Bedroom tax been ruled unlawful and discriminatory by Court of Appeal!

[Destinysdaughter]

Just saw it in the Independent. About bloody time! Although of course it's going to be appealed...

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/bedroom-tax-ruled-discriminatory-by-court-of-appeal-judges-a6836331.html

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/bedroom-tax-ruled-discriminatory-by-court-of-appeal-judges-a6836331.html

That's brilliant news. I hope the Supreme Court goes the same way.

I'm really bemused that IDS bothers to defend this. It would have been perfectly easy to devise a system which did not produce the blatant unfairness referred to in the two lead cases, and which did not rely on a pious hope that local authorities might grant discretionary funding to relieve the worst injustices - but rather than do that IDS chooses to spend a fortune defending the indefensible.

It doesn't mean the rule will be changed. It has been found to have a discriminatory impact in those particular cases and others seeking to rely on the decision would have to be in the same situation i.e. severely disabled children needing overnight accommodation and victims of abuse with specially adapted homes.

It beggars belief, people in such situations have to go through all of that to prove they need an extra bedroom.

I would like them to get a hefty amount of compensation and apology.

It's a good win. The government should have the grace to accept that and not pay goodness knows how much to fight it.

As for guy on channel 4 news saying disabled people are except they aren't automatically. If you need a carer and you are the adult tenant you are. If the carer is your partner and needs sleep other room no exception.

If disabled person is child not tenancy holder again dosnt apply. Ditto two kids one of whom needs own room because of disability - not except. Nor is having box room for extra equipment etc.

Yes there is discretion payments but limited depending on how many people in your area need them and apply for other causes like housing top ups and benefit cap tops ups. So you may get once or twice but not garrentees. Plus the stress and cost of paperwork and admin to council.

It's disgrace! At same time big companies and the like Bearly pay woulnt take much for them to pay all bedroom tax. Surely should add clause in certain cases where proven room is needed life exception. It be same poor family have reaply ESA and DLA every few years. When life is permently tough least government can do is make few adjustments.

when life is permanently tough least the government can do is make few adjustments

Agree. Instead of throwing more money on a legal challenge in the Supreme Court The Government should back down now and do the right thing and help families like the Rutherfords. It is extremely shaming on our politicians that such decent hardworking people who are saving the nation thousands of pounds a year by caring for their loved ones are made to jump through hoops for a discretionary payment, thus heaping even more stress and uncertainty into their lives.

Mr and Mrs Rutherford I salute you. Thank you for standing up for others who are not able to fight on.

Yeah its not as if there is a housing shortage or anything.

Why blame the government which allocated money to local councils to subsidise people in just this situation?

'Why blame the government which allocated money to local councils to subsidise people in just this situation?'

Because the monies are not guaranteed to people 'in just this situation'.

The government is doing FA about the housing shortage. Why would they? They want to keep the bubble inflated.

cdtaylornats

Two words from the Court of Appeal judgement

unlawful and discriminatory

I will say it again
unlawful and discriminatory

Why blame the government which allocated money to local councils to subsidise people in just this situation?

Because it was an utterly stupid way to deal with the situation. They could easily have framed the legislation in terms that meant there were exemptions for people who needed the extra room due to disability and safety reasons, and where the LA isn't able to offer a smaller property. I strongly suspect they realised that that would mean the whole scheme would fail and decided to try to get round it by allocating the so-called discretionary fund which in reality simply isn't big enough to deal with the problems the rule is causing.

Further, telling people in this sort of impossible situation that with any luck their council might give them some funding if they choose to exercise a discretion in their favour just isn't good enough: they need certainty, not reliance on the goodwill and indeed competence of some overworked council official who is under constant pressure to save money.

cdtaylornats, did you know that for many council this policy is costing more than is saved in housing benefits? That's because they don't have enough small properties for people to move into, so they have to go to the private sector. What sort of sense does that make?

If it was just about housing crisis then everyone in council housing would have situation reviewed on needs.

As things stand if you have 4 bed and work government do not care a monkeys that you have 3 spare rooms. Only if you on housing benefit do they become concerned over national crisis and horror you have more room. If introduced 3-5y reviews and moved existing stock around would make better use.

Again if you are retired they don't care a monkeys either. I'm all for bedroom tax where a suitable place has been offered but many cases there are no one beds around for those who need yet please have to pay.

If you need a room because of disability or equipment it's not spare should mean no tax. It's about right to have one less thing worry about - applying every few months for charity handout you pay or may not get is stressful. If this Carrys in be another 5y. They need room.

They are saving good £5k week in care costs if he went in residential care. Least government is do is say here keep bloody £14 week we owe you one.

fulltime carers like me save the Gov BILLIONS a year, yet we get penilised for having a tiny box room for medical equipment or whatever.

I need mine as DC has severe mental health probs and needs a quiet room, with sot panels on walls and sensory devices. its her escape form this cruel world.

and to store her pullups/medicines/bedding etc etc. its also a study as she cannot manage a bit in a social envioronment, such as school. shes home schooled by me and a tutor comes every other week for other stuff.

its a tiny room as it is, yet we get no discrecionary payments, and I have to get all her medical needs too on my piddly carers allowance.

Now, a couple in a 5 bedroom (sic) , a norlam couple, fine, gibe them a tax, but not the disabled/carers/DV victis andother vulnerable people.

this Gov is a disgrace, and they, lo and behold are arguing the case to carry on paying a fucking tax.

well done, that grandfather on the news yesterday, he speaks for us all,.

