How wicked of you, David Cameron.

[vivizone]

So we're going back to Victorian notions of the 'undeserving poor'. Time to re-open the workhouses.

How this man and his cronies are getting away with so much damage done to the ordinary man and woman, I do not know.

Help us all.

www.guardian.co.uk/society/2012/nov/09/deserving-families-council-housing-priority

You're lucky that your Ex and you can provide what your DS needs, Outraged. Not all of us can. My Ex earns less than £17k. I used to be the main provider. I should have been the one able to provide for my DC's.

Shame I got dxd disabled too...

If you DIDN'T have a higher earning Ex than me, WTF would you do if YOU were dxd with a disability?

Life isn't as black and white, as cut and dried as you try to make it out to be, Outraged.

I can't tell you what I'd do if I were diagnosed with a disability, it would depend on the nature of the disability, obviously.

But going on the list of suggestions in the article in the OP, I'd feel that I wasn't likely to lose my house because I know how to be a good tenant, I contribute to society (and believe I would if I were to become disabled).

I would claim whatever I was able to from the government the same as anyone else, but I'd feel lucky to receive any assistance from society and I don't think I'd feel like I was entitled to more if I could feed, clothe and house my children.

good for you make it sound like being disabled is some kind of choice. and of course you would choose to have a disability that means you can work.
they are few and far between.
or one that does not affect your behaviour.

hey guess what being disabled is not something you can choose. you can't say that.....
if I was disabled....
as you have no clue

Take a couple. Hard workers, both worked since leaving school. They have a couple of DC's. One is dxd with a life long disability. So one of them becomes a carer.

The other is still working just as hard as before. Then his wife is dxd with a disability that stops her from working, and means that she ALSO has care needs. On top of their NT DC, AND the care needs of their DC with a disability.

He is pulled in too many directions, and decides he can't do it any more, and walks out. He pays the minimum amount of maintenance. He doesn't have the DC's that much - maybe where he has moved to is unsuitable for their DC with SN, but he can't afford a more suitable place on his NMW job, on top of maintenance.

Soooo, you are then left with a disabled Lone parent with two DC's, one of whom also has disabilities.

Who the fuck provides for them? Because £47 a week maintenance sure as hell doesn't cut it.

And that situation isn't as bizarre as you seem to think, Outraged. It's a lot less to imagine happening than has happened to me, and I know that it is therefore eminently possible.

You only need to look at the stats on relationship breakdown when a DC has disabilities (about 70% don't last in this situation), and the stats on relationship breakdowns when one partner has disabilities (about 65% don't last in this situation), to know that if you have a relationship where one partner is disabled AND a DC is also disabled, that barely any relationship can survive that kind of shit storm.

• This was from a Relate survey, and another one done by a disability Charity too, that both came up with similar statistics.

You would feel lucky that you were unable to work or support yourself, through no fault of your own?

You would feel lucky that you were living in chronic pain every day, gradually losing your mobility and becoming more and more housebound?

You would feel lucky that you have seizures, in public, where you lose control of your bladder and sometimes your bowel?

You would feel lucky that because of your fibromyalgia, doing the school run by bus leaves you as exhausted as if you had run the London Marathon?

You would feel lucky to only have the doctors admit that you might have a disability that is genetic AFTER you have your fourth DC and they become the third out of 4 to have Autism?

If that's your idea of luck, I'll go and buy a Lotto ticket, because I must have the greatest luck in the world.

So you become housebound due to a disability, you have seizures that cause you to lose bladder and sometimes bowel control, you suffer from extreme exhaustion after an hour's exertion, yet you would contribute to society HOW?

I'm not even allowed to volunteer. Because I am a H&S risk. If I'm too ill to volunteer, how the hell can I 'contribute'?

Of course I wouldn't feel lucky for any of those things

I have a fair amount of contact with people from other countries who suffer some of the things you describe, and they get less than anyone ever would in this country. Maybe my opinion is clouded by that, but yes, I think I would feel lucky that if I and my family were to suffer because of ill health and financial hardship that I live in a country where I am unlikely to find myself on the streets or living with ten people in a home barely big enough for two, and where I will be given money to feed my children.

Threesocksmorgan, I know I can't say what I would do, which is why I started my post with the words 'I can't tell you what I would do'.

If Thatcher hadn't sold off all the social housing in the Eighties there'd be more than enough for everyone that needed them. The problem is there are not enough houses any more.

I do think something has to be done about those who deliberately set out to make themselves "homeless" so that they can get a local authority place, but I'm sure that's a very small percentage of the overall total. The rest are genuinely in need and will suffer (more) because of this.

Tories are uncaring wankers.

If you 'make yourself' homeless you won't be housed.

That can include leaving a physically abusive spouse/partner.

Tories are uncaring wankers

Agree 100%

If Thatcher hadn't sold off all the social housing in the Eighties...

And in the decades since then no one has bothered to build some more.

What was stopping Labour building some? They could have spent some of the pittance money Brown got for the nation's gold on building.

Well labour definitely built some where I live.

Loads built in the S.E where I live too but recent Tory reforms will mean a big change for many. Particularly the most vulnerable.

Of course there are families who make benefit claiming a lifestyle. There are however a great deal more 'deserving' people on benefits who have no viable alternative. Distinguishing between the claimants is not easy and Dave's clumsy attempts will see hell released on those trapped by circumstance and most in need. Yanbu. Surely there is no way the knobs will get in next election

A huge number of people who are homeless suffer from disabling mental illness. Disabling enough that they can't work or volunteer. Ill enough that families struggle to cope with them. Under this system where the hell do they fit in?

