Poor forced from the city's centre!

[redflag]

Am i alone in seeing if housing benefit is cut, and the poor are forced out of the cities, buy to let homes will go up for sale then the double dip recession (actually the third dip by my counting) will kill our housing market even more.

People act like only those who are out of work get housing benefit, and also that the poor or out of work don't deserve to have nice things and like like other human beings, getting really sick of it actually!

Of course Labour would have made cuts, but there are different ways of making cuts. Telsa, in an ideal world and all that. No party would ever do that to the rich. I think most people are aware that our new government are stuffing the poor and using the deficit as a smokescreen. They are bloody Tories and that's what they do.

Total exageration to say people will be forcibly evicted from properties. The local authority have an obligation to rehouse people, they will find HA places for them with reasonable rents before evicting them, they will be able to refuse 2 places etc etc.

It's not going to affect many families but it is sending out the message about the future of handouts.

I'm so glad I brought DD up mainly under a labour government. Just wish atm I had had her a year earlier.

Poor people can't move easy like people with money can, for a start I live in zone 3 (of London) my fiance works in Zone 2 it costs him £170 odd quid a month for a travel card and that isn't even that far, it would be a massive dent in our cash if we lived further away from his work.

At my work place (I'm not working at the mo as I am on a Zero Hour contract) people pay out £8 a day to travel in from outer London on the trains, travel costs in London are stupid.

Plus you have the catch 22 of can't afford to live here, can't afford to move out, everyone wants a deposit in my case it £1,700 luckily I had that from my work as my fiance who pays all the bills only has about £100 in the bank after paying for everything, when we moved we literally moved 20 mins away from where we was and had to cart everything here on foot over a 2 week period, moving is extremely expensive if you have no savings or no one to borrow money from you are stuffed and the majority of the truly poor can't drive and/or have no access to a car.

People renting these properties are villified for living in them, but the people who OWN them and make vast amounts of money out of the situation are not vilified at all.

Why should private landlords be allowed to own two homes and rent one out in the first place?

It seems that the richer you are the safer you are, however you came by your money (luck in a lot of cases)

You just get richer and richer while the poorest people get poorer.

Frrrright, unfortunatley you cannot control how people spend their own money. You can control how much the charge tenants in rent and this move might go someway to address this.

Well I'm not sure it would solve anything but in theory there could be a law against owning properties unless you live in them.

It's a bit radical though and might completely miss the point.

It just seems so unfair that some people can have masses and masses of money and power while the people they rent to are right at the bottom of the heap.

"they will find HA places for them with reasonable rents "
where??
there is already a shortage of social housing and that is going to get worse ans more people loose their jobs and loose their homes.

Why shouldn't landlords be able to charge whatever rent they like as it is their asset. They are to some degree regulated by the market anyway. Having unlimited housing benefit payments distorts the market as the Government will pay no matter what the price so the reduction in HB may see rental prices fall a little.

Something tells me this has already been addressed, they will ask single people to take smaller places to free up family homes. 'No-one can expect a council home for life', or words to that effect.

All it will do is create more households consisting of a bathroom, kitchen and 3 bedrooms full of bunk beds for the migrant and young single workers.

while signs will go up everywhere saying "No HB familes" forcing poor families to share properties living in shit conditions or live in absolute tiny crap holes.

the whole thing will get worse as outer london raises it's prices in expectation of the flood of inner city poor (not that outer London is cheap anyway), once demand outstrips supply forcing prices up more the net will widen ever further into the outskirts as more and more people are forced to have 4 hour+ commutes to work rendering social life non-existent and leading to families getting poorer all the time as they will not have time for the kids or to get a second job to help with income, while the price of travel to work goes up and up along with everything else except the wages of course they will all ways remain the same.

Sorry Hudd I've already explained that HB is NOT unlimited already and it is planned to make it even more limited next April and October.

Currently in our area (LHA) it is set at 50% of price of available properties

next year it will be 30%

That's for everyone btw.