Bedroom tax is the perfect example of why I could and would never vote Tory.

For all the intellectual arguments about the economy and the trickle down effect, when you scratch the surface they have no conscience. They don't care about anyone in a worse off position than themselves. In fact they almost seem to take pleasure in seeing just how much extra they can screw from the least fortunate. As many have said, there was no need to frame the tax in this way. There was certainly no need to appeal the decision further to the supreme court.

That poor DV victim, those poor GPs and their poor GS. As a society we owe them more than this, so much more. And to you Becker you're doing it for love and they are exploiting you, and so many others like you. It's shameful.

[Meanwhile they're silently demolishing the NHS brick by brick and sneaking it out of the back door before anyone notices....]

thanks here (great name, Beatles fan .)

All the other parties AFAIK were saying theyd get rid of the BT if they came to power- wether its true or not, we'll never know.

Becker has illustrated very very clearly what is wrong with this. The government can say till they're blue in the face that there's nothing wrong with the law because the discretionary fund is in place, but if someone like Becker isn't getting any payments from that fund then clearly it's not an adequate safeguard. In fact, Becker, I'd suggest you contact one of the solicitors' firms dealing with this case, because (a) they might be able to help you and (b) they might like to put you forward as evidence that the discretionary funding argument is a pile of rubbish.

Veritat thank you.

trouble is the government KNOW all this and they don't give a crap. hence the DWP and the gov trying to overturn the 2 cases (out of millions) on the news last week.

when I tries for discretionary funds I was told I had enough money and needed to budget more!

I told them ive had to sell most of my furniture, do car boot sales, im on a PAYG dongle for the internet and so limited on this, yet support groups like those on mumsnet for disabled/vulnerable/lone parents/this thread are so important for ones self esteem, and to encourage and empathise with each other, I toild them DC and I not only are we disabled, we have food allergies and the like and have to have specialist foodstuffs that are mostly more than double ''normal'' food, and things like that.

they couldn't give a shit.

and we are not the only ones in this boat (the Titanic!!).

AND the council raise the rent every year, so raise the BT too, yet carers/DLA doesn't go up at all.

FFS cant they see disabled/vulnerable cant cope like this? they are blinded by their own greed. I hate them, I hate them so much, Ive never hated anyone as much as I hate this lot, Im not a hating person at the best of times, but they've worn down so many of us (sorry Im babbling on, sounds so self-pitying), and the amount of people that have killed themselves cos they cant cope with imminent homelessness/destitution.

and Im sorry, it breaks my heart all this refugee crisis, genuinely, but the gov has the money/housing/medical facilities for migrants like afree fro all but cant be arsed with those already here in need.no funds for us, they have funds for the rest of the world by taking from US !

(sorry that was long).

don't mean to sound callous saying that, but its true. and this below:

. Instead of throwing more money on a legal challenge in the Supreme Court The Government should back down now and do the right thing and help families like the Rutherfords. It is extremely shaming on our politicians that such decent hardworking people who are saving the nation thousands of pounds a year by caring for their loved ones are made to jump through hoops for a discretionary payment, thus heaping even more stress and uncertainty into their lives.

^

what a mean government we have. Hope they lose some voters over this.

what a mean government we have. Hope they lose some voters over this.

Not sure why. There was enough warning before the election that this is what the Tories are like, and what would happen, and people voted for them anyway. Demographics at work really. Another legacy of Thatchers genius. Persuade the aspirant middle classes to have fewer children and more Spanish holidays, and watch as the population ages and continues voting Tory.

Is how some see it.

Something else that was missed when drawing up this policy was:

Sometimes two bedroomed accommodation is cheaper to rent than 1 bedroomed accommodation.

In my old neighbourhood, two bed accommodation is two bed terraced houses, of which there are plenty, one bed accommodation tends to be more modern flats, which are in short supply and are more expensive.

I have a long term tenant who over the years has been in and out of work. I was horrified to find he was being charged bedroom tax just for renting the most widely available type of housing within his budget.

I said Torys may lose voters because they may be appaulled when they see the Tories tried to overturn it and don't give a fig about the disabled boy and his granddad.

I said Torys may lose voters because they may be appaulled when they see the Tories tried to overturn it and don't give a fig about the disabled boy and his granddad

I doubt it. It's what they voted for.

Something else that was missed when drawing up this policy was:

They missed nothing when they drew up this policy. Anyone who still thinks it was ever about "austerity" or "saving money" should see me later about a bridge I have to sell. In the meantime, those of us with working hearts and minds know it was only ever ideological.

Ideological, like the tax credit changes and child benefit changes.

Ideological to try and use the tax/benefits system to push the moral view that married=good/unmarried=bad.

(I'm surprised those as old as me don't recognise this as a compilation album from the Tories greatest hits 1980-1990).

Currently, the greatest bulwark the disadvantaged have to protect them against they tyrannies of injustice is the fact the UK has signed up to the ECHR. And the greatest threat to that protection are the fact that racism might trump compassion, and the British public throw away their rights because Teresa May told a pack of lies about asylum seeker and a cat.

The current party of government is well ahead in the polls. They're expected to pick up votes in the imminent Welsh Assembly elections too. They seem bulletproof. I'm not sure that the general electorate minds about bedroom tax. I do, though, and I'm cautiously pleased with this news.