bedroom tax

[fireblade]

i have been hearing somuch of this bedroom tax, heard on the radio yesterday morning that this bedroom tax has droveso many people out of their homes and also got that bad, people are accually doing far worse? are you guys paying this bed room tax? whats your views on this also?

thank you for reading.

fireblade2.

 

[AJT]

Due to be shortage of social housing I do believe something needs to be done but not so sure on the bedroom tax.
Where I do feel for example a couple are living in a three or four bedroom property maybe they should give it up to allow a larger family to use it..
I am aware that folks have lived in the council home for many years etc but it is a council home and should be matched to your needs..but everything should be in place to enable tenants to find and move an appropriate social housing property to suit their needs rather than a "well I have been here for years and not moving now".
As it stands this is not yet in place so a quick way of dealing with it is to charge tenants of social housing more rent for rooms they no longer socially need.

 

[rawsy]

Due to be shortage of social housing I do believe something needs to be done but not so sure on the bedroom tax.
Where I do feel for example a couple are living in a three or four bedroom property maybe they should give it up to allow a larger family to use it..
I am aware that folks have lived in the council home for many years etc but it is a council home and should be matched to your needs..but everything should be in place to enable tenants to find and move an appropriate social housing property to suit their needs rather than a "well I have been here for years and not moving now".
As it stands this is not yet in place so a quick way of dealing with it is to charge tenants of social housing more rent for rooms they no longer socially need.

I agree, the tax gives an option at least but why should anyone have a subsidised bedroom if it isn't needed? As far as I'm aware help is offered for the move. Although the reasons behind the lack of housing which is causing or at least helping the shortage are wrong but are a completely different matter which I won't get in to.

 

[Lee5768]

Yes I have been effected by the bedroom tax I have 1 spare room...I managed to get an exemption after about 7 months of paying it.
(not going into details how as its to do with medical issues I am not talking about in a forum)

Something does need doing about the shortage of housing. I agree! but this tax is not the answer at all.

This is not about the shortage of housing if it was Cameron wouldn't be trying to drop the price of right to buy and encourage people to buy social housing.
(might be a good time to point out Thatcher who started this right to buy housing ministers in charge of it son owns over 40 of these right to buy properties himself and I am sure Mark thatcher owns loads too AND 126 MPs are land lords and 70% of them are tory)

It can't be about saving money either because this TAX costs more money people don't want to move into social housing because if someone moves out or dies you end up getting taxed.

If they do kick me out of here my current rent is about £80 a week, if I moved into a 1 bed flat that's private they will be happy to pay £110 ....Who's that gonna same money?


and I would like to point out I didn't have any choice in how many rooms I got I was housed under a council medical award the award said I could only be offered a 2 bedroom property

 

[Lee5768]

I agree, the tax gives an option at least but why should anyone have a subsidised bedroom if it isn't needed? As far as I'm aware help is offered for the move.

You're acting like people get a choice in how many rooms they get...its not a menu you don't get to pick
you never have.

They look at your needs then look at what they have and give you the closest match.

 

[Rumpelstiltskin.]

Its if it your requirements go down over the years ie members leave the household and now you have big house for 2 people.
My mother (God rest her soul) swapped her counncil 3 bedroom house for a bungalow many years ago when there was only her left.
Was too big for her and obviously more expensive to run.
Was her decision though no one asked her to.

 

[rawsy]

You're acting like people get a choice in how many rooms they get...its not a menu you don't get to pick
you never have.

They look at your needs then look at what they have and give you the closest match.

If that was the case why is there a bedroom tax? A family with one kid gets 2 bedrooms right? If they were to put them in to a 3 bedroom I don't see how they could charge the tax? I don't know . All I'm saying is if you are in social housing and get help in paying rent which as far as I know are the criteria? Why should you have more rooms than needed that said person isn't paying for ? Or at least paying fully for.

 

[Lee5768]

If that was the case why is there a bedroom tax? A family with one kid gets 2 bedrooms right? If they were to put them in to a 3 bedroom I don't see how they could charge the tax? I don't know . All I'm saying is if you are in social housing and get help in paying rent which as far as I know are the criteria? Why should you have more rooms than needed that said person isn't paying for ? Or at least paying fully for.

As said in this thread more than once.....social housing is very limited they built a hell of a lot more
2 and 3 bed places than 1 or 4 bed places.


So councils give single people 2 bedroom flats and houses (they had no choice) they could have lived in them for years spent money on them like I have and now they are told they have too many rooms.


Funny thing is pensioners (most likely to vote) are exempt from it a lot of them are living in 3-4 bed houses and wont move.


