Don't cap my benefits - BBC1(265 Posts)
And yes we must reclaim social housing I quite agree I am arranging a march it will be some time in august or september where I will be unrolling a campaign that was started in brent two years ago by Isobel counihan sanchez I will be unrolling it it camden and yes social housing must be made a priority and we must all stand shoulder to shoulder on this issue teh campaign I will be unrolling started as the counihan sanchez campaign and grew so quick it is now known as housing for all,it gives power to people to put their local councils under pressure and make them reverse decisions and protocol we have the power together to make huge changes as we know councils can't take sustained pressure!!!! please peolple don't forget this.
Hiya people I'm new to mumsnet I wanted to jump in on the convo the situation we are now facing was made by local goverment and they have been planning it for a while,the situation that you can't find a private rental my side of london(nw lon) is due to the fact that now the rents are being paid to the tenant now instead of to the landlord,also due to universal cock up being so widely publicised landlords are worried that people will indeed pay their rent but then won't have enough to pay gas and elecy and then start running into the red.And yes it is social cleansing and no it's not acceptable and I will tell you why britain is on it's knees as far as school placements are concerned my child was being racially bullied at the school they did nothing to help I spoke to them for over a year then my child was held down by three thugs(aged seven) in the playground and they stamped all over my little one nearly breaking his leg,I immediately pulled him out of school only to find myself being harassed by educational welfare when I couldn't find him a school placement cos there just aren't any school places and waiting lists are running out of control and no it's not a london thing it's a nationwide problem,it took me nearly five months to get my child back into school(and that was with the great help of my childs after school club and the links they had with a local school).I was threatened by educational welfare of being dragged to court and fined as my child was out of school.You can not have families and children being moved around the country at the mere whimsy of housing authorities there are already enough kids on waiting lists just in my borough at this mo in time 2000 kids are out of school due to lack of placements.I DO NOT BELIEVE THAT HOUSING PROTOCOL TAKES PRESIDENT OVER CHILD AND FAMILY WELFARE I DON'T ACCEPT THAT.
You can't have a whole generation of kids being constantly moved around being pulled from one school to another and being pulled from one dwelling to another kids need stability we all know that these constant changes for them are emotionally detrimental to them and we musn't let our councils get away with it please people if the council is trying to bounce you out of London or wherever you live you must resist otherwise the councils will carry on,kids need to feel safe and they need routine anything else just isn't good enough and if you are having housing issues please please get a solicitor on the case.Many boroughs are making up stories to put you down as intentionally homeless to rid their obligation and care of duty for housing just to bounce you to other boroughs to ask for housing under homeless applications.I am one of the unlucky ones I have been left homeless with my child due to the corrupt spin of my council filing me as intentionally homeless just to run from their obligation I have been sofa surfing with friends since the end of march I have gone public over my case my local newspaper covered my story and other local journalists are running with my story which I'm hoping to take nationwide,I have also created a google plus page dealing with the topic of illegal eviction and social services I have named and shamed everyone concerned in my case,and yes there is an unholy relationship between housing and social services be warned the two work in complete partnership we have all been set up where being moved out of London and surrounding it was carefully planned over a number of years being done step by step to make sure private rental became impossible in London on housing benefit and the media isn't helping making out like if you are a tenant on benefits that you are somehow a lesser person and not worthy of private rental and the story deepens as many boroughs have shut down all their hostels I will just give one as an example Barnet is one.We are set to see an era here where there will be families living on the streets and no social services won't help and don't their run of the mill answer has always been "WE HAVE NO POWERS OF HOUSING" But they will threaten to take your kids costing the state and the tax payer far more money then just helping you out with getting you housed.If you want to view my google plus page go to google plus and type in solly sheridan and if you need one on one advice my contact can be found on my google.
Deathraystare, the attitude of the government, and an awful lot of people on here and elsewhere in the UK is 'Why should you be able to afford to live in London if you are on benefits, never mind if you work in the city, and would lose your job, if someone NOT on housing benefit can't afford to live there, why should someone ON housing benefit?'
Totally misses the point tbh, which is that there is a massive housing problem, especially in the South East, but also in the South West, and NOTHING is being done, shipping people out to 'cheaper' but also jobless areas is NOT a solution and will make the problem far FAR worse long term.
The ONLY solution is to reclaim social housing as a state service, not give housing benefit to private landlords.
40% of the housing benefit bill goes direct to private landlords who then jack up the rents. Essentially, the taxpayer is paying their mortgages for them. We HAVE to make social housing a priority, in London and elsewhere, otherwise this problem will get worse and worse.
I was shocked by that programme abot the poor not being able to afford tolive in Tower hamlets. Tower hamlets ffs! Another bloody place seemingly being done up. The poor have got to live somewhere!!!! Rents are appalling at the moment. I have had to move in with my mum as the nearest town has a uni so any cheap rent means sharing. With students. I am too old for all that!
I feel sorry for the mentally ill who are being told to move and so leave behind not only family but their whole support network which may have taken ages to set up and for them to feel comfy with.
