To think this is a cruel policy, and not an actual 'tax'?

[katykuns]

www.guardian.co.uk/society/2013/jan/25/spare-bedroom-tax-contradiction-impossibility?CMP=NECNETTXT766

I just think its unrealistic, and completely ignores reality that it is not just easy to drop everything and move. It is also very unfair to the disabled.

Why can they not target the damn landlords charging extortionate rents?

It is not directly affecting me, but I do claim housing benefit and I work, and life is hard. I just feel like it makes it impossible to live with a 14-25% cut of your benefit.

Its not a tax, its a benefit cut. Say it as it is ... just another attempt to make people struggling to get by struggle even more!

Dh and i were fighting to get a ramp put in the entrance of our building. He has already had two accidents on his mobility scooter while coming in the building. (toppled over backwards and had to go to hospital because of hitting the back of his head) The HA refused to put a ramp in. They said we could move to another flat instead.
The entrances to the other buildings are exactly the same so we would have the same problem.
She also suggested that because of his disabilities a 2 bedroom place might be better.
You should have seen her face when i explained about the bedroom tax.
And the fact that there would be a break in tenancy. AND the fact that as the entrances in the flats are all the same it would make no difference to the way DH has to struggle with his scooter.
We have one bedroom. DH sleeps on a bed made up in the living room. We have slept in seperate beds for several years now partly because of his disability. He has spasms in the night and used to end up kicking me.
im saying that ONE of the reasons we turned down a 2 bedroom was because of this bedroom tax.
We have seen it coming for a while. Unlike some of the people i know in RL who are acting all surprised because rather than looking at the news and paying attention to the world around them they live on a diet of reality shows and celebrity crap.

It is harsh but fair. You could look at it another way and say aren't we lucky to live in a society where the needy are provided with a house with enough bedrooms for everyone at NO COST to themselves? It's incredible really (and fab). But these are hard times and there has to be a line.

When I couldn't afford a full mortgage, I rented out my spare room. Surely families who are being penalised for having bedrooms that are underused could do the same. That would provide extra housing for all sorts of people.

As for foster carers, round here they get about £350 per week per child. That should cover it. Foster carers NOT on HB have to bear the extra cost of an extra bedroom themselves. Why should foster carers on benefit effectively have make more "profit" than those not on benefit?

THis new "tax" or "cut" should indeed encourage more rooms to be put into occupation, as well as saving money on these particular benefits so that those in real need (eg homeless) can be better provided for.

PS OAPs should not be exempt.

When I couldn't afford a full mortgage, I rented out my spare room. Surely families who are being penalised for having bedrooms that are underused could do the same. That would provide extra housing for all sorts of people.

And of course you are offering to help pay for the CRB checks just to make sure these potential lodgers are ok to be around children.
Because if (god forbid) something awful happened the parents definately wouldnt be blamed would they?

Houseelf.....most tenancies forbid you from taking in lodgers.

'Surely families who are being penalised for having bedrooms that are underused could do the same. That would provide extra housing for all sorts of people.'

Most are prohibited from doing this by their tenancy agreements.

Oh l see Choc. I think ! Complicated isnt it? But l was thinking of newly formed families looking for a place to rent or moving area or whatever - will they not be worse off? Or as you say those with a extra room already for when (NR)DCs come to stay will they not lose some housing benefit now because of this 'spare' room ? Also what about families with two or three children from previous relationships. It's ridiculous they cant even have one spare bedroom to accomodate maybe two or three or more children without falling foul of this 'rule' and being penalised.

Fanfucking,

How can your issue with the room tax be resolved it has not yet come into force and as things stand at the moment the LA's HB dept are not accepting requests for considerations?

LHA allowances - living in a Private Rented 3 bed, due to need, disabled parent, 2 DC's of opposite sex, one of those disabled.

LHA refusing to pay for a 3-bed, only paying for a two. FanFuckingTastic having to find extra to top up. Not getting DLA AT THAT POINT for either hers or her DC's disabilities. Getting into rent arrears as unable to cover the difference between the 2-Bed LHA paid and the ACTUAL cost of the rent.

I know LOTS of people in a similar situation.

