26000 cap what it would mean to me

[TheHumancatapult]

ok some of you ahve complained about the £26000 Benfits capped and then slammed into hunty cat for having to much money left

so to balance it out this how £26000 would be broke down for myself as single parent with 4dc

.£26000 straight away 13200 would have gone to the LL .

so thats £12800

left .Discount Cb as peoplle up to £40000 can earn so tale away £3534 approc

so im now down to 9256 .Tale away council tax Benfit thats me down to £7886 .

thats then down to £151 a week
they will then tale of teh free school dinners have 3dc that entitled ( only 1 has but they will do the sums based on what they are entitled to ) so £6 a day times 5 is £30

£121 left take of £15 for water £20 for gas and £20 for electric bearing in mind most wil be on card/key meters taht charge more

would leave me £56 a week for food and clothes and any extras

Now relook at the figures again that im in h/a at £126 a week my hb is £6652

so think the problem lies when your forced into private rented a large amount of your money is swallowed up by Hb .And remember not all LL will takke Hb so often you pay a preimum for sometime substandard accomidation as they are aware that people can not move

And lets also remember those that are working in low income of £18000 Pa will also recieve top ups too of CB , WTC and CTC

We talk endlessly about the £26k cap that very few people get. Why not discuss what happens to those who willf all through the net- a net where the holes are being amde much wider. most of whome will be the vulnerable. What about the little-known MINIMUM income? Anyone know what that is? £2k. Per family. Per annum.

That's my biggest worry personally*

Right I wanted to separate that post but some other stuff:

Ewhat Mme said, exactly. I am a carer and Dh works, we can't afford heating unles it's below zero and we rent an ancient draghty house with a massive airbrick directly into living room (where boiler also is, behind ancient old gas fire that we dare not use arouund the boys as can't drill a fireguard into wall). Dh works from home and I am alrgely housebound with the boys; ir's bloody awful anyone can;t afford heat, two wrongs don't make right after all- but is it not possibly even worse if youa re at home all day and therefore never get office ehating or rely on the leccy only outside 9- 5? Not asking for pity btw; have duverts and will cope although boys been far more ill this winter than ever before and we have one off again today- just rpesenting an argument.

And LMFAO at boibbysmum about posting on mumsnet! DS1 requires 24/7 supervision or he is a significant risk- tried to break my hands yesterday, as a common example, got them and twisted until i screamed- so I post on the web endlessly s despite the fact that I would far rather be at the library finishing my MA or just tidying my tip of a bedrroom or teh agrden, I am constantly sat here just yeards from his side ready to pounce if needed. caring isn't always nappies and PECs systems- it can be a wide range but equally indispensible.

(And no i cn;t take him in the garden, tried that- he got on kitchen (an extension) the roof and tried to jump, then grabbed a stick from a tree and beat him more-severely autistic brotehr. Never again! I am sick of being in this room but more sick of atching my otehrs boys get hit so here I sit, getting fatter and older, watching his every move. When he is at school it is easier but God only knows whatb happens when he leaves in a few years! Social only help now if child is being abused or you have a termnal illness)

Mmelindor- do I think it's ridiculous that me My dh work full time but can't afford to have the heating on as much as we'd like?

Yes, of course I'd prefer to have enough money to not have to worry and have hour long showers and turn the heating up as much as I like. But I'm living in the real world where that aint gonna happen! I think if working people accept that they have to live within these constraints, its a bit much for people who are relying on public money to not accept it

But it is not normal, Callmemrs. It shouldn't be.

In a developed country it should be "real life" to be able to heat your home.

Housing, childcare, transport costs are too high, and they are too high because of decades of political bumbling.

And yes, I include the Labour party in that assessment.

Heating is an essential and it shouldn't normal to not be able to afford it wether you work or not.

luxuries yes, but not heating, food and shelter no.

THC there's been some disgusting comments to you on here, I do hope you are ok

Agree Mme

lack of ehating costs lives, we all know that. have given in and put ours on as ds1 off sick today but did not feel I had a choice tbh. Shall make cuts elsewhere.

Oh for real heating worries read my Grandad

Has a park ray heater as fitted by the council many, many eyars ago but there is a hole in the flue. Bloke who organises fixing and maybe even central heating at council off on long term sick and nobody else can sign docs.

Grandad is 91 and almost housebound! He doesn;t ahve better ehating becuase he has issues (pretty obviously a case of undiagnosed ASD) and refused to allow council in to replae ehating, through a case of paranoia. Social Services tried to send a home help, he won;t ahve it and nobody can force him to.

But he will accepot his heating being fixed. Except tehy can't, so he is without. And all I have been able to do is send him some fingerless gloves he can wear whilst making hot drinks etc.

Sorry off track a little but - ARRRGGGGGHHHHHH!

Here is my reworking of the figures:
£26,000
Less rent £13200 (£1,100 PCM)
Less water £379 (average cost)
Less gas/electric £1,380 (£100 PCM plus 15% premium for card payers
Less school meals £1,950 4 kids £2.50 per day 195 days
Less council tax £1,439 (average band D discounted 25% for one adult)
Leaving £7,652 or £638 PCM for everything else.

Hardly a fortune but a lot more than £56
There are thousands of properties for rent at less than £1,100 a month. If it is indeed the case that almost none of the landlords will take HB then I agree that there is a huge issue with the private rental market.

EssentialFattyAcid - I think you forgot to take the 25% off the average council tax - so that leaves £8011 or £667 PCM or £154 per week.

