The Accidental Smallholder Forum
Community => Coffee Lounge => Topic started by: Castle Farm on April 01, 2013, 04:48:59 pm
-
I fully agree with this policy, but fail to understand why our goverment fail to buy up all the empty properties in the country. Employ all our job seekers doing them up and then renting them out to people that need housing.
-
you would tho wouldnt you... ::)
-
so you agree that my friend who lives in a specially customized property for her wheelchair that when she was given had her daughter living there as well so has 2 bedrooms, under the current rules she has to find several hundred pounds a year from her benefits...
or move to a 1 bedroom place that isn't modified for her needs...
-
or a parent who shares half custrody of their child with their estranged partner cant now have a bedroom for their kids to sleep in?
or a disabled person cant have a carer stay over anymore.
unless your involved in this castle farm. i would strongly suggest you acytually DO SOME RESEARCH.
one of my friends has fybromyalgia, she is in a wheelchair. as of this week shes £30/ week worse off. nothing to you im sure. but thats 30% of her total income.
what is shes supposed to cut? she already has nothing. cant afford to heat her house.
this is not some lefty tagline. she CANNOT KEEP WARM
this is britain in 2013. 150000 people use foodbanks EACH WEEK. people are starving and cold. and the worst thing about it is
alot of those people are WORKING.
-
oh and while im at it.most of those 'empty properties' are actually held as investments by the rich.
there are 600000 of these properties. just sat there, accumulating value. cant be used as housing, owned by rich and left to rot. while my working friends live and bring up their kids cold and damp in sheds chalets, benders and caravans.
come and spend some time with me mr castle farm. you need your eyes opening.
-
I am wondering where all the one bedroom properties are for people who are forced to downsize? Yet again another Tory policy that hasn't been thought through...bit like the local council.
But Castle Farm has a point, empty properties should be CPO'd and put to better use.
-
Tricky one this.
There are people who need extra rooms.
There are people who don't and should downsize.
There are people on a waiting list who need a home and will benefit from people downsizing.
I didn't vote this government in, but it can't be easy to please everyone.
J xxxx.
-
in principle. yes.
there are a few who are overoccupying. but in reality, this is going to affect the disabled much much more than them
there is not the stock of housing to cope with a sudden surge of people reloctaing to one bedroom properties. they just dont exist. the building trend was for 2 or 3 bedroom houses.
there are 22000 registered on the housing waiting list, lots with families in tow. just in cornwall alone.
so if these people have nowhere to be moved to, they have no choice other than to stay in their 2 bed properties and pay the tax.
ive been helping my friend search for 1 bed properties and there are none. even in the private sector.
i should say that in cornwall property rentals are high priced, housing benefit will not cover the total cost anyway.
what are these people supposed to do??
-
At risk of being shot down I'll ask the following question .... what is stopping anyone with a 'spare' room renting it out to somone and making more income rather than 'paying' to keep it empty? Obviously some people would have no subletting clauses ...
-
not allowed if your in a housing association or council house.
-
I do understand that some people are seriously disadvantaged by this move deepin the woods ... however ....
Looking at it from my daughters point of view .... family of 4 living in 2 bedroom housing association property .... whilst the four bedroom houses behind hers have 2 adults living in them cos children have left home. The 3 bed that came vacant was put on the market. So she remains in 2 bed house with rapidly growing children.
Those of us who buy houses usually 'downsize ' when children leave because we can't afford to keep the bigger house but those in supported housing can continue in their large houses.
-
yep fair enough. my only issue is with that this is affecting the disabled and ill disproportionately.
if it had been done whereby those who are able to move were given somewhere practical, affordable and within their life structure, ie support structures like mental health teams, occ therapists, doctors etc then fine. that would be realistic.
however. its not been done like that. which is why its so unfair. its just been 'stop the money' no other options offered.
-
well i have the misfortune to live in a horrible modern house which is classed as a three bedroom, so i will be having to stump up but im not sure how much yet. what annoys me about it is the fact that the third bedroom is so small its only used as a cupboard but technically you can fit a single bed in it so it's definitely a bedroom say the damn council. Try opening the door when the beds in there !!
-
there is a 60 sq ft rule. i think.
