To think that very few people can manage £4200 energy bills

[Butterflyfluff]

news.sky.com/story/energy-bills-forecast-to-rise-even-higher-than-previously-thought-12668906

This simply isn’t manageable for the majority of people.

Where’s this going to end?

Most people spend 4k on a holiday, fuck me. Spin is correct it is just so disappointing that the SpAds are so far removed from reality.

"Most" people do not spend that on a holiday. Get in the real world.

@SpinCityBlues I feel for the younger generation in times like this. Its getting harder and harder for them to leave home. If you haven't got the bank of mum and dad it seems like your screwed. The cost of renting is ridiculous.

I’ve never spent more than £500 on a holiday, never been abroad, can’t afford it, a lot of people can’t.

Exactly . Annual trip to Butlins, £600 max here.

They could fund the poor as it's been quoted that it'll cost a tenth of covid.

The poor are getting a lump sum of £1,250 per household towards bills. If the poor are living in 2/3 bed flats and terraces and aren't wasting energy then they are funding the poor.

If the poor are living in 5 bed plus detached then the £1,250 isn't going to fund their energy use but those poor could take some of the unearned equity gains out of their property or downsize. I don't see why those of us working should fund the heating of huge houses that we can't afford ourselves.

If the poor are living in 5 bed plus detached then the £1,250 isn't going to fund their energy use but those poor could take some of the unearned equity gains out of their property or downsize. I don't see why those of us working should fund the heating of huge houses that we can't afford ourselves.

I agree, no fucking chance am I up for funding people who are choosing to overoccupy large properties they can't afford to live in. But given the demographic most likely to be on a low income in a large house and who they're most likely to vote for, I don't trust that the Tories will feel the same.

Well sadly you don't get much of a choice really. As much as it pains you, how the government spends our tax isn't up to your preferences and I don't actually mind, personally.

@Lunar270

I think you misunderstood my post. My point is that those who are truly poor are having their energy bill increase covered because their energy bill increase isn't likely to be much more than the £1,250 lump sum they are already getting. Those who are asset rich but cash poor, due to living in a large house, are going to have to find extra cash themselves, if their energy increases are more than the £1,250 lump sum that they are already getting. Equity release?

But given the demographic most likely to be on a low income in a large house and who they're most likely to vote for, I don't trust that the Tories will feel the same.

Unfortunately I think you are right.

@ShelfyMcShelfface

Sure but I'm not entirely convinced that these people make up any significant proportion of our population. Sounds like you're unhappy about an outlier of outlier situations.

Where I live, we have lots of social housing and some large poor families live in 5 bed houses and are on benefits. However they can't release anything and the local authority can't turf them out into a smaller home. Education is definitely needed and a support package implemented accordingly but it's clear what's being proposed is woefully inadequate.

@Lunar270

It's pensioners that are being referred to, and there are millions of them so not outliers at all. The baby boomer generation who've been able to buy family houses on the salary of one manual worker or teacher or similar and have profited handsomely. Often also have final salary pensions since age 60

Asset rich, often vote conservative. Paint themselves as vulnerable despite often being near millionaires on paper, and far more financially comfortable than their children and grandchildren ever will be.

If they can't heat their homes, perhaps they should downsize or release some equity, rather than expect less well off taxpayers to pay their energy bills for them?

I am wary of the statistics around housing, especially these 'massive 5 bedroom houses'. Their accuracy depends very much on definitions.

A friend of mine was recently surprised that the claustrophobic dump she's renting (because there's nowhere else affordable to rent) is now classified as a '5 bedroom semi-detached house' by the DWP, LA and landlord.

It's a dilapidated former stable and workshop at the end of an 1870s terrace. It never had planning permission for conversion (that we can find), or for its freezing cold breeze-block bolt-on galley kitchen in the back garden. The living room is classified as a bedroom. A large cupboard is now classified as a bedroom because 'you could put a cot or small mattress in it' - it's damp as a swamp.

Of the three bedrooms that are actually the upstairs bedrooms, all are damp and one is just a tiny box room that fits a very small single bed and nothing else.

Lump sum? I mean I'm not saying I'm poor but I earn min wage (plus commission but it's variable), no benefits and live alone
I get the £400 everyone else gets and that's it

I read the 5 bed detached as hyperbole, though I may be wrong there.

