Will UC housing element also pay hot water and heating costs?

Maybe it impacts the way they pay their tax on the income from the property

Another thought... Most leasehold properties have a service charge. This is owed by the leaseholder. This cost isn't passed through directly but forms one of the costs that the landlord has.

So, along the same lines, if instead of breaking out the heating infrastructure charge, why can't the landlord include this as part of the overall rental charge- and so therefore it would just read as 'rental charge'? Because, I don't understand why it would be broken out, as there is no choice not to pay it so it's part and parcel of the fabric of the flat.

"You’ve just compared a single person earning 50K to a single parent who’s a full time carer and has two disabled children. Do you really think we should receive the same level of help, genuinely?

How do you know the single person who works also doesn't have caring responsibilities they need to fit around work?

I’d definitely keep on looking - energy prices have come down, but I know someone with a similar communal heating / hot water set up who was really affected when they were at their highest as they didn’t benefit from the price cap (something about it being classed as commercial rather than residential, I think). I don’t know if that’s been changed now, but something to watch out for, particularly if you’re not on a high income.

@Question8383 good luck, I hope you find something suitable - and somewhere where you only have to pay for what you use!

The fact that rents are so high, and many people's wages are not sufficient to cover these costs, has just created a system where public money is funnelled into the hands of private individuals (landlords). Really it's like a giant scam.

But as many PP have said, it's a problem with the system, not the claimants. It's so odd that some people like @sugarisbad truly believe a life on benefits is something to envy.
Op - are there no other housing options without this complicated bill set up?

UC will ONLY pay the LHA regardless of what it says in your tenancy. I know this for a fact

UC will only pay the rental element of the tenancy, nothing towards the bills. The tenancy will need to specify what part of the payment is rent and what part is bills.

The RENTAL part of the tenancy will be paid up to the LHA amount (assuming its private not council/HA) so if the rent is £1900 and the bills £200, and the LHA is £1944 you will be paid £1900, they will pay the actual rent OR the LHA (whichever is lower)

Exactly. It’s such short term thinking to line the pockets of landlords rather than invest properly in social housing.

People who bang on about benefits for working people frequently overlook the fact that in most cases it's the rent that puts them above the threshold for benefit entitlement and the landlord is actually the biggest beneficiary. People living in studio flats are paying close to £1k a month here, and we're 50 miles from London.

A programme of massive social housing building would save shedloads in benefit payments and would more than pay for itself in the medium term, and be profitable in the long term.

* no I don’t think someone earning £50k should get £2k a month housing benefit - in that scenario most of the working population of Britain would be receiving more in housing benefit than they pay in tax.*

"Most" of the population wouldn't get that much. It would only be those in very high rent areas that would get anything like that.

I've just run a calculation for someone on a salary of £50k, paying 10% in pension contributions. They would take home £2,952 a month, less if they had student loan repayments. If they had 2 kids, and were living in my part of Sussex, they would be paying around £2k a month to rent a 3-bed property.

There is no way that they'd be able to feed and clothe their family, cover commuting costs and pay all their bills out of the £950 they'd have left after paying rent. Council tax alone would be £150 a month.

They would be entitled to £1059.24 in Universal Credit. Even in central London, where rents are among the very highest in the country, they would get £1767.31.

For them to get £2k a month, their family would have to include someone with significant health issues/disability.

Claim UC then, if you genuinely think it’s the easy life. As someone who currently cannot work, it doesn’t matter which ‘element’ my bills come out of, most of my bills are paid from the whole UC anyway. ‘Elements’ are simply the different amounts you get for different aspects of the claim.

House is heated to 18 degrees and I have a very long very deep bath most days. Toddler also has a bath and DP a shower daily. (I also shower when I don’t have a bath. I realised that made me sound like I don’t wash every day!)
Use a heated towel rail for about half an hour most days in the winter to dry towels.

We have good insulation and are slowly replacing the old windows.

washing machine on a few times a week, usual gadgets and phones being charged. We are careful about turning lights off etc and don’t watch much telly though.

DP gets a little too obsessed with the smart meter in the winter I will say!

I’d look to see if you are wasting energy tbh or there’s something going wrong with your meter or something. Or change supplier!

OP ignore the benefits knobs. The problem is the housing policies in the country going back decades.

@BarHumbugs Yes, I have a friend in a similar position. Some people are paying 90% of their income on rent. God only knows how they manage.

OP gets the 3 bedroom rate but has to live in a 2 bedroom flat to pay such a small top up. I live in an expensive area just outside of London. Lha is £1320/month for a 3 bedroom place but the cheapest 3 bedrooms are around £1795/month.

Then there's the benefit cap. If a single mum with 3 children gets £1320/month towards their rent, then pays the £475/month top up she will have £40/month left over for bills, food, transport, etc. as her benefits will be capped at £1835/month.

See that sounds insane to me. I'm on prepayment meters and spend no more than £130 for gas and electric combined even in the middle of winter. £30 a month for normal water bill.

There's 6 of us in a terrace house. I work from home, and I have one home Ed child so he's around using gadgets and stuff all day!

People in that situation are much better off IN London than in a cheaper property elsewhere, if their top up is only £56 a month. In my area (NW) rents are cheaper (typically 1K pcm for 3 beds) but the LHA rate is less than £600 a month, so someone on UC has to top up £400+ a month themselves from their remaining benefits.

For those saying what a ridiculously high sum - yes it is, but blame the situation in this country- I'm pretty sure OP would be quite happy to have a good 3 bed social housing flat at £940 a month etc - this is why the situation is bad and unsustainable- particularly in the southern half of the country- the state could own a huge amount of housing assets and be paying far less out every month to support those who need housing payments. Thing is it requires a lot of upfront investment- planning to change so Unis aren't constantly building blocks of luxury little studios for mainly overseas students etc - it requires a totally different mindset-

That sounds very high for a flat a month. Is 200 standard in the building?
These things never seem to be very clear.

Also my sister is on uc and the lha is 450 a month. Just for the people who read this and think all people who have to claim uc are getting the best part of 2 grand paid rent wise.
I think if anything it just highlights how mad the rent prices are .

Shock at the cost of the housing bill caused by short-sighted political policies and lack of investment are justified, blaming and misrepresenting the circumstances of the people that have been the most disadvantaged by this is not.

@Question8383 no I don’t think someone earning £50k should get £2k a month housing benefit - in that scenario most of the working population of Britain would be receiving more in housing benefit than they pay in tax.

You should have state supported housing, of course. It’s not your fault the state has opted to farm this out to the private sector at enormous expense.

But the basic facts of it are - it’s a massive amount of money and people not in receipt of government support probably couldn’t afford this kind of rent, so yes it’s going to be surprising to know you can claim these kinds of sums.

And anyone needing a three bed property could claim this much in your area.

It’s not a criticism of you, it’s a criticism of the government and their mishandling of the housing market.

You are merely claiming what you are entitled to.