40,000 families homeless due to benefit cuts - and no money saved...

[pointythings]

story in today's Guardian

I am just .

So what can we do to keep people in their homes, especially given that the majority of these families will be working families? How are low-paid jobs in places like London going to be done without penalising the people earning this low pay by forcing them to move away and incur huge travel costs? Are we ever going to have the house price readjustment that is needed so that people can live where they work, have sensible mortgages they can afford and are able to save a bit too?

Aaaargh, I wish I had some answers, I am feeling really depressed about this...

It'll work because gang bosses will continue to import illegal immigrants to sleep 10 to a room in some shithole in London who have to pay most of their (crap) wages to the bosses to pay off their expenses of getting here.

In the same way that women are trafficked in the sex industry.

:(

I know that some savings will be made under the LHA TheHumanCatapult, but the BBC article says that it won't be as much as the savings made under the new social housing HB changes (see box 3 underneath the article).

I think that a lot of the low income key workers in London won't be affected by the LHA rate changes as they live in council/HA flats anyway. At least, most of the families on the estates around here do jobs like that (bin collectors, cleaners etc). Most families I know who are having to move out have slightly better jobs (e.g. nurses) - still low paid but not min. wage, and will be able to afford removal and commuting costs. The most vulnerable tenants tend to be in council housing, as the council has a duty to rehouse under medical/social grounds.

Catapult. The problem is this. Housing benefit was getting out of control. Another thing we can't afford in its current guise.

It was being milked by a lot of landlords whom just priced their properties at the maximum of what the local authority said they'd pay rather than let market forces & competition drive down prices.

If I remember correctly the cap was about £500 per week which still seems incredibly generous to me.

At the end of the day we need to be sympathetic to those who need HB but also to those whom pay for it. It understandably upsets those hard working families paying taxes to support someone else who as a result of HB lives in a house they have no chance of affording themselves.

I'm also mindful that if my interest rates went up to the point I couldn't afford to live in my current home then ppl would be saying "Tough....move somewhere you can afford then" and its the same here really isn't it?

if you can't afford to pay rents in central London then surely the logical thing to do is move elsewhere rather than expect the government to pay more money. The tail should not wag the dog.

what mumble said. those jobs will be done by immigrants who come without family, legal or not, and sleep 10 to a room in a slum.

'At the end of the day we need to be sympathetic to those who need HB but also to those whom pay for it. '

niceguy, 80% of those in receipt of HB work. Yet still this assumption HB is the domain of the unemployed.

I know this may seem like a dumb queation but why can't Councils or HA use the money collected from reght to buy to build affordable homes for people on low incomes.
I also think that £30K is plenty enough to have a basic standard of living - to house, feed & clothe the family. We are a family of three and live on about £18K plus some tax credits so nowhere near £30K

I was horrified when I read this article, as me and DP have a couple of friends up north who are facing homelessness or were homeless in the past.

Here, in the cheapest town it costs roughly £550pcm for a two bedroom place. If you want it to be a house or a ground floor flat however, expect it to be more around the £600pcm mark. HB will cover approximately £475pcm maximum for a two bedroom place. However, even if these rent prices don't seem like much, there's one problem. Based on experience roughly 80% or more of landlords/agencies don't accept ANY housing benefit. Whether you are working or not, they WILL NOT accept it. Those that will accept housing benefit, you will need a guarantor who owns a house or earns at least 3x the rent.

We found a lovely house after months of searching that would be perfect for our new family, the agency took housing benefit only because DP is working. But, they called us up one day as we were getting ready to finalise the move, and said as we were not earning 3x the rent, we weren't allowed to rent the place, and to top it all off housing benefit wasn't allowed to be included in the income as the landlords wouldn't allow that. DP is on minimum wage, and I cannot work, so that was that one out of the window.

