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!

Garlic, she won't get the lower LHA minus 14% as its only social housing that gets the % reduction. Its just the flat LHA for the size house she needs and now she would no longer be able to keep the £15 difference between the rent and the LHA if the rent was cheaper like they used to let you do.

Mrs De vere i think you have misunderstood me. I NEVER said or thought it was fair.

OK, thanks. In my local authority you already dont get to keep the extra if your rent is cheaper than LHA.
It would seem totally insane if I moved to a cheaper house, for them to reduce my LHA. The 3 bed place I looked at yesterday was less than the lha, so in effect would be saving the council money.

Is this fair?

"Tenants with disabilities will also be subject to the penalty, unless a bedroom is used by a non-resident carer who stays overnight.

Jayson and Charlotte Carmichael from Southport received a letter informing them they will be expected to contribute an additional £11.90 per week towards the cost of their two bedroom flat.

Charlotte suffers from spinal bifida and sleeps in a hospital-style bed which is designed especially for her condition, while Jayson sleeps in the second bedroom.

The couple are now deemed to be under-occupying the property.

The letter tells them their options are to pay the penalty, move to a smaller home or take in a lodger.

?It?s so depressing,? says Charlotte. ?I have to sleep in this bed. I didn?t ask to live like this.?

?I?ll have to give up bus travel,? says Jayson. ?And we?ll have to cancel the television subscription.

?I don?t know why we?re being penalised. We?re not under-occupying this flat.

?Charlotte needs to sleep in a hospital bed because she?s severely disabled. We?re already pushed for space with all the medical equipment. It?s disgraceful.?

From this page

I never said it was harsh but fair. i never posted anything of the sort.

www.dwp.gov.uk/adviser/updates/size-criteria-social-rented/

This is what i posted last night.

DarkesteyesTue 29-Jan-13 17:26:36

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

Ifnotnow,

Is it lower than the LHA for a 3 bed or a 2 bed?

DarkesteyesTue 29-Jan-13 17:33:46

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?

First paragraph in this post was copied and pasted from another poster.
Second paragraph is me.

Is it fair that people will be penalised for under occupying even if they want to move to a smaller property but there are none available?

"According to figures from the Department for Work and Pensions around 600,000 one bedroom flats will be needed to accommodate tenants currently under-occupying larger homes, but national housing stocks for this kind of property stand at just 300,000.

In the Liverpool city region there are 10 potential tenants for each one bedroom flat that comes on the social housing market. Estimates suggest it will take seven to eight years to find smaller properties for those willing to downsize in this area, not taking into account new demand."

Also from this page

Darkest they have mixed you up with the poster who posted directly after you.

Just checked It was houseelfdobby who said it was harsh but fair.
I copied and pasted some of her post. Thats what must have caused the confusion.

Thanks Sock. Got into a bit of a panic there for a min and thought somone might have hacked in as me

well if they had I would have fallen off my chair,your posting style is quite noticeable to me and I know your not in the habit of saying ill thought out cuntish things on these threads

Thats ok Mrs De vere no worries. Agree with you btw. x

Thank you for the info, Sock. My LA wrote months ago to advise me that I'd be penalised - I'm in a private rental. I know a lot of other people, in various different LAs, who've also had this advice.

I'm confused but not optimistic.

I think this is a terrible policy. Uprooting people who have lived in their homes for decades for about £14 per week or whatever it is, seems to me to be vindictive.

I think it may lose them the election when people wake up to it.

I think this is going to be their "poll tax". Too many people are going to be negatively affected. The sad thing is that many of them will not be in a position to move or pay the difference. ..some cases already coming up which show the idiocy of the changes.

Claig, the people being affected by this will be in too much uproar to bother about voting in the next election. In April 2015, local authorities will be relieved of their duty to house residents within their authority. All they'll have to do is find them a place - anywhere in the country.

I've forgotten how this was worked out, but only the North-East has spare housing at the low rents LAs will be ready to pay. There will be a rush to Middlesbrough, which is already reeling under the worst cuts in the country.

Maybe Sock knows where to find details? Anyway, the upshot will be local authorities all over the country palming off their poor to other boroughs. HB recipients will be obliged to go wherever they are sent, or sort something out without housing benefit. This is clearly going to be a mass, messy migration and tear lives apart. It's unlikely that registering to vote in their new location will be top of anybody's mind.

Tory cunts.

Remember when Labour where in power and everybody was ranting on about how David Cameron and the Torys would sort this country out, get it back on its feet, clear up labours mess etc?

Well they're doing a fucking good job arent they?

The poor where never going to come off very well with those cunts in power where they?

It's making everybody else poorer, too, Vito. Except the very rich.

Hi Choc. So what about families who did already have a 'spare' room for the NR parents child to use when they stay ? Will they now get their housing benefit cut or be penalised iows for this 'spare' room as it is classed now?

I know what you mean about families that own their own house always had this.
DHs son has a young DC from a prev. relationship. He is the NRP. He now has a DC2 with a different DP. They bought their first house together a few years ago when their DC was a baby - two beds (and the DCs are opp. sex and four yrs apart in age).
His DP is flatly refusing to stretch herself anymore mortgage wise or work wise to help them get a bigger house and has resisted it for last few years when it has become obvious the eldest - her stepchild - does need her own room.
So they carry on with bunk beds etc. and the oldest (when there) being told either has to go to bed at same time as much younger sibling or cant go to bed till youngest asleep as will disturb them - no matter how late that is. Neither satisfactory really and both centring round SMs own childs needs and SMs wishes.
Her argument - why should she work longer hours, see less of her own child etc to provide a bigger house to accomodate her stepchild.
She thinks her DP should do any extra hours, earn any extra money needed if he wants a bigger house for his child and bottom line is he cant do it on his own.
Besides in her ideal world it would just be the three of them.

These are the sort of horrible politics going on around me that prompted me to post, because l am sure she would be equally unimpressed if they were renting and on housing benefit and DP eventually said enoughs enough and we need to rent a bigger house - my child needs their own room, meaning them falling foul of this rule and them both somehow having to find the extra money or do without things.

Wouldnt do much for family harmony in that house, can assure you.