Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

News

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Bedroom tax will be costly disaster, says housing chief

999 replies

vivizone · 31/03/2013 06:51

I don't understand how they can implement it. When a council tenant signs the tenancy agreement, if bedroom tax is not mentioned, is it not illegal to implement it at a later date?

I don't see how it is enforceable. Let's say a tenant refuses to pay/can't pay. They then get evicted - wouldn't the council still be obliged to house them after eviction, especially if they have children?

The whole thing is a mess. Why so many changes all at the same time?!

www.guardian.co.uk/society/2013/mar/30/bedroom-tax-disaster-housing-chief

Cost-cutting policy will push up benefit bill, cause social disruption and create widespread misery, say critics

Ministers came under new fire over benefit cuts last night as the independent body representing 1,200 English housing associations described the controversial bedroom tax as bad policy and bad economics that risks pushing up the £23bn annual housing benefit bill.

David Orr, chief executive of the National Housing Federation, said the tax would harm the lives of hundreds of thousands of people. It comes into force this week alongside a range of other tax and benefit changes.

"The bedroom tax is one of these once-in-a-generation decisions that is wrong in every respect," he said. "It's bad policy, it's bad economics, it's bad for hundreds of thousands of ordinary people whose lives will be made difficult for no benefit ? and I think it's about to become profoundly bad politics."

His intervention came as opponents launched nationwide protests against the tax, which will hit 660,000 households with each losing an estimated average of £14 a week.

Crowds gathered in London's Trafalgar Square yesterday to protest against the measure, and simultaneous protests were being held in towns and cities across the UK. One protester, Sue Carter, 58, from Waltham Forest, told the Observer: "I'm a working single parent with a tiny boxroom and now I'm faced with the choice between food, heat or paying the bedroom tax. People have looked after their homes, improved them ? why should they be turfed out?"

Under the scheme, which is introduced tomorrow, people in social housing with one spare bedroom will have their housing benefit cut by 14%, while those with two or more unoccupied rooms will see it slashed by 25%.

Ministers say the tax, which David Cameron calls the "spare room subsidy", will encourage people to move to smaller properties and save around £480m a year from the spiralling housing benefit bill. But critics such as the National Housing Federation (NHF) argue that as well as causing social disruption, the move risks increasing costs to taxpayers because a shortage of smaller social housing properties may force many people to downsize into the more expensive private rented sector.

The federation's warnings came as charities said the combination of benefit cuts and tax rises coming in from this week will amount to a £2.3bn hit on family finances.

Labour said analysis of official figures showed average families would be £891 worse off in the new tax year as the changes ? including those to tax credits and housing benefits ? begin to bite.

Research by the NHF says that while there are currently 180,000 households that are "underoccupying two-bedroom homes", there are far fewer smaller properties in the social housing sector available to move into. Last year only 85,000 one-bedroom homes became available. The federation has calculated that if all those available places were taken up by people moving as a result of the "bedroom tax", the remaining 95,000 households would be faced with the choice of staying put and taking a cut in income, or renting a home in the private sector.

If all 95,000 moved into the private sector, it says the cost of housing benefit would increase by £143m, and by millions more if others among the remaining 480,000 affected chose to rent privately.

As well as the move on spare bedrooms, council tax benefit will be replaced from this week by a new system that will be run by English local authorities but on 10% less funding. Pensioners will be protected under the changes but, as a result, it is feared there will be a bigger burden on poor working-age adults. Restrictions on the uprating of a number of welfare payments will also hit millions of households, homelessness charity Crisis has warned.

Chief executive Leslie Morphy said: "Our poorest households face a bleak April as they struggle to budget for all these cuts coming at once. People are already cutting back on the essentials of food and heating but there is only so much they can do.

"The result will be misery ? cold rooms, longer queues at food banks, broken families, missed rent payments and yet more people facing homelessness ? devastating for those directly affected, but bad for us all."