You need to step away from the "how many rooms is needed" discussion and think about COST

if I was forced out of my place because of the BT I have very little chance of getting a 1 bed room place from social housing (they just don't have them ) and another thing to note is if you owe rent arrears (almost all people charged do ) they wont offer you a smaller place because you owe them money.

My choice is then go to a private landlord ....I will get a 1 bed place it will cost the TAX PAYER in my area about £30-40 week more than if I stayed where I was and the council would be happy to pay it.

 

[rawsy]

As said in this thread more than once.....social housing is very limited they built a hell of a lot more
2 and 3 bed places than 1 or 4 bed places.


So councils give single people 2 bedroom flats and houses (they had no choice) they could have lived in them for years spent money on them like I have and now they are told they have too many rooms.


Funny thing is pensioners (most likely to vote) are exempt from it a lot of them are living in 3-4 bed houses and wont move.


You need to step away from the "how many rooms is needed" discussion and think about COST

if I was forced out of my place because of the BT I have very little chance of getting a 1 bed room place from social housing (they just don't have them ) and another thing to note is if you owe rent arrears (almost all people charged do ) they wont offer you a smaller place because you owe them money.

My choice is then go to a private landlord ....I will get a 1 bed place it will cost the TAX PAYER in my area about £30-40 week more than if I stayed where I was and the council would be happy to pay it.

And a family that needed the spare bedroom would have it? Thus meaning that room was used and maybe an extra house wouldn't need to be built.

I'm not saying it's perfect and the fact we are importing people who need houses with extra bedrooms isn't helping. on top of the fact we haven't being building enough houses anyway. the top and bottom of it is if you pay your rent you have what your paying for ?
Social housing has an obligation to house people not to let them have spare rooms. I don't think it's fair for example a single person to have to pay bedroom tax if they only have 2 bedroom premises available or similar but as I said if there is something available then the fact a roof over everyone's head is made available takes precedence. If anyone wants the extra bedroom then pay the tax. I have a spare room as I'm paying a mortgage. I don't have money to throw around as I pay for all maintenance on my house and don't have my rent subsidised.

 

[D 8 RCS]

There are also a lot of people paying the bedroom tax even though they have requested smaller properties than they are currently in.............this is because of an even bigger shortage of 1 and 2 bedroom properties than of 3 and 4 bedroom properties.
Much bigger savings would be made by councils building or even buying properties rather than renting from the private sector, where they are paying between £800 and £1200 pcm for quite ramshackle 3 bedroom properties.

 

[rawsy]

There are also a lot of people paying the bedroom tax even though they have requested smaller properties than they are currently in.............this is because of an even bigger shortage of 1 and 2 bedroom properties than of 3 and 4 bedroom properties.
Much bigger savings would be made by councils building or even buying properties rather than renting from the private sector, where they are paying between £800 and £1200 pcm for quite ramshackle 3 bedroom properties.

I agree that it is wrong for someone to pay the tax if there is no alternative . I'm surprised that is the case.

 

[madhatter007]

Another lie people have fallen for.

This neither meets the house shortage in the south but also penalises people who have no option of moving.

It does not save money as people moving are put on to a higher rent which in most cases is more than what was paid before as RSL let new properties at greatly increased target rents.

 

[D 8 RCS]

I agree that it is wrong for someone to pay the tax if there is no alternative . I'm surprised that is the case.

There should be no surprise, it was a typical knee jerk reaction tax to give the impression of doing something about "benefit scroungers", when in fact nothing could be further from the truth.
Also do you think that it is fair for a couple who have rented a house for 30 plus years, kept it in good decorative condition and even spent money on improvements inside and outside the house, be forced out because their children have grown up and moved on, but they still want to be able to have grandchildren stay over in "their" home ?
It should be remembered that it is "social housing" not private investment property that is hawked about for the largest profit.

 

[alimac]

if recieving benefits you could apply for a discretionary housing payment to help offset the loss

 

[rawsy]

There should be no surprise, it was a typical knee jerk reaction tax to give the impression of doing something about "benefit scroungers", when in fact nothing could be further from the truth.
Also do you think that it is fair for a couple who have rented a house for 30 plus years, kept it in good decorative condition and even spent money on improvements inside and outside the house, be forced out because their children have grown up and moved on, but they still want to be able to have grandchildren stay over in "their" home ?
It should be remembered that it is "social housing" not private investment property that is hawked about for the largest profit.