But yes, people on low incomes who could downsize and/or use their assets, be they in privately owned homes or social housing, should be well below people who are on low incomes and not underoccupying homes in the priority order for help. Who aren't making choices that make their need for energy higher. That includes homes like mine that are 3 beds with 1 box room, if they've only one person or a couple in them.

I don't expect this to be the case though, because the Tories will probably identify which side their bread is buttered.

That doesn't seem to fit with data.

The latest Office for National Statistics Household Disposable Income and Equality figures, show that in 2016/17, 89 per cent of retired households on the lowest band, an income of £7,619 a year, owned their own property, equating to 660,000 households

That literally isn't millions and I very much doubt a high percentage of those 660,000 houses are 5 beds.

Although I stand corrected if you have more recent or detailed ONS data.

I'd also be interested to know how many older / pensioner home owners have already fallen for those 'equity release' schemes you see on the tv? The one where the simpering daughter gets her dream wedding paid for because mum and dad have effectively given the house away to a bunch of legalised charlatans?

(Downsizing is always a much better way.)

I meant ‘only just over £700’ per year relative to a potential £4/5/6k per year bill.

Totally agree it’s far too much even on its own.

My point was that the person who said it’s the standing charges that cripple us, not the usage was incorrect unless you use hardly anything at at.

Which isn’t the case for most people, certainly not in the winter.

We still have to pay standing charges on top of the actual usage charge. That's what I was getting at , even if you had zero usage ( which most people couldn't do) you you still have to pay for the standing charges.
They get you all ways

Wow!

I really don’t think I’ve ever read a comment that’s more detached from reality.

Even if that’s not your reality, surely you have the empathy to see that isn’t the case for everyone.

Aside from the fact if all those people who do spend £4k on a holiday stop doing so, what happens to the leisure and tourism industry they were supporting?

Getting rid of standing charges would give more control over bills, especially in summer, money you could save for winter. Many people are using comparatively 'hardly anything at all' as they have no other option, and standing charges make it more difficult to reduce bills further.

It’s obvious most people can’t afford it. The state pension is what.. about £160 a week? That’s about £600 a month for state pensioners, maybe a little less.

People on benefits won’t be given 4k a year to go towards energy and neither will pensioners. So £600 quid isn’t going to touch the sides.

Millions of low warmer like myself won’t get anything at the moment apart from the £400 discount.

FFS this is surely more urgent than the covid situation?

Asset rich, often vote conservative

Not everyone who is asset rich votes conservative. Me, for example. Never have, never will.

The equity release versus downsize argument is not as clear cut as it may appear. Quite apart from the huge amount of work involved in moving house, there is also a huge amount of cost. Let’s say you downsize from a £450,000 4 bed house to a bungalow…. bungalows are much more expensive comparatively than houses, so you could easily end up spending £350,000 to get one in the area you want in decent nick, and the agents and legal fees will eat into what you’ve released. You might walk away with only £75,000 once you’ve covered all the costs. My mother did this, but then found so much she wanted to do to the new place to make it “nice”, she virtually spent the lot. Ended up with lower bills, but that’s it.

"Most" people do not spend that on a holiday. Get in the real world.
You’re not the average though. Have a look at the statistics. Around a third of people in the UK spend £1-2k on their main annual holiday, plus spending money. Another third spend £2k plus. Some people have a second holiday as well. So you’re looking about half of people who could cut out their holidays without changing their lifestyle and that would cover the rise in energy bills.

Aside from the fact if all those people who do spend £4k on a holiday stop doing so, what happens to the leisure and tourism industry they were supporting?
Oh the leisure and tourism industry is going to die, there’s no doubt about that. Holidays are the first thing to get cut when finances are stretched. But for about half of people, cutting out holidays is the only thing they’ll need to do to make ends meet. So for those people life will continue pretty much as normal, minus holidays.

Maybe another 25% of people will also need to stop having days out and eating out, so hospitality will get hammered too. But not as much as tourism.

The main concern is the other 25% who already couldn’t afford holidays or restaurants, because they don’t have anything in their budget to cut. Those are the people who will default on their bills. And that 25% will swell to include all of the newly unemployed who lost their jobs in tourism and hospitality.

Ironically the extremely poor will probably be ok because the government is giving extra cash to benefits claimants.

Lump sum?

Yes, the poorest are getting a lump sum of £1.250 to go towards energy costs.