A Department for Work and Pensions spokesman said: "Our welfare reforms will improve the lives of some of the poorest families in our communities, with universal credit simplifying the complex myriad of benefits and making three million people better off. And by next year, we will have taken two million of the lowest earners out of paying tax altogether."

Crisis argues that homelessness is set to rise dramatically. This winter has already seen a rise of 31% in the numbers of rough sleepers across the country and a 20% rise in people seeking help with homelessness from their local authority in the past two years, according to Crisis.

ChartiesCharities are also concerned that the government-funded network of homelessness advisers in England is to be scrapped. The team of regional advisers and rough sleeper and youth specialists which have provided councils with expert guidance on meeting statutory homelessness duties since 2007 will be disbanded just as the bedroom tax comes in. Also being scrapped are the crisis loans and community care grants which provided a lifeline for people in financial crisis who needed essentials when moving to a new home.

Shadow chancellor Ed Balls said: "This is the week when the whole country will see whose side David Cameron and George Osborne are really on and who is paying the price for their economic failure."

OP posts:
retrorita · 01/04/2013 12:36

Yes That's the biggest barrier for people on HB - even those in work struggle to find somewhere to live because of the no DSS rule.

expatinscotland · 01/04/2013 12:37

A person in a private let also needs to make sure it falls under or at the LHA cap, too. Plenty of those, surely.

TheHumancatapult · 01/04/2013 12:37

Want unfair see who else they letting of bedroom tax

www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/paedophiles-rapists-dodge-bedroom-tax-1795785

TheHumancatapult · 01/04/2013 12:38

Neil and Airdrie councillor Michael Coyle were horrified when they were told of the loophole.

The DWP man told them sex offenders with large houses would not have their housing benefit cut because they couldn?t let a room out to a lodger and are almost impossible to rehouse.

Child abusers and rapists freed from prison would still be housed in larger homes and not penalised as it is hard to find them suitable accommodation.

FasterStronger · 01/04/2013 12:39

expat - the ones I spot checked did not mention no DSS.

and as many people claiming HB will be in work, they can top up their LHA cap.

the upside is, that other, larger families will be able to move into vacated the properties.

retrorita · 01/04/2013 12:39

Unfuckingbelivable Shock

retrorita · 01/04/2013 12:40

Faster many letting agents do not accept DSS so looking on Rightmove is a daft idea in the first place.

Try Gumtree. Or word of mouth. That's how most people on HB find a place to live.

FasterStronger · 01/04/2013 12:41

I really don't think it is in anyone's interest for registered sex offenders to move, as they may go off radar.

if you think beyond the knee jerk....

TheHumancatapult · 01/04/2013 12:41

yuoexactly they kept that one very quiet

lottieandmia · 01/04/2013 12:43

I am astounded to see someone upthread trying to argue that actually disabled people are not that vulnerable - they can take care of themselves in this climate of cuts and more cuts. WTAF?

retrorita · 01/04/2013 12:45

I really don't think it is in anyone's interest for disabled people or the most vulnerable people in our society to be forced to move.

If you think beyond the knee jerk of saving a pittance ....

expatinscotland · 01/04/2013 12:46

'expat - the ones I spot checked did not mention no DSS.

and as many people claiming HB will be in work, they can top up their LHA cap.'

I found 39 that are even close to the LHA cap for Newcastle, which is £55/week.

The majority of LLs cannot or will not, however, take DSS tenants, in work or not. Many are forbidden to do so by their mortgage lender or their insurance.

There will be no mass of people downsizing, because a) if you're in work in your council/HA property and don't claim HB, then you don't have to move b) NO ONE is going to move to go to a private let with that whole 6-months short-assured tenancy crap, IF they even find someone who will take the DSS.

expatinscotland · 01/04/2013 12:47

'I really don't think it is in anyone's interest for registered sex offenders to move, as they may go off radar.

if you think beyond the knee jerk.... '

So it's okay for those people to be exempted from this and not disabled children? For real? PMSL!

skinnywitch · 01/04/2013 12:48

*No, but there are things the government can do to help people help themselves, but they refuse to do anything other than push through Tory ideology.

