said:

The metric takes into account the type of house and the size of the house.

Small terraced houses will miss out
Large detached houses will get it.

If you want to know why, look for who is currently in charge.

Irrelevant - the people in charge and their mates will never have a low enough income to claim means-tested benefits (the first criterion for the WHD) so none of them will ever qualify anyway.

Some small terraced houses may be old enough (therefore more likely to be energy inefficient) to bring their score above whatever threshold they set - we'll just have to wait and see.

Mstty

Got my threads crossed sorry wrong end of the stick for me👍

Spoonie_Turtle

Mstty said:

In my opinion WHD shouldn't be paid for any properties over a band D. 

The added benefit here is anyone in a band E or higher can sell up, pocket the difference in cash say 20-30k if they really want the money each year.

Harsh but there isn't an endless supply of money and I hope whoever is in power next and beyond is savvy to this.

Too many pensioners hold onto their large, inefficient costly houses rather than downsizing early to enjoy their lives more. 

a) only if they own their home - people renting privately would find it nigh on impossible to find another landlord willing to take people on benefits without a huge deposit or a guarantor; people renting socially are only allocated large properties if they need it, and anyone else with grown children having left home may still find it extremely difficult to find another suitable social property (could take years).

a2) if someone has that kind of savings after selling their home they won't qualify for means-tested benefits so won't qualify for the WHD anyway (though £20-30k savings for someone who previously had to claim a means-tested benefit would be an absolute dream!)

b) Core Group 1 is only pensioners claiming Pension Credit (Guarantee Credit) and doesn't look at property size at all.  They've been the consistent core group all along and realistically the people in power are unlikely to want to alienate an ever-growing part of the voting population.

Maybe you were only thinking of a specific type of situation, in which case a sweeping statement didn't make that clear.

matelodave

Perhaps we should bring back means tested benefits (and properly test with a home visit) and then those who really need it should get it and those who just think they need it wont.

It always seem sto me that those who get stuff given, never think they get enough and want more and those who end up paying for it through their taxes etch ink they get too much and should get less.

In the end, it's not free money , it doesn't grow on trees, someone has to pay for it either by higher taxes or higher prices (or generally both)

Just a thought

Spoonie_Turtle

matelodave said:

Perhaps we should bring back means tested benefits (and properly test with a home visit) and then those who really need it should get it and those who just think they need it wont.

What do you mean, "bring back"?  They never went away.  All the benefits that qualify one for the WHD are means-tested* - they assess income and savings.  Working-age benefits are harsher than pension-age, and all benefits are harsher than they were pre-2013.  They were frozen for years.

*except Tax Credits, which is means-tested but doesn't assess savings.  Bit of an anomaly there.

[The only good things to come out of the reform are Universal Credit having a taper for earnings rather than the cliff-edge that legacy benefits have, and that UC is assessed monthly which does away with the annual mess of Tax Credits finalisation and overpayments created by the way it was set up in the first place.  UC is harsher and more reaponsive to real-time situations.]

worrywart_3

wild666 said:

I think it was unfair to stop payment to those who receive PIP as many of them might be stuck indoors 24/7 and need the heating on to keep warm. Why hasn't there being a protest over this? Many on PIP might also receive ESA so would be able to claim but that's not the point PIP should be included in the core group. 

No because it isn’t means tested effectively you can be a billionaire and receive pip if your of working age and not able to work you would get universal credit as well If on a low income same applies. Therefore it has to include a means tested benefit.

worrywart_3

Spoonie_Turtle said:

parchedpeas said:

The metric takes into account the type of house and the size of the house.

Small terraced houses will miss out
Large detached houses will get it.

If you want to know why, look for who is currently in charge.

Irrelevant - the people in charge and their mates will never have a low enough income to claim means-tested benefits (the first criterion for the WHD) so none of them will ever qualify anyway.

Some small terraced houses may be old enough (therefore more likely to be energy inefficient) to bring their score above whatever threshold they set - we'll just have to wait and see.

Yes my house is 1380 and terraced would score lowest
on an epc I’m imaging it would be eligable despite its small size , but this is far
too convulted in my
opinion.

Spoonie_Turtle

worrywart_3 said:

Spoonie_Turtle said:

parchedpeas said:

The metric takes into account the type of house and the size of the house.

Small terraced houses will miss out
Large detached houses will get it.

If you want to know why, look for who is currently in charge.

Irrelevant - the people in charge and their mates will never have a low enough income to claim means-tested benefits (the first criterion for the WHD) so none of them will ever qualify anyway.

Some small terraced houses may be old enough (therefore more likely to be energy inefficient) to bring their score above whatever threshold they set - we'll just have to wait and see.

Yes my house is 1380 and terraced would score lowest
on an epc I’m imaging it would be eligable despite its small size , but this is far
too convulted in my
opinion.

Flats would likely score the lowest.

From what I read, the stated reason for not just going on EPCs (or even including them in the consideration) was that not enough properties have them.  Would have been much simpler otherwise!

markin

Spoonie_Turtle said:

Mstty said:

In my opinion WHD shouldn't be paid for any properties over a band D. 

The added benefit here is anyone in a band E or higher can sell up, pocket the difference in cash say 20-30k if they really want the money each year.

Harsh but there isn't an endless supply of money and I hope whoever is in power next and beyond is savvy to this.

Too many pensioners hold onto their large, inefficient costly houses rather than downsizing early to enjoy their lives more. 

a) only if they own their home - people renting privately would find it nigh on impossible to find another landlord willing to take people on benefits without a huge deposit or a guarantor; people renting socially are only allocated large properties if they need it, and anyone else with grown children having left home may still find it extremely difficult to find another suitable social property (could take years).

a2) if someone has that kind of savings after selling their home they won't qualify for means-tested benefits so won't qualify for the WHD anyway (though £20-30k savings for someone who previously had to claim a means-tested benefit would be an absolute dream!)

b) Core Group 1 is only pensioners claiming Pension Credit (Guarantee Credit) and doesn't look at property size at all.  They've been the consistent core group all along and realistically the people in power are unlikely to want to alienate an ever-growing part of the voting population.

Maybe you were only thinking of a specific type of situation, in which case a sweeping statement didn't make that clear.

It seems council/social houses often get free external insulation.