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

Yes I know.
I'm off my tree on strong drugs post operative lay and feeling intolerant.

As has been pointed out to you so many times, with empirical evidence to back it up, the benefits lifestyle families are in the main, a myth. Certainly the very well established, highly respected Joseph Rowntree Foundation hasn't managed to find them. But as usual, here you are peddlling your rubbish, without a care for those who are stuck in three bedroom homes, unable to move because smaller homes are not available, or those disabled people who are being forced to move because they cannot afford the bedroom tax (it's like the poll tax, dear, we all know it's got an official name but this is the reality) or, as has happened in a number of cases, because the spare room holding equipment or used for a carer on an ad hoc basis has been deemed to be worthy of bedroom tax rather than as a necessity.

The letters have been intentionally written in the way they have been to maximise fear and generate payments exactly the same way that none reputable debt collectors operate. This is wrong,its fear mongering.

This is exactly what I was thinking sockreturningpixie

Does anyone know when the law changed to mean the non ability to pay rent/mortgage means you are making yourself intentailly homeless?

Perviously if you were evicted, whether mortgaged or renting , it was classed as becoming inentially homeless

Its interesting that no one on this thread actually thinks children's services wants to take children into care due to these letters - its pretty clear that cs are overburdened as they are without adding on the large amount of predicted homelessness due to government pressures on the poorest in society.

Children's services are used as a threat by other parts of the council / civil service/ etc. social workers have said they know housing does this. We know from other threads/ people/ sources that it happens. I have been threatened myself with the evil spectre of children's services if I didn't agree with adult services (although children's services refused the case a grand total of seven times as there was no grounds!).

It's appalling that other people in positions of power spread the fear and lies around children's services.

(and then we wonder why cs have a bit of an image problem)

WooWooOwlMon 04-Nov-13 10:00:47

It does seem like there is a bedroom tax bandwagon that could easily be jumped on by people who could afford to pay their rent without starving

This is one of the most ignorant and callous statements ive ever seen on here.

If you are found to be intentionally homeless the council do not have a duty to accommodate you long term. If you have no way of providing a home for your children, a referral will be made to social services as the duty will lie with them.

Darkesteyes calm down dear!

WooWoo did not say that everyone failing to pay their rent could actually pay it if they chose.
But it is true that the 'bedroom tax' can be used as an excuse by some who would rather not pay.

Rose,it hasn't changed homelessness cases have always meant to be assessed on a case by case basis with no instant decision of intentionality and each persons circumstances taken into consideration even when arrears or evictions are involved.

Note I used the word meant of course we all know they try to avoid following the actual rules when faced with clients who don't know them.

And fwiw the vast majority of those types of letters being sent out are for between £200-£400 worth of arrears.

Now do you think it likely that the LA is going to start proceeding for 3 weeks rent or less or do you think its more likely to be as a result of the build up of ohhhh I don't know about 7 months worth of £7-14 pw or intermittent reduced payments.

I wonder what might cause that

YY Sock

I have recently had to deal with eviction proceedings from my council flat (not related to bedroom tax but to do with different rent arrears, linked to an almighty screw up with HB) and there was no mention at any stage of notifying SS. I don't believe SS were notified automatically (I had no contact from them) although my LA might have written to them without my knowledge.

My arrears were for £2k (thankfully sorted out now) but I went to see a housing solicitor who said that it was very unlikely that I'd get evicted at a first hearing, it would normally be at least £3k and after repeated times coming back to court that an outright eviction order would be made. Usually they would suspend the order to allow tenants to repay the arrears, at quite a low rate if they are on benefits.

Nobody is saying they will be able to just evict ASAP or that children will be removed,

Just that they are sending letters out to people often vulnerable ones to make them think it will happen and is easy to do.

The government seem intent on creating a climate of fear. Just shows the loathing and contempt the Tories have for the poor.

surely if you are behind on rent, any LL is going to put pressure on you as they need your rent money?

Absolutely! Not wanting people to have free spare rooms and expecting them to pay their rent clearly means you loathe them.

Whats happened to "being a big girl who can look outside your own experience" Woowoo.

They are not free spare rooms They changed it retrospectively in April of this year.

I don't see the problem as such.

If the mother/parents are so completely irresponsible as to find themselves homeless, then social services do have a responsibility of care to look after the interests of the child.

If the mother/parents are good parents but just facing difficult circumstances i.e. not useless, irresponsible as above, then that is not the same reason, but social services can't distinguish until they meet them, unfortunately.

I think it is more along the lines that sockreturningpixie has highlighted, that these letters have a threatening undertone to scare people into paying.

Now if someone can afford to pay then of course they should, however there are vuleranble people who the bedroom tax has had a negative effect on.

How horrible it must be if you are not only being threatened with losing your home but receiving 'a veiled' threat about your children too

all because of a change in government policy which did not exist when you were 'awarded' the social housing

Whats happened to "being a big girl who can look outside your own experience" Woowoo

Wow! That's some serious Internet stalking you've got going on there Darkest. Even I can't remember what thread I said that on, let alone the context!

Not really sure what point you are trying to make with that anyway tbh. I am open minded enough to look outside and have empathy beyond my own experience, that doesn't mean I am automatically going to sympathise with people who don't pay their rent!

They are not free spare rooms

Not anymore they're not, but they were free for people that got enough housing benefit to pay for their spare room for a long time. Thankfully that has changed, as it was always very unfair.

They changed it retrospectively in April of this year.

They changed it, but they didn't change it retrospectively. They aren't asking people to pay back the extra housing benefit they were given.

I agree with you that the way the 'bedroom tax' has been implemented has its flaws, but the principle of not giving people more money than they actually need is a good one.

WooWooOwl council houses are allocated to the person by the council

so if someone was given a council house that was in effect 'too big for them' , surely that is not the individuals fault?

A friend of mine was housed in a council house in a bad area, high rise drug problems, crime etc and it is a 3 bedroom flat.

He lives alone and has his 3 children every weekend.

He has been told he has 2 extra berooms which means paying £28 per week out of his £71 seekers allowance.

He has been on the list to swap since the bedroom tax was introduced with no joy. No one wants to swap because he is in a shithole of a flat

I realise that there are people in that situation Rose, and I realise it will be difficult for them, but at the same time in the situation you are talking about, he's been given a secure tenancy, he gets most of his rent paid for him, and why shouldn't he have to pay a little extra to have his 3 children stay with him? He could become a lodger in a spare room in someone else's house if he didn't have children. I'm sure you could go on to tell me about this guys circumstances and that nothing about his situation is his fault, but mentally and physically able people have some responsibility for themselves.

I don't think it's entirely fair that people have to pay for rooms they don't actually want, but that doesn't mean that stopping paying for people to have rooms they don't need is wrong. It means that there should be a list of people who don't have to pay because they are willing to move into the first available property with the right number of rooms within a given distance.

The criteria for who gets the under occupancy charge does not really take into account the need for the room.

It disproportionately effects households with disabled people in them and people who got allocated the property based on a need for the room where the need has not changed.

Not internet stalking but i DO have a photographic memory. At the age of 10 i was in the school play of the Wizard of Oz. I was only playing Chief Ozgirl but i memorized ALL the parts EVERY line Ive never seen a teacher look so freaked out.

but mentally and physically able people have some responsibility for themselves

ok so you think someone who is on benefits and strugling WooWooOwl is not mentally or physical able?