Moving house whilst on benefits!

kj*daisy

I just think - I have a house and a mortgage, if I should be so unlucky as to become incapcitated, and get benefit instead of earning money, but could still afford to pay my mortgage that I took out when fit and well, from that benefit, why shouldn't I be able to do that?

The money would only otherwise go on rent and I'd be moving from a stable secure mortgaged home to an insecure tenancy. Makes no sense. Assuming it wasn't my fault that I became incapcitated - forcing people to move from owned to rented seems draconian to me.

dmg24

SquatNow wrote: »

I've had back problems.

Doesn't stop me using a computer. Or answering a telephone.

But that's not my point.

I agree that people who have been injured/fallen ill need state support.

What my question was (and I'm asking for opinion, not trying to be offensive) should taxpayers be paying so the the injured/ill person can end up with a highly valuable asset at the end of it? Or should that asset belong to the taxpayer..... the people who paid for it.

IB is not means tested. Perhaps the OP saved all his working life so now pays his mortgage that way, or perhaps, as others have said, his wife works also?

I can't see anywhere in his post that the OP asked for the taxpayer to pay his mortgage for him. I doubt very much that his IB of approx £80 a week covers all his outgoings.

Perhaps you would think differently if you had a long term health condition that left you in pain day after day, or perhaps you could just stop passing judgment on people that you know nothing about?

SquatNow

dmg24 wrote: »

IB is not means tested. Perhaps the OP saved all his working life so now pays his mortgage that way, or perhaps, as others have said, his wife works also?

If his wife worked then there would be no benefits/mortgage issue.

If he had large savings then he wouldn't need a mortgage...

dmg24 wrote: »

I can't see anywhere in his post that the OP asked for the taxpayer to pay his mortgage for him. I doubt very much that his IB of approx £80 a week covers all his outgoings.

If he is on IB and his wife doesn't work then he will be receiving Housing Benefit/Local houseing Allowance.

dmg24 wrote: »

Perhaps you would think differently if you had a long term health condition that left you in pain day after day, or perhaps you could just stop passing judgment on people that you know nothing about?

I was not passing judgement. I am sure the OP is a person of good character.

I am merely posing a fair ethical question:
While the state has an obligation to provide for those who due to injury or ill health are unable to provide for themselves, should valuable assets paid for by the taxpayer to support that person not remain property of taxpayer who paid for them.

foreversummer

Squat Now - I couldn't understand why you were scaremonging a lady last evening who was for asking some advice on her mortgage.

I couldn't understand why you felt the need to make nasty comments to this man who has a perfectly legitimate question.

Now I see - you are jealous! You do not have a house and you begrudge anyone who has.

Shame on you. I kinda feel sorry for you now.

Foreversummer

dmg24

SquatNow wrote: »

If his wife worked then there would be no benefits/mortgage issue.

If he had large savings then he wouldn't need a mortgage...

There is a big difference between having enough savings to cover mortgage repayments, and having enough so as not to require a mortgage at all.

If he is on IB and his wife doesn't work then he will be receiving Housing Benefit/Local houseing Allowance.

They wouldn't if they had a mortgage.

I was not passing judgement. I am sure the OP is a person of good character.

If you truly believe that, then you need to reread your posts!

I am merely posing a fair ethical question:
While the state has an obligation to provide for those who due to injury or ill health are unable to provide for themselves, should valuable assets paid for by the taxpayer to support that person not remain property of taxpayer who paid for them.

If you have a fair ethical question to ask, then why not start a separate thread? This thread is dealing with an actual person, not some hypothetical situation.

I think foreversummer has hit the nail right on the head!

SquatNow

foreversummer wrote: »

Now I see - you are jealous! You do not have a house and you begrudge anyone who has.

I do NOT begrudge him owning a house. (Ignoring the fact that in reality he doesn't own it, the bank do, until the final payment is made, with the payments in effect being paid by the taxpayer.)

I am simply asking a question: If that house is PAID FOR by the tax payer, shouldn't it's ownership (or %age of it's ownership paid for by the taxpayer) return to/remain with the tax payer when he no longer needs it.

It's not an unreasonable, insulting or unfair question.

Daneyboy

Listen i was just looking for a bit of advice,you know the reason this forum was put here!

SquatNow

It may in fact have implications in future, as the government looks to slash costs and grab money wherever it can, it may well turn to extracting money from the properties of people who paid their mortgages using or partly using state payments.

Hypothetically, the government could claim a share of ownership of the property. (Something like this can be seen when co-habiting partners split and the mortgage is in one name... if the partner has been paying toward mortgage OR bills they can be deemed to own part of the property.) I can forsee a future government, desperate for cash, selling it's equity to a third party.

SquatNow

Daneyboy wrote: »

Listen i was just looking for a bit of advice,you know the reason this forum was put here!

I appologise to you Daneyboy. None of my questions are meant in anyway as an insult to you. My mother is in a wheelchair with back problems so I know the problems you may face.

If your mortgage is not transferable between properties and your wife does not work full time, then you may have problems finding a mortgage in the current market. You would be classed as sub-prime, and as such any offer you DID get would be unlikely to be anywhere near as good as you got when you purchased your current property.

Depending on how much equity such a move would give you in the new property, and the type of property you plan to move to, you may not be able to get a mortgage at all. I doubt you would get a mortgage deal worth taking if you are looking to move to a new-build property or to somewhere with a high LTV ration. (I doubt new-build would be suitable for your needs anyway as they arn't really suitable for people with diabilities... bathrooms stupid shape, doors to narrow, steps etc.)

Would it be possible for you to downsize so that the equity in your existing property bought the new place outright?

Obviously if your wife works full time and has a good income then you wont have any propbelms at all and your status is irrelevant.

Worth noting when you move that you may be able to get grants to adapt the house to your needs.

merlinthehappypig

I usually quite like Squatnow's posts, often entertaining anyway, but these tonight are a pile of garbage.

You clearly know nothing about the problems that face someone forced to give up a job and rely on Incapacity Benefit.

You make a number of assumptions which are untrue such as 'If he is on IB and his wife doesn't work then he will be receiving Housing Benefit/Local housing Allowance'. I get IB, my wife doesn't work (carer) and we don't qualify for Housing Benefit or anything like that.

'I've had back problems. Doesn't stop me using a computer. Or answering a telephone' Well, bully for you. It doesn't stop me either, but next time I'm forced into medical retirement by my local authority employer, I'll employ you to reason with them rather than my consultant. I tried everything I could to get them to let me work from home and they didn't want to know. It was easier to retire me and pay the pension because it came out of a different pot.

Try getting a job from anyone with a track record of spending 3 or 4 months a year in hospital.

As for trying to tell someone they can't get a mortgage with IB, you are just plain wrong.

The OP came here for advice, not a lecture from someone who has no idea what they are talking about and an obvious grudge. At least he is trying to make provision for himself and his family, not advocating illegal occupation of someone else's property.