I work with (adjacently) a recently retired man who has a heart issue and a plethora of other health issues. He told me that considering the new cuts to PIP he was reluctant to try to claim going on to his state pension.
I told him to still go ahead as he has nothing to lose.
However, what astounded me is that he is living (and has for 20 years) in a fairly decrepit rental that is thankfully charged at a few hundred below current market rent - but he still has to pay £60 pounds per month to the council per government shortfall.
I can't get my head around that.
If he is living in a place that is so far below market rent, doesn't this mean that the government are presuming he could find something cheaper? His rent is roughly £420 PCM.
How are people on benefits surviving in private rents if the gov don't acknowledge this reality? I am sure the gov know that the average rent in a nondescript town for a one bed property is currently over £400 PCM. Why pretend that rents are valued below it?
Surely if a person is unable to work and has reached state pension, such a low rent allowance is unrealistic. Shouldn't a benefit match the state of current rents? And if not, wouldn't the gov try to regulate rent prices to keep a balance?
I fear that this is only plunging people who are the most vulnerable into further poverty.