It’s not fair those renting get more universal credit?

[Bigbenbube]

I’m a lone parent on £31k-ish. I’ve worked out if I earn a few more K I Get no more universal credit, but a couple with two kids on £60k combined get £240 a week.

I'm surprised that they get help with council tax, tbh.

My income (pensions and earnings) is just under £2k a month and I'm not entitled to any money off mine apart from the 25% single occupier discount.

Because the landlord isn't the one claiming the UC! That's obvious. What do you suggest, that we go back to people on benefits being barred from renting certain properties? Do you not see how as someone with a mortgage you will still come out far better off than the renters you are resenting in the future because you will have an asset you can sell?

That doesn’t answer my question.

presumably, a renter won’t automatically get the maximum amount of UC, the rent has to be high enough to be eligible?

eg, x2 renters have a 2 bed flat, one rent is £800pm, the other is £1500pm, the

Would they both get the same £200pm housing UC? Or is there a cut off so the rent has to be over say £1100 to get any UC contribution.

No I think If people earn the same amount they should get the same in cash benefits. Simple as that.

You will be happier if you don't compare yourself with others. There are a million and one injustices in the world. I don't think this issue should keep you preoccupied. One could look at the situation and say the couple are paying more tax than you and therefore enabling you to access benefits. Life is tough and unfair and sometimes you have to make the best of a difficult situation. If the couple you're worrying about get less, you won't get any more.

Which is exactly why we need more social housing, to stop the taxpayer buying assets for individuals.

Council housing is self-financing over the medium-long term. The council borrows the money (at low interest rates) and builds the houses. The rental income, less maintenance and management costs, repays the borrowing. Once it's repaid, the subsequent rental income can be used to finance the building of more council housing.

When Thatcher introduced RTB, she pretty much killed a cash cow.

If you are a BTL landlord and your tenants are on UC, the rent is paid to you from the public purse. Usually via the tenant, but in some cases directly to you the landlord.

Exactly. As I said, needs a huge overhaul…

Why? When down the line one will still be in a precarious housing situation and one will have an asset? How do you make that make sense?

Wonder if there’s a way to rent your own property back to yourself and claim UC for it 😅

I think this is irrelevant now. If OP sold her house it would be to buy another house. If you’re on UC with children, you won’t ever be made homeless anyway, so it doesn’t matter. And don’t start with ‘but OP would get to choose her house..’ as most people get to choose fuck all these days as prices through the roof

Yes it’s called fraud

"Helping people up is cheaper than dragging them down."

Love this, @calligraphee !

And so true. There's been a lot of research into the effects of poverty on health, inc mental health. It's grim, and expensive.

I would support that as I agree people with mortgages are struggling. However, the condition would be a charge put on the property so the money was repaid at a later date should the home owner profit from house purchase. That way both tenant and owner occupier are supported to keep a roof over their head in tough times, but neither profits from public money. Fair?

That's exactly what happens though.

After 3 months on UC, claimants can get support for mortgage interest added to their UC. It takes the form of a loan and is secured against the property, so is repaid when the property is sold.

Showing my age here, but IIRC in the sitcom Bread, the families owned each others houses to claim housing benefit.

Even if their costs are different?

The only extra renters get is towards paying rent.
Why on earth should UC pay someone's mortgage?!?!?! Imagine if someone who just bought a property, suddenly became disabled for life (god forbid, of course) and UC paid their mortgage? The disabled person then passes away and their none-disabled kids inherit the house. Paid almost entirely by UC. Can you see how that wouldn't sit right with tax payers?

Also, owning a property is an asset. Whilst you absolutely can still claim UC whilst owning a property, they will not pay for the mortgage of said asset. Unless you're disabled, UC is not intended to be a permanent claim. Especially if you have assets which you could potentially sell to make ends meet if needed

... but if the rent is lower than the maximum amount, they only get the actual amount included in their UC.

(This wasn't the case when they first trialled the whole LHA notion back in the early '90s, and for a little while people were getting more than their rent.)

But they don't have the same needs!

You'd be paying the same to people who owned houses outright as to people who pay 4-figure sums in rent every month, and to people without children as to people with.

Which would be bonkers, frankly.

Obviously there will be people who need extra support. I’m not criticising people who receive benefits, I get them myself and have done for many years, will do for many more. But you can’t really equate paying benefits to people who need extra support for their disability or because they are over retirement age to paying for someone’s mortgage.

why would UC pay for peoples mortgages when once your mortgage is paid off then you can sell the house for that money back. renters cant. That rent payment is gone, not income it goes straight to someone else, you want your mortgage paid for by the government then rent a room/the house out to someone on benefits.

At the end of the day those renters don't get a penny of that rent, the landlord does but if homeowners also got that payment then it would be extra income for them/into a savings pot basically because in the future it would come back to them via the house, not sure how thats fair either.

Also don't know anyone who earns 60k and is entitled to UC 😂

years ago people with mortgages could claim housing benefit!
that was stopped and it seems crazy now that it ever was the case.

I’m in a similar situation to you. I have to admit though I’m just grateful I own and have security. I do think we need to build more social housing. It’s crazy to pay in excess of a grand a month to house families for years it’s really short term thinking from successive governments.

Look at this another way OP. As a single parent you can do a job with (for the sake of argument) a £30k salary. But due to your needs, the government via UC tops your income up to (say) £35k. Meanwhile, Sally sitting next to you, doing exactly the same job, same hours, same responsibility, also paying a mortgage, but doesn't have children, only gets £30k income. Do you think that's fair?