And there's nowhere suitable for them to move to.

Another person I know in that situation is unable to move as Occupational Therapy have paid to fit a wet room in her current property. She has been told that there are NO available 3-Bed properties (she has DC's, but her current house is larger than she needs as her eldest goes to Uni now) that have a fitted wet room.

She has also been told that OT will NOT pay to adapt another property within the next 5 years. At which point she will be put on a waiting list. There are ALWAYS 5,000+ people in URGENT need on the waiting list. The annual budget for these adaptations covers just 3 per year. And is being cut AGAIN in April.

So she can a) Stay put and pay 25% of her (highly extortionate) rent. (SE). B) Downsize so that her teenager has nowhere to sleep when he is on holiday from Uni and from when he finishes Uni, AND have no way of independently washing herself, costing £££ in carer costs as she is a disabled lone parent.

It will actually cost them MORE to pay for her to have Carers coming in to wash her than it will to just continue to pay her current level of HB...

Money saving or ideological?

Great post, Mouthy. Sadly.

I can't see how people are moaning, if they dont pay for it in the first place then suck it up, get a job,

its not that hard.

Mrsbucket,

If your going to attempt to wind people up do try and find out about the thing that's causing them concern.

9 out of 10 HB claimants are actually working people,its not just the ones who don't have jobs that this rule includes its everybody who has any HB and is of working age even if they have a job

just shows how little you know about it to say get a job its not that hard, what if like pp says you do have a full time that's low paid and that 14% or 25% is the difference between eating or not. or having heating or not because it will be for some people

We appear to have been infiltrated by Conservative Central Office .

Seeing rather a lot of em on these threads.

its diamond dave playing to the "strivers" vote>otherwise the Queen would have 2 move from Buck house (100 or so empty rooms)

MrsBucket. Mw earners and those low earners cannot afford to pay rent and their rent needs to be partly HB.

So unless your very well to do or your rent is cheap (v unlikely nowadays), then most will be affected by this.

And no people cannot just, up and move because that also costs money, and where are all these places to move into?

Oh and for the record, dh is looking for work but he has been for 4 months and still hasn't got one.
Where are all these jobs you talk off, please tell me and he'll snap it up?

There are over 200 people or more applying for each job, only one can have it. Normally the youngsters get them 1st as under 21s are on lower wage and the the more experienced.

A quarter of tenants subject to ?bedroom tax? now being forced to leave their homes reports N.W. England?s biggest social landlord.

Suda, they've never regularly been able to claim for a child that doesn't live with them the majority of the time. Benefits for a child go to the parent in receipt of child benefit. Including housing benefit for the child's room. Both parents cannot receive those benefits. As it stands, it will be nothing new for Non Resident parents.

It's partly why I find the argument that all NRPs paying the CSA minimum maintenance are losers unfair. Some NRPs are losers. Some pay the minimum and nothing more. Some don't even see the children. But some have their children up to 50% of the time and pay maintenance and receive no benefits for the child, instead they fund a bigger house and an extra room or have to make room in the home (along with all the other costs they incur from having their childen spend time with them).

It may not be fair that these non resident children cannot have their own room or have to share with half or step siblings, but it's what has happened for years. It isn't something new. It's also exactly what those who own or have mortgages on their properties and cannot afford a bigger house, have to do.

Can I ask something? I currently live in a 2 bed. The rent is too high and I want to move. Most of the cheaper places happen to be 3 bed ex-council houses. If I move from an expensive private rented 2 bed to a cheaper private rented 3 bed, will my LHA be cut? (I have one child).
(I am working, but, like the majority of renters in the UK need assistance to cover extortionate rents.)
Does anyone know?

You will only be entitled to receive the LHA for a 2 bed as that is the size of house you need.

Yes, your LHA will be cut.
As you're entitled to a 2-bed, you will get the 2-bed allowance if you live in a 2-bed.
If you live in a 3-bed, you'll get the 2-bed allowance less 14%.

Tommorrow Channel 4 news are covering the cuts in council tax benefit.

My main issues are simple:

1.) Where are all the smaller properties?

2.) Can everyone afford the costs of downsizing?