Who knows OhYou. And of course, now they are cracking down on squatting too .

It's such a mess.

It's frustrating that people think it's so easy just to be homeless and suddenly get a social house. It really doesn't work like that any more.

We are homeless. None of this situation has been easy. It's been a constant nightmare. But we didn't have a choice. I chose to private rent - unfortunately the Landlords here have chosen to refuse all housing benefit applicants. Largely due to the recent changes with the benefit cap. And Universal credit.

What is scary is that they are pushing all this little changes through now knowing that the homeless numbers will explode next year. They KNOW they will. Every single homeless charity and department have the figures.

My Housing Officer told me from the start that his main goal was to persuade me to source my own housing and withdraw my application. That is why they make it so hard.

And yes, that may make some people who were expecting to get a nice cheap social house go elsewhere. But what about those that can't?

We are talking of disabled people because it will effect them.

It's a shame that some people can't discuss that as well as the other issues. But the problem with bringing disabled people into it is that people can't bang on about a lifestyle choice can they? They can't dismiss them as some kind of benefit scrounger who should go to work.

But if you're looking at a policy change and how it will effect people surely you have to look at all of the people who will be effected. Not just the ones you feel will deserve it.

And there in lies the problem with most of these tory benefit reforms. They are designed to weed out the few playing the system but seriously harm the majority who need it. So, tar everyone with the same brush then? Seems a bit of a theme for Davie Boy doesn't it?

Good post Charlie

I remember reading your posts previously, How are you getting on?

OutragedAtThePriceOfFreddos of course you can't tell me what you would do.
because you are not disabled "yet"
(I hope)
my dd is, she will never be able to volunteer. work
pay rent herself. join the forces(thank god) or go on a be a good tenant course.
what will she do?

Not too bad Thanks Amber - In emergency housing. Been here 4 weeks and am being moved next week by the looks of it. Onto the next temporary place.

In a mild panic today over furniture! Had to leave or sell most of our stuff. This place has beds and kitchen stuff but the next place won't. Since I won't know when we move until 24 hours before I'm a bit worried what we'll sleep on in short notice!

Air beds will be my friends I think :)

The kids are doing ok. Just hoping the next place is closer to DD's school. She's doing an hour long, two bus school run just now and it's not been much fun for her poor thing.

sorry not got past page 3 of this, so sorry if this has already been pointed out/raised, the bit about people not chosing to be homeless. I've seen so many threads on here where people are stuck not able to pay their private landlords or have been given notice to leave their rented property and are advised until they are made homeless by the landlord evicting them the council wo'nt house them. That they are advised to stay put until they are at the last moment then present themselves at the council offices as now homeless and a priority.

For people in that situation, wouldn't this be a much better move? If you could prove you've paid your rent on time but your landlord wants the house back, or if you are working, have done charity work in teh community, are prepared to go on a good tenant course etc, you could not have to go to the extream of waiting for the baliffs to get housed, people like that will be a priority earlier.

I see what you are saying don't mind - but notice from your landlord is not a legal document. So it doesn't actually mean you have to leave. So the council require the next stage which is court intervention.

I can prove my rent was paid on time. I have never had a complaint against me. It doesn't matter.

I could go on a good tenant course. It doesn't change the fact that the amount of social housing is not big enough to support a two tiered approach like that. They need to build more. They needed to do this a long time ago under labour too.

How would it work? People are being made homeless at an alarming rate. Why should they go to the bottom of the list under 'more deserving' people.

I just don't understand how they can get away with making such changes (Cap and Uni Credit) which are proven to be upping the homeless numbers and slyly be making it harder for people to be housed once they are homeless. What do they think will happen?

The choosing to be homeless thing is a myth these days. If you make yourself homeless by leaving a suitable property they can refuse to help you. If you stop paying your rent so that your Landlord starts eviction procedures then they can refuse to help you. They have made it very very hard to be housed down the homeless route. And yes, they needed to cover themselves from people who played the system.

There's a lot of bollocks on this thread. From reading the article it seems that the real change is that the government is going to prioritise those who serve their country/volunteer or work. At first glance that sounds fair to me.

So what about the homeless? Well even the rather biased article points out that the families will be housed in the private sector. There's no suggestion that people will be forcibly flung out into the streets like the usual lefties are suggesting. What we're really talking about is should we be prioritising council houses for homeless or soldiers/workers and volunteers over those who have done none of the above.

We have too few social housing for too many claimants. It seems fair to me that we prioritise those who contribute over those who do not. For too long our benefits system encouraged people not to work. A change has been long overdue.

@Charlie

You're in a flat/house then not a hostel? if so, thats good, as horrible as it all is, at least you have avoided being in a hostel! [I have been through this, thankfully when I was pregnant so the kids were spared the hostel experience!]

Are you in London? or elsewhere?

There are a few places that do very cheap furniture if you have a referal from a SW/HV/or housing officer. Also if you haven't already, join your local
freecycle.

Glad to hear the kids are ok.

Chin up sweetie

But how do you decide who contributes niceguy?

Does a disabled person not shop/eat/travel in a community then?

Yes a house - they managed to get this private rented place as the only other option was 20 miles away.

Not in London - but SE.

I'm gonna hit the big charity shops here - and hope they can deliver in a couple of days. We'll be fine. It's just an expense and worry I can ill afford right now.