Hi Tracy (tracymcc), I've been trying to make contact. Please accept a PM. Thank you.
(Nor could we afford not 'one could we afford'. Can't type!)
Tbh I am v sceptical about market pressure having any effect on London prices; i think the market is v broken though.
But I do agree that housing at all levels needs to be looked at really, it is mad ATM. And even out of London it is impossible; we could not afford to buy our house now, and one could we afford to move because to buy a property anywhere in our city with anything like enough space would incur massive stamp duty (10s of thousands). But I recognise we were lucky to buy when we did.
Agree Lily - but actually affordable housing should free up rental properties, thus drive down rents and make landlord either have to sell on - or accept cheaper rents/HB tenants...
(And actually I thought 'affordable housing' could be social housing too...housing associations etc)
Affordable housing is all well and good but there needs to be social housing in the mix too. Affordable housing will not be available to anyone shown on the programme. Both are desperately needed.
precious we live in an area where we are supposedly getting lots of new housing (increasing population by 25%+ in less than 20yrs - I think too much in such a short space of time but that's another story! )
We live in a naice area - a 'sought after location'.
Most new housing here so far has been gap filling and high end 4-5 en suite bedroom type houses - nothing affordable.
And no bungalows for older people to move into and free up larger houses for families (lots of old big Victorian houses with one older person living there - their choice is either move to another village to get a bungalow or sheltered housing flats/care home.)
With the new housing 20% has to be affordable and the developers have to pay for improvement to the infrastructure (roads and water/drainage) - which sounds great...except...the developers can pay (off?) the council money to build the affordable housing elsewhere...
And I strongly suspect that is what will happen here - also we are being bribed to 'allow' the increase because the railway station that has been closed for years will be reopened ...which would be good - except that would give people an easier commute to the (expensive) city...and so make the new houses more attractive to wealthier people
Well I just watched on catch up and I cannot understand and I am the child of a large family as there are six of us is why anyone has huge amounts of dc, working or not. Even if you work and have a really decent job anything can happen. Our circumstances have changed due to my ill health and our income has dropped by 25%. I never saw this coming, you don't tend to.
I only had two dc so all very manageable, of the five sisters one has 3 dc, two 2 and two have 1. We are unsure how many dc my brother has 3 or 4 as he is one of those feckless twats that leaves women after they have dc.
That was the thing that struck me, how shit absent Fathers are. I hope the man whose dc ended up living in a hostel is ashamed of himself.
Where I live new developments have a social/ affordable housing quota.
I havent seen the programme so could be talking shite here, but surely the person who had 7 kids was one in a million? what about everyone else, instead of focusing on one very unusual situation?
I personally know two families affected by the benefit cap and neither live in the south east and one of them lives in a council house. The reason they have been affected by the benefit cap is that one has eight children (the one in the council house) and the other has five children (in a not too ridiculously priced private rental property).
These people are not one in a million. The programme only focused on families in the SE with very high rent, but large families elsewhere in the country are affected too. I do think that London is exceptional because of the cost of housing and perhaps a slightly bigger allowance was needed there, but £500 benefits is more than sufficient for the cap in most areas of the country.
I've just watched this on catch up...and I agree with a lot of what has been said about entitlement etc. I thought I'd feel some sympathy - and I'm aware of editing etc - but I felt absolutely zero. Just lots of dependent people thinking that the state should look after them. I'm actually shocked.
And what about the fathers?
Tracey - on benefits for 3 years - youngest is a year or so old - so had one of those children while on benefits...same goes from the woman with the purple hair (Tanya?) a less than one year old - moved into the flat in Notting Hill 3 yrs ago and had to leave her job ... and the woman who didn't want to do Avon - said something about you wanted me to do that when I had 3 children and it didn't work - how on earth do you expect me to do it with 5? I understand accidents happen - but all three single mothers, no mention of father, had children whilst on benefits...is it only me that sees that as absolutely messed up?
Actually the same with the Ethiopia woman - unless the husband/father died/disappeared -obviously had both children in the UK, not worked for 12 yrs ...where is the father?
Not going to go to the 7/9 children - FGS - speechless...interesting how one guy suddenly DID have a job - wondering if he was working on the sly before and went 'legit' cos it was in his best interests??? Or just was forced to get his act together and get a job?
Secondly - market demands etc - if the council stop paying the ridiculous rents, the landlords are going to have to find someone who can pay...and as low paid working people are going to struggle to find that kind of money eventually market forces should drive the rents down...and moving people out will also free up properties and also (hopefully) drive rents down...
(Remember years ago on homes under the hammer a woman bought a buy to let (not in London) , can't remember exact figures but estate agents were saying rent of £400 pm but she'd already got a contract with council paying £500 pm...and the presenter was congratulating her!! Same with a young single mother in Yorkshire (not about housing at all) but was paying £600pm for a 1 bed flat in a not nice area - did wonder if she was paying/earning if she'd have been prepared to /able to pay that)
God it was depressing - and shocking ...and worrying...
