AIBU to hate the line "why should people on housing benefit live in homes that working people can't afford?"

[standupandbecounted]

"Why should people on housing benefit live in houses that working people could not afford?"

I keep seeing this line being thrown about in the media. Along with stories about families, usually with an average of eight kids, claiming a shocking level of housing benefit.The government is going to cap housing benefit to prevent this. Reasonable, but not the whole story.
A a less publicised proposal is to drop the level of Local Housing Allowance(LHA) from the 50th centile to the 30th centile.Local housing allowance is currently set at the median-middle value- of private rents in your local area. In my area the LHA is nowhere near the proposed cap. The maximum I can claim for a 2 bedroom property (I have 2 kids) is 126.92 per week. For a three bedroom it is £150 per week. Shelter have estimate that the average loss for a for a two bedroom tenant in my area will be £12 per week.( I assume this is based on predicted rent levels)
Loss per area here

I am renting a two bedroom flat for myself and two children, aged 18 months and 5. There is no outdoor space, it is not large and not in an exclusive area. The soundproofing is poor and the tenants upstairs are fond of partying way into the early hours. Hardly luxury housing that working people can't afford. I believe this myth about HB claimants living in the best properties does not represent the reality for the majority of us. I have tried to find somewhere better but most landlords will not take HB or children. I have put my name down on the waiting list for council housing but have been awarded thr lowest priority level. I will never get one with that banding.

The thing that upsets me most is the "working people" bit, a lot of HB claimants ARE working people! Housing benefit is also available to people who don't earn enough to cover their rent. Most low income people cannot access council housing anymore. They are forced to rent on the private market, where rents are to high to be affordable on low incomes. This is the case in most areas, not just London.

So, AIBU to feel angry that people on housing benefit are being misrepresented and subjected to unfair cuts?

'1300 in extra tax,

should be in lost benfits I mean.

And yes our council does offer a free 10 - 3 holiday club for NT kids.

We'd prefer to get the extra work anyway but- why carers?

Although after the 24 hours we have had with ASD ds1 (he called me a fucking lying bitch in town and his youngest brother a fucking brain dead - can;t even type alst word) if anyone fancies a skinny 11 year old suited to chimney sweeping.....

I think mortgage interest for two years is fair too. My friends husband lost his job.They are not entitled to any help from the state because she works, they have a mortgage and are at risk of losing their home.Yet it has been a year and he still can't get a job.( he is skilled but in his 50s)It can take a long time to find jobs at the moment.

there are a lot of well informed posts on here. I have no medals to award

Riven The criteria for MN deserving poor seem to be very strict and involve a lot of detail.

I am aghast at the number of people who think anyone should give up a job, in which they help provide for their family, in order to claim off the state instead. That's what's bloody wrong with this country, too many people willing to take handouts instead of helping themselves, perhaps some people have too much pride to give up work.

How many actually do think that Posie?

I don;t think I have ever met anyone esposuing that view and certainly it is not something we in any way believe.

Although having pride in carer's incidences (as Riv and I both are so relevant) could eman giving up work- sadly 24 hours in a day is not always sufficient without a time wortex

standup, for some on MN, that detail includes mobile 'phone and laptop/internet usage. If poor, and given a posh mobile telephone for a christmas present from a non poor relative, should it be kept, or sold for a fraction of it's value, and the money used to buy vegetables/pay utility bill I wonder?

To be fair, there's poor and then there's actually poor which would mean no internet or mobile phone.

There's your answer, a1! You're supposed to flog the mobile and buy a week's shopping with it.

You don't deserve mobiles or net usage unless you meet the proper criterion.

Nobody said that, but poverty is not having a mobile contract and internet. That's why the government made a pledge to put broadband/internet into every home because really poor kids didn't have it.

Honestly.

expat But shopping must only include vegetebles to make your own soup and other proper food. No biscuits, not even smart price, and if dcs invited to a birthday party, no present may be bought. I am part time worker so cancelling internet and kids can go to library if they need it. I may go to the Libray and use internet for full time jobsearch only. Anything else is a waste of time. Only shops I can go to must be in walking distance.

Library

And you've best be buying that veg whole, a1, no pre-cut stuff! That's too expensive.

Perhaps some tinned fruit for puddings.

Much cheaper, you know.

Yy, library, indeed. You don't need a mobile, but you won't have a landline, either, so how the hell potential employers are supposed to contact you, I know not.

But I'm sure a handy neighbour can take your calls and provide free childcare when needed, too.

Contract mobile, not no phone at all.

posie So no contract mobile, even if it works out cheaper than a pre pay?

Todays news. "another one million people will slip into poverty" Dave can do better than this.

expat, sorry cannot write any more, cancelled internet and anyway must be off to boil outer cabbage leaves kind neighbour gave me, will be very nutritious good for us, boiled up with grated potato peelings (out of nex door's dustbin, of course we eat with skin on).(I still have to pay internet as I foolishly signed up for a year of landline and internet, but cancelled anyway, as I don't deserve it!)

gabby It's ok, he's aiming for more

Shame! This thread was sounding reasonably informed and intelligent this morning. It's degenerated as these things tend to do.

I only buy the reduced price carrots that have gone bendy. Anything else is a waste of money and that money can go towards rent. Broccli in particular is not for the likes of us.

Ok then, Being serious; Thatcher sold off council houses (and other things) and she and rest of Conservatives wouldn't let councils use money from sales to build more council houses. Tenancies do not automatically get inherited by children. Tenants are encouraged to downsize already when children leave. (more well informed details given by other posters earlier). Labour allowed some social housing building, shame it wasn't more, but if they had built more, coalition, especially Nick Clegg, would have said it was a waste of money and left a "mess" to be cleared up. (Clegg said free computers and internet for poor "waste of money", that scheme has been stopped.) Labour weren't perfect but have good morals and better than the cruel, encouragers of hate between middle income, low income and lower income classes, coalition we have now. In case anyone has forgotten, Housing Benefit is for those that work as well as those that do not, and Council houses are not free of charge to tenants.