I personally think rents need to be made more reasonable, and if this cannot be done, something needs to be done about the minimum wage and housing benefit I think.

it's not a dumb question at all, it's extremely pertinent. Originally Thatcher banned councils from using the proceeds of sales to build more council houses. IIRC all the money went to the Treasury. That changed a few years ago - think it does go locally now - but there are still rules about building new social housing, and I'm not sure there's any limit to what councils can spend the money on, so it may be going elsewhere. Think councils have to work with Housing Associations to build new properties, rather than simply build their own? Also of course during the boom years I imagine property developers were snapping up any likely land, inflating the price above what councils were willing to pay.

Councils are now under huge pressure from govt. to make massive savings - front loaded with the most savage cuts this year so it all looks rosier by the time of the next election - so probably aren't going to invest huge amounts in new homes.

Only if you look at things in the round, all this trying to save money from this budget, and trim this one, ends up being MORE expensive overall. Madness.

vickibee - good question. for many years councils were not allowed to spend the money like that, because the policy was brought in to get rid of council housing. It has obviously been a triumph. Buy to let landlords must show the firm they get the mortgage from that market rents pay 20% (? I think) more than the mortgage repayments. This is to encourage private landlords. This has also been a triumph.

I'm not disputing that most HB recipients work. But that there has to be some limits over the amount people receive.

What I'm trying to say is that just because I work but I can't afford to live in the area I am currently in because rent has gone up, the government should not be expected to make up the difference.

There has to be limits to what you can expect the state to give you. The taxpayer's pockets are not limitless despite what some people may think.

nice guy

I do not live in London I live in east Herts .But My LHA is 1000 a month for a 4 bed .#Which they state I need .(ds1 and ds2 share a room , dd has her own , ds3 has to have his own due to sn and i need a room so thats 4.

Trying to find a 4 bed in East Herts at that is hard so thats £1000 a month and takes HB.My current place costs 1200 a month

oh and just to point out all 4 of my dc were born when was married and my xp and myself was working .But marriage broke down when ds3 was borna nd becameobvious that he was disabled

I do think that in cases such as above it is different - but they have already made an allowance for those on DLA.

I think the cap on benefits equates to real life earnings of £33 grand. I really really don't think its fair that some benefit claimants get that much when its far more than most families earn. I agree its not going to make someone wealthy but its still unfair. I know many many families in London who struggle in 2 bed flats because they can't afford to buy anywhere bigger - yet we see many benefit claimants in 3-4 bed semis (as mentioned on this thread even). Our rent was extortionate and over half our income in our 2 bed flat, and I hated how I was living, but I just don't see why someone on benefits should get it easier (i do realise most don't - but the 3 bed semi in a nice area where others can't afford to rent is taking the biscuit.)

Where on earth is the incentive to get off benefits? I'm a teacher and I'd have to be a Head of department or very experienced to get £33 grand - someone on benefits is highly unlikely to jump into a job on that wage so of course it won't pay to work.

We are currently living separately during the week as we realised we just couldn't afford to live in london. I now have a garden and more space for the children but its at great cost (husband away during the week). That we could apparently be so better of on benefits really really makes me sad.

I don't at all doubt that people may struggle given less than what they are used to - but so many people earn less than 33 grand it just doesn't seem right that people on benefits should get more.

emsies

Yes they have for benfits for now ,etc as the dla would tip us over .But and since thread is talking about the housing problem and the LHA caps that are coming in

There is no allowance on the HB or the LHA rates at all .It is one size fits all .As i shall be declared homeless by September suitable accoimdation private rented if can find i suspect shall cost them upwards 2000 a month at least probably a lot more instead of them looking thinking hmm tricky case here think we be better paying where she is .

And is not just people in my situation , someone who is not disabled if they cn not afford when the caps come in will go to the council as homeless and then council will house them maybe B&B which will cost a lot finacially and then be a mental and health cost to the person to .
Or the council then have a legal duty to house them and very oten they have agreements with private landlords for homeless familys that will then infact cost more than what the rent was in the first place

All very well saying move somewhere cheaper but then the LHA cap is lower in that area .So same problems finding somewhere that fits the LHA and takes HB and then as more people flock to cheap areas prices will rise as demand does

Where can I read more about these cuts? by "benefits" do they mean everything -childcare tax credits, DLA, HB, CTB, Child benefit, working tax credits, employment and support, carers, prescriptions, bus passes?