Making long term private renting more secure and affordable would mean less need for social housing.

Raise the NMW so people can afford to live without claiming.

Its easier to blame the poor though rather than look at the circumstances that trap people.*

And in 13 years in power did Labour tackle any of this?

Changebagsandgladrags · 01/04/2013 12:52

Well I would have normally agreed with this policy.

We own (mortgage) and have two children sharing a bedroom. So, I don't see an own bedroom for same sex children as a necessity. It is a nice to have.

However, it's the total disregard for individual circumstances that I don't agree with. The fact that it won't save that much money. That the demand for smaller properties outweighs supply. That pensioners are exempt.

Wanting an extra bedroom and needing an extra bedroom are different things.

FreedomOfTheTess · 01/04/2013 12:52

This is the situation my friend's cousin 'Fred' finds himself in...

Fred was born and raised in small village in a shire county. The village is popular with second homers and London commuters (it's about one hour from London by train). This has pushed house prices (and private rents) up to beyond any born and bred local.

Housing association homes were built in the village two years ago (despite the second homers and "outsiders" fighting against it), for local people like Fred, who have been priced out of the market.

Despite doing a survey, to find out what needs there were, the silly muppets didn't build enough 1-bedroom flats, yet had plenty of 2-beds.

That meant that some single people, who only needed 1-bed, were allocated 2-bed flats. Fred was one of them.

Fred didn't mind that much, as Fred was working at the time, and had money to cover the rent.

Eight months ago, Fred was made redundant, and has been having help with his rent.

Because of the new rules AND the fact he has a spare bedroom, Fred will now have to stump up the cash from his minimal JSA to pay for the spare room. This is despite the fact, he was allocated a 2-bedroom flat (he didn't ASK for one!) because someone had got their sums wrong.

Utter madness.

FreedomOfTheTess · 01/04/2013 12:54

NB: Fred's options at the time were, take the 2-bed flat or risk not getting a place at all, as there weren't enough 1-beds to go round. At 26, he wanted to move out of home, so he took what he was offered!

expatinscotland · 01/04/2013 12:55

And Fred's tenancy agreement probably forbids taking in a lodger, most new HA tenancies forbid this practice and/or subletting.

lottieandmia · 01/04/2013 12:56

'And in 13 years in power did Labour tackle any of this?'

I don't remember them forcing people into a situation where they suddenly had to find £80 plus a week they didn't have and suddenly have to choose between eating and paying the rent when there is nowhere for them to move to.

Labour may not have been perfect by any stretch but life was so much more civilised under their administration and now it's apparently ok to call disabled people benefit scroungers.....

lottieandmia · 01/04/2013 12:59

FreedomOfTheTess's story is an example of the Tory's 'let them eat cake' mentality.

FreedomOfTheTess · 01/04/2013 13:00

Spot on expat, so he either has to suck it up, or give up his flat and move back in with mum and dad (and after two years on his own, he doesn't obviously want that).

skinnywitch · 01/04/2013 13:00

No Lottie, they didn't tackle any of this just threw money at the wrong situations.

All the ridiculous name calling , " rich tories" and " tory LL" makes me laugh!
Most of the Labour party are as rich if not richer and landlords come in all political guises. In fact, I know more Labour LL than Tory.

skinnywitch · 01/04/2013 13:02

Can he not take in a lodger?

lottieandmia · 01/04/2013 13:03

Er, you can be rich and still believe in collective responsibility. Or you can be on any amount of money and begrudge helping those who need it.

expatinscotland · 01/04/2013 13:03

And what if Fred has no parents to move in with?

Disregarding this stupid Labour/Tory thing, this is NOW.

Swipe left for the next trending thread