Apols that should read LHA currently covers (ostensibly, but not actually ime) the price of 50% of current properties

next year it will be set at 30%

I don't think rental prices will fall. This is the whole point. The wealthy will take up the decent housing stock and pay the asking price (glories of the free market, eh!) - happy in the knowledge that there are no poor scum nearby and that their cleaners have to travel for 2 hours to remove their shit.

Apols- thanks for the correction Frrrrightattendant

Telsa, 2 hours, now stop exaggerating. Also not everyone person who cleans for a job is living in inner cities claiming HB! Real generalisations there.

in theory there could be a law against owning properties unless you live in them.

You need a rental sector for all sorts of reasons. I'm not sure that having the state as the only landlord would work well.

The main thing that's gone wrong is that too-ready supply of mortgages to private landlords has skewed the market, and in places like London HB has fuelled the problem.

Property should only be an investment at the same sort of level as say National savings - something which should retain its value relative to inflation and provide a few percent on top. Property values should NOT go up in absolute terms relative to salaries. The market has become horribly distorted, there simply has to be some correction. Someone mentioned robbing our children - well, leaving them with a deficit AND unaffordable housing is what does that in reality.

at least Boris is on message
oh wait....

capping HB and reducing HB after 12 months is not the answer. that only hurts the people caught between the 2 'powers' if you like. the ones with the power are the gove and the landlord.

what the government is doing is taking from or hurting the people caught in the middle. if you think that will drive down rent, you can think that but there is no proof and it will be highly damaging in the meantime.

so, how will those people survive in the mean time? if you think that may force some buy to let landlords to sell-who will buy the properties? it won't be the person on HB that will buy it-they cannot save for a deposit. so that won't help them. that won't solve the housing shortage problem we have either.

where is all the social housing being built/created? oh no, they are cutting that, they are cutting councils budgets too. where are the all the regulations for private landlords that we need?

this may be of help to some of you:

www.housing.org.uk/Default.aspx?tabid=1336 it is the link from the National Housing Federation who have also written to the Equality and Human Rights Commission about the housing benefit changes.

Why are people wetting themselves laughing at the idea of people being turfed out of their homes and leaving with whatever they can carry?

Really don't understand some of these attitudes.

People will have to leave possessions, renting vans etc is very expensive. I don't get the joke.

I don't think anyone is laughing. I'm not. Its grim.

Isnt, no-one is laughing at that thought, It won't happen like that anyway.

Whats going on with the right to buy new homes scam now?

I went and looked at a few of them, the ones where you pay a bit towards the property and then pay rent/mortgage combined thing where a tiny amount goes into the owning the place pot every month and the majority is just rent money and in 50 years you might actually own the place but still be paying because they have annual maintenance fees of over a grand a year that they can increase anytime they like.

What happened with that mess are they still pushing it as a stupid way to get the poor on to the property ladder or has everyone cottoned on to what a massive scam it all was?.

(I wish I could remember what the scum/scheme was called )

Two people on this thread had a good giggle about it earlier on.

I don't get the joke.

Why won't it happen like that?

People will be served with eviction notices as they can't pay. What will be the mechanism for finding alternative housing for all of these families? There won't be one. How will families be expected to move all their stuff? There won't be any help many will have to leave their possessions. Will it be ensured that there are spaces in the schools etc where people are being sent? Doubt it. It goes on and on.

Someone upthread said 21,000 I have read that 200,000 will be affected. If you live in London then you will be well aware that the cap will not allow you to live anywhere, really. This is not a small thing.

ryoko shared ownership / housing assocaition there is a lot of that around here (and very little genuine social housing).

Evicting someone from their home isn't a simple operation. It takes months of legal procedure even if no rent is paid and don't forget this is capped at £400 a week so some rent will be paid in the interim.

The local authority will have to find them somewhere else, it is a legal requirement.

I really hope it doesn't come to that but I can't see a way around it.