Because, if they do, we're fucked.

We don't have very much disposable income (in fact, we only have any at all because my DLA goes into the family pot and I have a bus pass, so, as the DDs are so young, we only pay travel for DH) but we have larger outgoings than average as my health means we need childcare. Currently we get most of that paid through tax credits, but I live in fear of that going. I would dearly, dearly love to be able to look after my own children full time, or work, but I can't. So, either DH would have to give up work or...I don't know. I suppose I could do it with loads of support, and if my medication gets sorted out so I am more stable. No idea what would happen if I went into hospital again.

Suppose, if the HB (which is £200 pcm short of the rent as it is) gets reduced, we would have to move out into one of the new estates, which have awful bus links, no facilities, etc. Which would mean my health would suffer, as I wouldn't be able to access the support groups, surestart and so on. Which would mean the kids would suffer. Which would mean DH would have to give up work. I might have to go back into hospital, and take the medication which leaves me totally unable to care for the kids. The kids would become isolated. DH would be without any time off for caring for the more ill me and the kids. The inlaws would suffer for being futher away from us. Generally, things would go from pretty much ok, if bit skint, to utterly awful.

APie - I'm a disabled mother and I get Direct Payments to assist me in my home, with childcare, etc. www.disabledparentsnetwork.org.uk/ .I'm currently in similar (not as bad) situation, can't move from mortgaged house to shared ownership for reasons we cannot discover. Do you wonder what country they're talking about on the news? That mythical land where all the disabled people are fakers, rolling in the squandered wealth of noble taxpayers, where all the millionaires pay tax? I'd love to go, it sounds fabulous.

apieofbutter

No were exmpt form the £500 a week(ncluding hb and council tax as most peoiple seem to think we have 500 a week to spend when infact often mor ethan half goes straight to teh landlord and back to the council )

But we are not exampt from the cut in the LHA rate so thats Hb will be cut that affects everybody no matter what circumstances are.Which is what we are trying to get others to see .

I can not even move anywhere as nowhere suitable this bungalow not perfect but its a sgood as i can get

It's odd that people who are lucky enough to be able to manage without going on benefits seem to be envious of people who are unlucky enough to qualify for them.

A lot of us, whether receiving benefits or not, are having a hard time because no matter how hard we work it's still really difficult to make ends meet. But whoever you think is to blame for that, it's surely not the fault of the people on benefits - so they shouldn't be penalised.

There are plenty of other ways of reducing the deficit.

I wonder what Shelter think of this cap on housing benefit.

Please turn to Channel 4 and watch Despatches: Landlords from Hell now.

Turn it on now and see where the low paid in areas where housing is unaffordable for those on low wages live and will live, more and more.

Mellow Shelter have a petition about it here

Empusa - have signed. I wish I could sign a petition to get this government exiled to Elba.

Humancatapult. I am sympathetic to your situation and you don't have to keep reminding me about your kids being born in wedlock. As a single dad until very recently i know full well about how the best laid plans go to pot. And I have no beef about how the state should help people in their time of need but it's now painfully obvious that the government can only do so much. Unlike previous thinking, where people assumed the government can just magic money it's now obvious it cannot, it's actually apparent that the government has no money. No it really doesn't. None, nada, zip. It's got our money and it's not enough so it's been borrowing our children's money!

You get £1000 per month which by any standard is a lot of money. And I'm not saying you shouldn't be entitled to them. What I'm saying is the state can no longer afford to pay so many people, so much money. Money like I said, it simply doesn't have.

So the government are having to make cuts. LHA was an obvious target for both Labour & the Tories. Tax credits, child benefit. They've all been targeted. I don't believe this is some ideological drive since politicians rarely do things which are vote losers. And cutting benefits will alienate the recipients and won't gain you many, if any votes.