Tory Government’s benefit cap is unlawful and causes 'real misery for no good purpose', High Court rules

[Skutterfly]

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/benefit-cap-judicial-review-welfare-payments-government-loses-lawsuit-court-case-judge-misery-a7802286.html

Finally

Am I saying anything that isn't true? Misguided, perhaps.
Do some research before assuming that everybody gets 23k a year.

You chose wisely, puckered. Very wisely.

So are we saying that a 23k cap is an unworkable reduction in peoples benefits? Or are we saying that hardly anyone gets 23k? Because if hardly anyone gets 23k then surely a cap at that level affects hardly anyone?

If you rent a place that costs £7k you won't get 20 grand. You'll get around £6k housing benefit and £73 a week dole plus £50 a week for your first child and less for the second. You'll get some of your council tax paid as well but you'll have to find at least 15% of it. And that's it. People who are on the dole don't just get handed £20 k a year.

Up thread it was argued that people on the dole are getting under 13.5k which is much less than the cap. So why are people worrying about the cap? It's all irrelevant if nobody actually gets that much anyway.

The people who are affected by the cap are mostly unemployed single parents with several children in private rented accommodation. Instead of getting their rent paid (and remember the rent is only covered if it is one of the least expensive properties in the area) and getting just enough to live on, the total amount they get is capped, so that after rent they have much less to live on. Result is either they get a job to avoid being much worse off, even though the state then ends up forking out for childcare, and they still can't afford the other costs of employment like transport, or they can't get a job, their benefits are cut and they end up either getting behind with rent or not feeding and clothing the kids properly. Which in some cases has ended up with familes becoming homeless at extra cost to the state, or parents being charged with neglect and kids needing foster care, again at huge cost. The courts are right. It's a deliberate punishment for no useful purpose. Unless you believe that single parents and women who leave abusive relationships have to be punished to shore up the 'traditional' family, and that anyone without full time paid work is a leech on society

What on earth has their age got to do with anything puckered

Why does anyone say "they should suck it up and move somewhere cheaper"
I moved from Cardiff to one of the cheapest places in the UK (the valleys)
Here is a breakdown of costs
Agent fees 220 pounds per adult,
Plus 49 each for a credit check.
Removal van for 1 load (I only had a bed,oven and boxes everything else was ordered online to be delivered) going 25ish miles, 120 pounds.
Deposit 750 pounds.
4 weeks rent in advance 600 pounds.
There was also a week period where I was paying rent on two properties and smaller less essential costs like mail redirection, and if their previous property was part furbished they must when replace those things, ovens are a common item to come with a property and can be very expensive for example. but if we just look at the very basics you wouldn't have much change from 1800. Rent and therefore advance rent would cost more in other areas or for bigger houses (since the main focus here is single parents with a few kids. Who'd need more space than the 2bed I had). And housing benefits are paid in arrears it does not cover rent in advance, so even if they could get help with their deposit (hard to get) they'd still need to pay the few weeks upfront. In addition to that, if they had to move even further transporting their things would cost even more.
So I'm really not sure how on earth anyone on benefits can afford to move quickly. Much less without social housing, all the while living on less and less as they are capped. Its perfectly possible that in "cash" all someone gets is a few hundred a month. How do you turn that into 1800 or more with kids to feed and bills to pay?

Aren't agent fees going?

Soooo basically we should continue to pay over the odds cramming people into squashed accommodation.

That is insane.

Is this everywhere? All the preferable villages,towns and hamlets? We as a taxpayer should pay more and house people in the best places because they demand it and refuse to leave whilst those in the middle have to do just that. Landlords already pull the plug on properties and people manage. Plenty move within their local area,the costs are the same. Nobody gets to stay in one place their entire lives.

You think ghettos are the answer?

Missymayhems post says it all

Ghettos. How over dramatic.Hardly. The most expensive places are few and far between. The majority don't live in them.

I thought this decision was based on the cap being an arbitrary amount and that setting any cap does not make sense. This is because if a person/family is judged to need say for example
X amount for rent
Y amount for universal credit
z amount for child benefit

Then it is wrong to add it all up and if comes to more than a certain amount to reduce what they are paid as that will be less than is needed.

If welfare payments are judged too high (say for political reasons) then payments of specific benefits need to be reviewed. Just arbitrarily setting a maximum amount is a discriminatory and unfair way to limit welfare payments.

Disclaimer: I am just summarising what I think the judgment was saying (though happy to be corrected as I am no lawyer) not what I believe about welfare payments in a political context.

The judgement makes complete sense to me whatever your political views on welfare payments

suggest some of you read the exemptions from the benefit cap. The labour MP spouting off on the news last night did not seem to understand that anyone with a disabled child is EXEMPT and disability benefits are NOT included.
Rents are too high in the private sector - that is heart of the problem and the housing benefit bill is rising fast. This needs to be addressed as a matter of urgency as it is us, the taxpayers, who are paying for this.

