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?

Violet - I'm sorry, didn't meant to go off on one at you. Unfortunately I'm currently one of those facing homelessness and so it does upset me when the issue is always turned back around to talk about those working the system.

I hope we can put this behind us though.

(Sigh)

I was responding to a post from Rocky12, giving a broader view of some of the changes in society which have shaped the way a lot of people think and behave. If you bothered to read it properly, you might have noticed that it wasn't all about 'people who have chosen to rely on the state'. I also mentioned school children who have no sense of personal responsibility, and greedy bankers who have no sense of personal responsibility.

That ok with you?

Or do you believe you have some control freaky personal responsibility to censor people's posts?!!

FWIW there are lots of interesting points on this thread, and have enjoyed the debate.

Apology accepted kaloki!

I'm not a heartless person - far from it - and I have some sense of what you are going through, as we came perilously close to losing our home back in the early 90s. Interest rates literally doubled overnight, we were paying about two thirds of DHs take home pay on a very small flat, and the majority of my take home pay paid for childcare for our 3 month old. Shit times.

But I genuinely believe that things have swung far now towards allowing people to walk away from personal responsibility, that the economy (and society generally) is in a mess. And that's bad for all decent, honest people, whether they are well off, middling or poor. I don't begrudge paying a hefty wodge of my income on tax - and one advantage of having worked all the way through, while having kids, is that I am now in a management position, and pay about £8000 a year in tax - I really DO NOT begrudge it when it's targeted towards the genuinely needy who are not responsible for their situation.

But when I see money being squandered, and people playing the system, whether they are bankers or teenagers - it makes me mad, because that money could be put to SO much better use. I also think it sends out a shocking message to people who are trying to do the right thing. My own teenage kids are working virtually every day this Christmas holiday, in Christmas temp shop jobs, as well as revising for January exams - good for them, I have no problem with it, as I honestly believe its the best thing for them - but its very hard when you see other people getting hand outs for doing bugger all

I agree with you on that. I wish no one would stoop so low to play the system, because it puts so many people in trouble. People who are paying towards their upkeep, and taking money which could go to those who need it.

I'm just so scared right now as, on the whole, most suggestions which are meant to make it harder for people to play the system are also far too likely to mean serious trouble for those who can't help their position.

I think when people say 'play the system' , It's not so much referring to people who are being dishonest and claiming what they're not entitled to. Its the fact that the system is so flawed, that it's quite possible to quite legitimately work the system so that you can be as well off choosing not to work, or choosing to work just a few hours a week , as you are if you work full time. Its not the minority of dishonest people I worry about- as you say, they'll be caught. Its the masses who don't need to be dishonest to work the system

I think you get heavily penalised if you quit your job for no reason-you need proof when you claim-Redundancy letters,doctors letters etc.

Heroine, I know there are mum and baby support units for very young/totally inexperienced mothers that provide the support and community you describe, though may be a slightly different format (for want of a better word). I think they have some success, but I think there also comes a point where people would prefer independence and not to feel they're constantly living under supervision. (And I hear that that IS how it feels..)

Of course, I realise that this attitude may be flawed, but I just wanted to point out that it already happens in some places. I know there's one in Bristol (v good friend is a foster mum there, which is how I know). Perhaps this concept could be developed.. I know when I was a single mum I would have welcomed more support and a more sociable life, as well as support to get back into work. It's very, very hard and financially risky doing it alone. CSA were of no use in our situation, so it really was all down to me. No local family, etc. I do think you're onto something, I think the place in the system it would be most effective would be during the wait for social housing, rather than the hazardous and depressing current B&B setup. That was the choice I had if I went down the social housing route - I decided to hunt for the cheapest possible private rental, and simply didn't tell the LL I was an HB tenant. Such a thing as being too honest, etc. It was no palace, believe me, but I could see our lives going down the toilet otherwise, and I'm glad I did what I did.

Brandybutterfly-I have posted in campaigns-would be great if you could add your story.

16 hours a week is two days a week.

Its no where near full time- its less than half!

Therein lies a lot of the problem!

Agree with violethill at 20.45. Wanted to say exactly the same thing myself ealier this evening but didn't quite have the time to articulate the right words - started a post that sounded amateurish and crap so deleted it it! Thanks violethill I'll just leave it to you in future!

I think cuts in relation to HB are only fair in this age - the UK has to dig it's way out of the financial grave it's in. I'm more concerned about our local library closing along with other cutbacks - school/NHS etc.

Merry Christmas

And before anyone comes on bleating 'but that's the daily mail'- yes, we all know they are biased. We all know they'll flag up the designer labels angle. But the facts are in the figures. Does anyone really believe its ok for someone who has never done a days work and continued to have children in crap relationships because she likes babies, to receive 30k? REALLY? And in response to those who will predictably come on here and say 'but you cant let the children suffer because of their ignorant feckless parents'! Well, quite. They need a roof over their heads and food in their stomachs. But 30k?? Considerably more than the average wage? More than many hard working families earn? REALLY? And if anyone answers 'yes' to the above questions, please explain a) why you think thats fair and equitable and b) how you propose to continue that level of spending out of the public purse.

If someone paid my rent / council tax on my behalf I wouldn't be splitting hairs over whether it was 'paid to me' - id be bloody over the moon!

Violet - you sound like me! Of course there are the really feckless mothers with 4+ kids with no support from the 'fathers' but there are also the ones who choose to have a baby just to get out of the parental house. What a terrible choice to make!

I understand that some are put in B&B's but if this was the norm I dont beleive we would have the problems we currently have.

I dont understand the parents living off benefits claiming they want what everyone else have, who state that their kids will only wear designer gear.

I remember John Prescott of all people visiting both Rugby School and a home where no one worked. The Rugby School pupils wiped the floor with him. One of the boys was on a full scholarship and his father was a milkman. Jump forward to the family who were unemployed who were smoking and literally had a bloody great TV in the background claiming that their kids (under 10) only wore expensive clothes. I know some of this was set up but for goodness sake John was the DPM and he still agreed for it to be shown!! Surely he had enough brains to stop it - he was shown up as a complete buffoon with a massive chip on his shoulder about 'rich' people!

I think until the consequences of making bad/foolish choices comes back to YOU then nothing will change. I like the idea of hostels - with lots of help and support. It is really really stupid to have children you cannot afford.

What doesn't Add up?

Btw, I totally agree she's taking the piss. And if she is on the fiddle, then she's laid herself open to being investigated pretty damn easily!

As for her belief that shes a good mother, well, she's clearly not bright enough to realise her children have a far greater than average chance of also ending up as unemployed, with absent fathers and an unemployed mother as role models. So I would certainly disagree with the Mails assertion that shes 'intelligent' !!

That was to tsc btw