It is fair because it is social housing . Just because someone may have lived there for x amount of years doesn't give them the right to keep an unused bedroom without paying for it. If someone wants to stay in a social house with a spare room then pay the tax. Does the tax make the rent more than the equivalent private rent? Also if someone has lived in the house for x amount of years "subsidised" give them the right to have a family who would use those rooms without a roof over their head? I'm not saying it's perfect but the bottom line is if you want a spare room pay for it or move to somewhere without a spare room. If no alternative is available then it's wrong to be taxed in this way. I am not in the position to know if the tax is enforced in these cases but would assume there would be a case for help or the tax being waved in that situation?

 

[D 8 RCS]

Alimac "if recieving benefits you could apply for a discretionary housing payment to help offset the loss"

That is at the local council's discretion and they all have a very limited budget for this, which is often used up within the first financial month.

Rawsy "If no alternative is available then it's wrong to be taxed in this way. I am not in the position to know if the tax is enforced in these cases but would assume there would be a case for help or the tax being waved in that situation?"

There is no alternative in the majority of cases, and yes it is wrong to be taxed in that way and that is a big part of the argument against the bedroom tax, as Alimac says above there is a "discretionary housing payment" available but firstly it is "discretionary" so there are no hard and fast rules as to who is eligible or for what reasons and secondly there is very limited funding for this.
There is a war on benefit claimants and no prisoners are being taken, but despite the image of a benefit claimant relentlessly shown by the media, the majority of claimants are or were hard working people who have lost their jobs or have become ill or are in very poorly paid work and depend on the benefits just to keep their heads above water.
Don't get me wrong, I know there are real scroungers out there and yes they do deserve to be targeted but there are far easier and fairer ways of identifying and punishing those people.
There are about 200,000 people with 3 months and over mortgage arrears in the UK and there are about 50,000 house repossessions each year...........that position is a lot closer to many people than they think, and from there it is a very hard road not made any easier by the way those who fall into the benefits trap are treated.

 

[rawsy]

Ok that has cleared up part of the issue and I agree there should not be a tax put on anyone with no alternative. The people who do have an alternative should either pay the tax or move though. Also as has been said there should be either exemptions in the mean time and more suitable accommodation being sort or built. If there is a choice between having a room with tax or another place to live I have no issue with it. If there is no other choice then it's wrong.

I'm not trying to be an arse or fall out with anyone but what I said above is what I believe.

I have learnt more about this situation in this post and hope the issues can be resolved .

 

[D 8 RCS]

@rawsy, I don't think you are being an arse or trying to fall out with anyone and I can fully understand how you feel but unfortunately the true injustices are being hidden behind the shield of "Look how we are clamping down on Benefit Scroungers" who on a financial scale are miniscule in comparison to the Big Business Tax Dodgers, but do they do anything about that ? No, in fact they reduced Corporation Tax.............that's the Tax ATOS, Serco, G4S and Capita (who all have huge Government Contracts) haven't paid, and they are only the tipoff the iceberg.

 

[Lee5768]

Another thing that's happening is people who do get evicted end up in a hostel and the costs to the tax payer in that situation is unbelievable.

Like I said earlier we have lots of old grannys whose family's have left home and they don't want to move and they are exempt from it.


in my case I didn't have a choice my first flat (also 2 bedroom) was rat infested and I do mean infested they would be running round the bed of a night and everything

the women who lived upstars would spit and me and my ex out of the window as we entered and left she even smashed my windows .....total nutcase who was evicted a year after I was moved.

That situation had an effect on ongoing medical conditions and I was rehoused under medical grounds
the house we got was from a council who had no money to carry out repairs smackheads lived there before us and finding drug needles in the garden was a normal occurrence not going to mention the used condoms in the loft.

we was told we had a tenancy for life as did everyone before David Cameron came along. so of course thinking that we spent money and carried out the repairs the council couldn't afford

Then Cameron and BANG you have to many rooms TAX TAX TAX

Hardly fair is it ....if they wanted to do this they should have made it for all new tenants and at the least they would have a choice.

 

[D 8 RCS]

"we was told we had a tenancy for life as did everyone before David Cameron came along. so of course thinking that we spent money and carried out the repairs the council couldn't afford

Then Cameron and BANG you have to many rooms TAX TAX TAX

Hardly fair is it ....if they wanted to do this they should have made it for all new tenants and at the least they would have a choice."

As you say @Lee5768 it used to be written in the majority of Council Tenancy Agreements that you had the Tenancy for Life, unless you broke the other rules of the Tenancy.
Perhaps it's time for some of the long term Council Tenants who are now paying the Bedroom Tax to look out their Agreements and argue this point, but then again they will probably argue that you can still have the Tenancy for Life but only if you pay the Bedroom Tax, but it may be worth consulting a solicitor with those facts and arguing that the Bedroom Tax should not be eligible "Ex Post Facto".