The Guardian estimated about 100,000 people are up against the benefits cap. So not a vast number but symbollically important.

The Government plans to appeal.

Bumbling, I agree with your summary.

Tomorrowillbeachicken

See what you mean. On the face of it he does seem to have made some rulings that his peers might not have made in his place.

The housing benefit bill will grow hugely when generation rent get to an age where they can't work anymore formerly known as retirement but we know no one will be retiring

cocklodger your sums are right, I'm going through it at the moment. Bloody bubble wrap and boxes are extortionate. Ive tried supermarkets but no one has any decent ones.
It all adds up. It's expensive moving.

FizbotheClown I hope they do but I suspect they'll be worked in elsewhere or renamed and charged for anyway.that's if it even comes in, it may not. See previous u turns.. But even so, rent in advance and removals etc are crippling enough.
I'd definitely support something that allows people to move somewhere cheaper, perhaps a 0 percent interest loan from the dwp, they used to exist and to a point still do but you can only borrow a very small amount. So I think something like that but specifically for moving would long term reduce the benefits bill. Encourage people into cheaper areas rather than staying in eg London or the se so demand falls... And it could all be done without making people choose between food and gas.

Its not necessarily about refusal to move but the ability to do so. I'd support something similar to the above for all but based on income rather than where the income comes from. I often think the working poor especially the young Working poor are very much left to it because they work. I was in that situation and while I'm a dyed in the wool lefty I think provision needs to be made for anyone on less than x amount, perhaps vary it by council. As 16k a year in some northern towns or Welsh towns isn't bad going, you can live reasonably well if frugal. 16k a year wouldn't make a dent in London, or even parts of the SE, and a fair few cities and towns in general...
the Crux of it for me is that many are suffering be it workers without benefits, workers with benefits, the disabled and sick, unemployed and a lot of people who make the average income or less depending on where they live. A huge change needs to happen but overall I'm unsure how we achieve that but I think saying "you have the same/more/ not much less than me so I want the gov to cut it" will only lead to a race to the bottom and unless we all want to be eating beans on toast for every meal we should be fighting for better pay, conditions and living standards in general

But surely if you are paying rent in advance you have some weeks when you are using what you paid in advance after giving notice,I always did. You then stockpile for the new place.

People are managing to move all the time as landlords often sell etc.There is very little difference in moving out of area to staying. Van hire is the only thing.

I've done a tax credit calculation online. If you're a single parent with 2 children working full time with childcare costs and earning £30,000 you could get £464.14 every 4 weeks in tax credits. That's £6,033 per year.

You'd also get child benefit of

fitz I've just been given notice as my landlord is selling.
Currently my landlord has deposit and first months rent etc.
I've had to pay the estate agent Thursday, deposit and first months rent for the new place. Last week I had fees and referencing to pay.

So within days of unexpected notice I've had to find thousands. That's before you move to practicals of vans and boxes.

Yes I'll get my deposit (hopefully) back and maybe have a months grace due to that advance payment. But I've still had to find it now to get the next house in place

Posted before I was done- CB £1788.70 p/a.

Housing benefit- according to a turn 2 us calculator someone in this situation living in London could get £250.75 in housing benefit per week- or £13,309 p/a.

So someone in the same situation as those on the benefit cap (and realistically you need to have 2+ children for it to apply) earning £30k wouldn't have the same amount they do- they could have £21,130 more even after tax.

So my point is that you're not better on benefits and the cap is in my view unfair.

I work with people who are really struggling financially, about half are on benefits and most of the other half are self employed, on zero hour contracts, on low/ unpaid sick leave or low/ unpaid maternity leave. About a third have dependant children and the majority who do are lone parents. It's pretty clear to me the issues to tackle- get rid of zero hour contracts, do further work on raising wages, make it easier to get benefits if on a low income while self employed, put in better provisions for in-work sickness and maternity benefits, improve childcare and fund it better and get rid of the benefit cap and bedroom tax which only kick the poorest/ sickest/ vulnerable children when they're down.

Cocklodger, your figures don't take account of the fact that someone who is moving will get their deposit back from the previous landlord, and the new deposit is probably less than this (as its a cheaper property). So you shouldn't count a deposit as a moving cost, unless the person has been living with parents previously and its their first time of moving out

Oh and build more social housing so that housing benefit can be mostly paid on cheaper rents (instead of expensive private sector rents) reducing the overall housing benefit bill for the country.

And get better prevention of homelessness strategies in so that public sector landlords aren't spending fortunes evicting people and having to wipe all their debt because they have no money. And local authorities aren't having to spend even more on homeless procedures.

And build fit for purpose homeless accommodation and stop putting people in temporary homeless accommodation and charging them up to £300 a WEEK (yes this is happening) which is usually paid for by housing benefit which is a ridiculous way to use public money.

And no this isn't to come from the magic money tree- Invest and spend in improving these things (it's a lot, take one at a time) and you could save the same back that is currently wasted in inefficient practices that leave people miserable.