BEDROOM TAX related. Letter mentioning Childrens Services. AIBU to think this is appalling.

[Darkesteyes]

Apparently if a parent recieves a letter notifying them of eviction proceedings they will be considered to have caused this situation intentionally and Childrens Services will be notified.
Ive seen at least 3 copies of letters like this on Twitter over the past few days. So

twitter.com/robolollycop/status/397035649460498432/photo/1

Potentially a lot of identifying info about service users there Shelly

CSD are always notified about a social housing eviction. It means that families being monitored are less likely to just vanish

The LA I work for refers to it as a bedroom tax unofficially in the work that we are doing to asses and mitigate the impact.

In official papers and correspondence we refer to it as the spare room subsid - because that's what it is actually, officially called, but verbally everyone from councillors down, call it the bedroom tax.

I wonder if there any stats as to what the bedroom tax is actually costing LA to manage & implement?

I don't act work in Welfare but Education. The reality is very poor inner city boroughs resources are so stretched, how will they help even more vulnerable people who are being pushed to the edge?

What's been gained from the bedroom tax?

How much revenue has it really created?

Take a look out of your window now, do you think a child is wise for a child to be out in that weather ATM.

If a family is made homeless then what do you propose happens instead of child services being involved.

Sorry but that letter seems very fair to someone who hasn't paid their rent, after all it does say "you will be given advice and assistance to find alternative accommodation". I believe it takes quite a long time to evict someone so it wouldn't come as a bolt from the blue. My stepbrother rented out his house while he was working abroad and it took ages to get rid of tenants even though they had paid no rent (but could pay to have dcs at private school ) and completely trashed his house.

Its a badly thought out & badly processed piece of legislation. Disabled people all over the country are dealing with the day to day impact of this hideous tax.

It's nothing new that children services are informed when the family is facing homelessnes. It doesn't automatically mean the child(ren) will be taken into care, like everything else, each case is looked at differently.

I worked in a SW intake team. We were copied into all notices of eviction so we could do checks and visit families we knew to be vulnerable. It was viewed as a protective factor. If you weren't on the SW system you got a standard letter saying you could call and get advice but there was no suggestion all these families would have their children removed.

I think I live in a different world to many of the posters on MN.

How about try to imagine being disabled. With a disabled dc. Raised in institutions. No money. About to be evicted. No family...

I don't have to imagine. We asked for help when we lost our business and the accommodation that went with it through no fault of our own, we had/have a severely disabled son and were born and brought up in the area (which apparently is supposed to give you extra 'points').
The only 'help' were were offered was to go and find a private rent and they would lend us the deposit!

Exactly Pixel.

The reality of the help out there for the most vulnerable is scarily sparse.

I think this is really scary.

does anybody know how many people have been evicted through the bedroom tax,not notices actually people physically lost their home

thanks

Well I can see that cs have to be informed, but it's a convenient reality that most people will take that sentence as a threat... I'm sure that hadn't passed the authors by.

I'm sure the bedroom tax enforcement, and subsequent drains on other budgets has saved no money, probably incurred alot of money actually, just like the dla scandal.

It's purpose isn't to save money, it's to strengthen a narrative of blaming the vulnerable and making their loves hell.

The absolute cheapest, most efficient, and most humane way to help these children would be to support their parents to remain in that home, with, oh I don't know, benefits maybe, which would allow them to meet their rent.

I really don't like these letters, and could hardly believe my eyes when i saw them. I thought it was all fake but i'm guessing not having read about it on this thread too

I didn't think threatening letters were legal, but they obviously are if this is anything to go by. People will be rushing to pay to stop their children being snatched, with money they clearly don't have. I bet Wonga and the likes will be cashing in on this whole new saga

If these children are to be taken, does the gov not realise it will cost way more rehoming all these children with paid foster carers, or carehomes.
The children will also suffer ultimately and pay the price for this dodgy new scheme they call bedroom tax

"The absolute cheapest, most efficient, and most humane way to help these children would be to support their parents to remain in that home, with, oh I don't know, benefits maybe, which would allow them to meet their rent."

This ^

I don't see a problem with this, if you don't pay your rent then you are intentionally making yourself homeless.

If this is related to the so called 'bedroom tax' then there has been plenty of time for people to make arrangements to deal with that - whether it is moving to a smaller property, getting a job/working more hours in the same way as any one has to deal with an increase in rent/mortgage/bills.

Theywillgrowup - as eviction takes time, few or no people have been evicited at present but according to inside housing, the leading social housing magazine, 50,000 people are at risk of eviciton.

It's so vile and shortsighted. If one of those children end up in care over a weekly £14 deficient it costs £2,500 a week.

But if even if one single child doesnt end up in care the financial cost to the LA in terms or rent lost/admin associated with eviction/cost involved of changing childrens schools following forced moving of areas/costs in changing tenants - costs loads to ripout everything etc etc far outweigh the gains made from the bedroom tax.

Let alone the emotional turmoil for the children (and adults) the loss of neighbours and support, so vital for vulnerable families, the longterm implications of disrupted education/employment/support networks all of which impact on the future of that family and thus on the tax payer. Even if they are found intentionaly homeless this time, once homeless the liklihood of being homeless again massively increases.

God I could go on and on about why this is so terrible.

where do we get the leap from 'informing children's services' to being 'taken into care' from though ?

It's more what Littlewhitebag said

and I totally agree with Billybanter

you are remarkably naive*, littleoak.

Which smaller properties? what jobs? What more hours?

*I'm hoping naive rather than the alternative.

Littleoak, that is because you probably don't have to decide whether to warm your house so that you don't worsen your childs asthma/your arthritis, feed yourself or pay £14 because someone who housed you in your adapted property in the first place has now decided that you should have a 2 bed property, even though there aren't any available in the area you live.

Getting a job is quite difficult when you need a carer to put you to bed.
Or you are up 5 times a night dealing with your disabled child.

As for moving, where to? Where are all these 2 bed properties! None around here,

Gordy - if you were homeless, with literally no place to go ss is meant to take your children. That is procedure.

Sure. So many smaller properties ready ad waiting to take on disabled tenants, so many jobs with secure hours, etc.

Littleoak, you either lead a very sheltered existence, or you're missing the empathy gene.

There very rarely are suitable smaller properties available for rent from social landlords. There may be from private landlords , but a ) finding a deposit is often a problem; b) private landlords often won't accept tenants on housing benefits ; and c ) private rents are higher, so there is no saving anyway (often the contrary).

If better paid jobs or longer hours were so easy to get then people would be doing this already. Also, most housing benefit recipients are working already.