Ssd, yy absolutely.
I return to my first point, this is divide & rule politics. Anyone who says 'I have no sympathy' based on a few snapshots, or what the politicians choose to feed us needs to consider what happens when they are the group picked on. Who will feel sympathy for them?
Only one thing has happened in this country over the last few years; the rich are richer, everyone else is poorer. When the Tories say 'the rich are contributing a greater share of the income tax take, that is because THEIR INCOMES HAVE RISEN.
It was not the fault of the poor that the banks behaved so irresponsibly, the poor did not cause the global financial crisis, but those who caused it are far better off now than they were then.
The housing market is broken. Just as the energy market is broken. The Tory mantra of 'market forces' no longer applies, because these markets no longer function.
There are clearly hard cases, but there is also a problem that needs to be addressed.
I am a higher rate tax payer, wouldn't be eligible for CB etc. If I was the sole income earner in our household, we could not afford 400pw rent.
I'm not saying 'shove out the poor' and for that matter I'm not in London, but there is clearly an issue with a market where poor people on benefit can live in a house that an earner in the top 10% couldn't afford to rent. That is one skewed market. Who lives in South London - 6 figure earners and the very poor? Where the hell do the middle go?
Something has to be done to readdress this for the sake of both the poor and the middle, otherwise we end up with gated houses surrounded by ghettos.
I havent seen the programme so could be talking shite here, but surely the person who had 7 kids was one in a million? what about everyone else, instead of focusing on one very unusual situation?
I have sympathy for those who've fallen on hard times.
I don't think anyone who has had SEVEN children deserves uncapped benefits though. What a piss take.
The top floor flats probably won't be affordable - usually they penthouses and the most expensive in the whole building. I don't think most of these flats will be as high as that anyway, it's just a recent example I linked to but there are many low-rise flats being built as well. Apartment living is really common in London (I grew up in one) and is not such an issue for families here, especially in the inner boroughs and in social housing.
It's really tough for so many people, I know.
But tbh, building more social housing would help people in work as well as out of work, because housing is the biggest drain on most people's budgets, and it was never ever meant to be like that. It shouldn't take almost all of people's wages to pay for a roof over their heads.
And it is shortsighted to say 'they are scroungers, stuff them', because they may well be, but kick them when they are down, and we continue to have to pay for them, and probably their children as well.
Imagine the scenario where benefits claimants were all as the man on the show, with 7 children. If none of those children work, then we have 7 times the problem to pay for in the next generation.
Far far better to retain state control of housing for the poor, invest in education and try and ensure those children go on to be economically active contributors, so that the problem is not exacerbated many times.
*Just for once in this godforsaken craphole of a country I'd like someone to stop bleeding their heart for poor ickle benefit claimants being told expecting people to pay out for them to have rent at £500 a week is unreasonable - and to actually look out for the "just getting by" people who come in just above the line for fucking everything and get sod all - but often live in shittier conditions by far.
I have fuck all issue with areas being more or less expensive to live in - the south east is expensive... we couldn't afford to live there - so we don't. I'm bloody sick of uncapped benefits whacking private rental prices on a whole through the roof though and shitting on those who don't claim who can't afford them because they've gone so bonkers as the state's been subsidising the whole happy snowball. I'm fucking sick of the lot of it - sick of the hysterical "woooo you must be a Tory and read the Daily Mail cos it's all evil evil evil you evil capitalist don't you care in your little palace" shite that gets thrown about on here as well. If it got the whole fucking mess sorted out - I'd vote for the bloody Naked Stripping Elvis Party in a heartbeat and read the fucking Beano on a daily basis.*
Applauds miaowthecat - exactly !!
(Sensible allocations would in an ideal world ensure that people who NEEDED a dedicated house, eg those with disabilities, would find that one was available, those for whom a flat was ok would also be able to be allocated a flat).
I think the problem is that solving this problem requires quite radical solutions, and I don't think any of today's politicians are prepared to be brave and creative, they prefer the 'radical' solution of moving people out, people who are not in a position to help themselves, or to argue their corner.
True, but then we need to ask serious questions about what people's specific needs are. Otoh, some of my family coped very well with children on much higher floors living in the Far East, and it was regarded as normal, not as something undesirable; with today's rules on accessibility and H&S I don't think it's the issue it was, and many high rises have their own outdoor space - thinking of the flats in our city, many of which are social housing, and the remainder of which USED to be, there is a large quadrangle, a big lawn area, a basketball court, so the kids there are not deprived of outdoor space.
Lily; I agree with you about some of those homes being for social housing. Affordable homes are not affordable for many.
Another thing though: who wants to love on the 42nd floor with children? These tower block developments are not suitable for all families.
There is a big difference between affordable/shared ownership housing and social housing.
I would like to see these development all containing a proportion of housing which would be bought at cost price by the local authorities, and which would stay in council ownership, to start rebuilding our much reduced social housing stock.
What constitutes an affordable home though, can somebody on the average wage (£27k) afford to live in one without govt help?
Join the discussion
Please login first.