Thanks breatheslowly - you're right.

I think Humancatapault makes a very good point about landlords not accepting new tenants on HB because if the point is for people to move to cheaper places then of course as she says, cheaper options need to exist. What I hadn't realised is that although cheaper places in the private rental sector are seemingly in plentiful supply and extremely easy to find they are frequently not made available to those on HB.

If private landlords will not accept HB then I agree that the government must provide more housing at affordable rates.

It is the case, and whilst some make that decision themselves, the insurances required by most landlords with a mortgage insists on that as a criteria.

Heck even if you been in said house for ages and paying up you would stiull be in breech of most contracts if you were amde redundant and claimed HB.

Action to address this would surely be a clearly essential part of this sort of 'relocation' strategy if done properly; presumably with redirection of resources so they they moved with the poulation- if (random figures nothing more) 12000 people moved out of a london Borough to margate then the money and services should follow them, not remain intact yto serve far fewer people whilst someone else's services are shared more thinly.

Not that even insurance action will do much- topic has been discussed on MN before and most landlords have said they would not wish to house people on HB and ultimatelyu it is their choice.

And YYY to much more affordable housing

Ideally concentrated around existing connurbations with average or higher employment stats- far more sensible than sending them to places already struggling and high unemployment. I also think that if someone is a main carer for a vulnerable person then they should be a priority to remain within say 10 miles of the person, on a bus route. The trauma of not doing so, for the disabled or elderly person, would be a genuine human tragedy resulting in a complete loss of independence for some. caring for your elderly Mum with onset of dementia after all is NOT the same as choosing not to work and certainly absorbs costs from the state.

I know as people have said there are people out there who will not work no matter where they end up; but in this current economic climate it is naive to think that they are the majority. I have huge issues with plans that punish peopletrying their best under the blanket of tackling the feckless.

There also needs to be ++++++ investment in childcare; if we are saying people have to move away from existing placements and family and then find work, six month waiting lists for childcare are pretty damned unfair.

I don't understand the ops figures at all. Is she having a laugh or something? Ignoring child benefit in her calculations is ridiculous. Free school meals is a huge benefit. With four dcs that's a minimum of £150 a month. Do people who work not have to pay high rents? Where do you think they live? The reality is they have to pay these rents out of their wages!

The op gives people on benefits a bad name. Their expectation that they should be able to live the same lifestyle as some working is wrong. The sad reality is a lot of working people are having a poorer lifestyle than some people on benefits.

Agrees Journey

Journey the Governemnt said they intend to overturn the HoL decision to exclude CB, so why would she include it?

'The op gives people on benefits a bad name. Their expectation that they should be able to live the same lifestyle as some working is wrong'

is that just the unemployed or all of them?

Peachy I agree with your suggestion that new affordable housing needs to be built preferentially in areas with high employment rates.

I think there are some massive problems with the rental sector at the moment - there are too many people renting long term from private landlords with no security of tenure.

I also think that if your family income is over a certain threshold then you should not be able to continue living in council/ HA accommodation unless you pay market rates. And that council and HA accommodation should be allocated appropriately to need. So a pensioner couple should not be living in a family home unless they pay market rent for it. But I think they should be offered a 1 bedroom property locally appropriate for their needs instead.

We need to have a massive overhaul with regards to publicly funded accommodation. And we need to change the planning laws to free up more land for new building as this will drive house prices down.

The income thing is coming in; theyc an't backdate it, but it is happening. There is one issue with it though (in esence I agree) but the proposed 2 year assessment period will be a massive disincentive to people to earn more as they could easily be evicetd without having ahd toime to raise a deposit on somewhere else.

I would prfer to see a five year tenancy period on council homes so that people earning over the ampunt set can get enough togetehr to either buy or put down a deposit somewhere else. That woudl work for greater good then, rather than just shuntin people of into substandard accomodation where they end up abck in council housing.

But the OP is talking about a income of £26k - i.e. the proposed cap - and what a hypothetical family would have left after expenditure on rent, utilities, etc. I still don't understand the logical sense of deducting CB from the £26k amount - it's a source of income, not an item of expenditure.

The free school meals will not be counted as income for the purposes of the benefit cap, either so I'm not sure I undersatnd the relevance of deducting an amount for school meals, either.

Has it been confirmed that free school emals will continue under UC? have seen nothing about it anywhere. The old qualifiers will cease to exist.

It says here in paragraph 1 that the cap will not count free school meals as income. So we can add that back to EssentialFattyAcid's calculation. Lets say that the 3 eligible for FSM don't count (195 days at £7.50 per day = £1,462.50) and the other one makes his own packed lunch for £1 per day rather than buying £2.50 of lunch at college (195 days at £1.50 per day = £292.50).

So we can add that onto the £8011 from my last post to give £9,766 or £814 per month or £187 per week.

Do people actually get that much spending money if they are on benefits or have we just come to the point where people in the OP's circumstances aren't receiving the equivalent of £26,000 to begin with?

"The cap will apply to combined income derived from benefits including jobseekers allowance, income support, employment support allowance, housing benefit, child benefit, carers allowance and later the new universal credit...

...Benefits such as social fund loans and free school meals are not affected. "

www.disabilityalliance.org/bencap.htm

Its wrong that Carers Allowance is included.

That's the impact assessment though; haven;t they been found to be a little- ahem- devious? (see SPartacus report for more info)

It can't apply to all the things mentioned above as they will cease to exist and be UC instead, that's the whole point surely?

BTW beef with government transparency not you brad!