BLOOMER knows more on that than me.
castle farm, are u gonna stand your corner, or are you doing your usual trick.
-
There is always going to be disabled and ill affected by whatever the new rules are and their needs should be taken into account. BUT there are families living in crowded houses having to share rooms that are in urgent need of larger houses.
With 3 bedroomed houses only having 1 person living in them is unsustanable.
Please don't attack me DITW for posting this. I have 3 properties and they have 9 bedrooms, but I own them and rent 2 out to people that need a home.
And I got those after been born and bred in a council house and working my arse off for 50 years to buy them. :innocent:
And you live where again...
-
no your missing the point. this legislation directly affects those disabled people. in a harsh and unfair way.
your op would seem to support that.
-
in a rented 2 bed house with no central heating. that i pay exactly 1 half of my monthly wage to stay in. or id be in a caravan too.
-
On paper it all sounds pretty reasonable, like people say, why should one person live in a home meant for more, but then there are people who's have say 2 children under 10 and they will not be allowed a bedroom each until they are older than 10, then same sex children will have to share until they are adults (not too sure until I re check) and people often change the family make up, so lots of moving around, no stability, I am sure its getting more like pre war times when families all shared a bed, and of course with 1 bedroom comes a smaller space so many will have to get rid of furniture and other stuff that means a lot to them, in the big picture we all need to be realistic but to some people, stability is paramount to their state of health.
! am currently working with the mental health team and its creating a lot of anxiety amongst the service users, within mental health that in itself can lead to dangerous behaviours and also moving to different areas makes them feel much more vulnerable and isolate, as is my husband, there are a lot of upset people out there who can barely live on what they get already, In my opinion, its too drastic, too sudden and not enough planning, so when people are too poor to live a decent life, they suffer or turn to crime and we all suffer!!
I am wondering where all the one bedroom properties are for people who are forced to downsize?
As for where all the homes are? not many builders build one bedroom homes, so they are few and far between, lots of work maybe for builders and removal people! :innocent:
We own our own house and are going to downsize but thats my choice and we are happy with that, but to keep up rooting your home and family is a hard choice!!
-
Using arguments like "fairness" can be so subjective. I don't think any tax is fair. It is taking away your money and deciding what it should be spent on. I don't particularly think my £900 a month train ticket to get to work is fair, particularly when I get up in the freezing cold and see some people on my street happy to receive benefits who are fit and able enough to do a days work but seemingly are able to decided not to. What one person sees as unfair another thinks is righteous and just.
I also don't think its fair that I still haven't convinced my wife to let me buy a wood-chipper for my birthday...... yet!
-
thats not quite the same as not being able to keep yourself warm or feed yourself properly.
-
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/living-on-benefits-can-you-survive-on-53-a-week-8556169.html (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/living-on-benefits-can-you-survive-on-53-a-week-8556169.html)
-
Who are you saying that are in that sort of poverty DITW?
Oh I see ..claiments.
-
Capping benefits at £26,000 for a family unit seems perfectly legitimate... Oh to have a post tax income of £26,000 - wouldn't that be nice. I'll put my name down for that one.
-
God I wish I was young enough to sign on..£26 grand a year. I'll have some of that. :innocent:
-
There is also the issue of jobs, so many jobs pay min wage, that wage is hard enough to live and support a family on, we even find it hard, its easy for me as I came from a time when I could move from job to job and so could a lot of my friends, so agree that some people have had an easy ride but there is no good system to sort the needy from the greedy, I know that every one should contribute to their care and support but some people are just unfortunate, worse is yet to come as I can plainly see all support services getting cut eventually, then what? some will be fine and some will not, glad I am not one of them "at the moment" disability and mental illness and loss of income etc, can drop into anyones life anytime......
-
escaped to the country.... im sorry but thats just crap.
the 26k cap would only apply to families with lots of kids and living in a high rental area.
you dont just automatically get 26 k given to you if your on benefits. and tbh, as an ex government hopeful you already know that. please stop offering ridiculous arguments and get to the reality of this.
this is the reality.
the people who have caused this situation isnt the poor claiming housing benefit, its the landlords putting the rents up too high based on spurious valuations based on an overinflated market caused by a shortage of housing provision.
-
I also don't think its fair that I still haven't convinced my wife to let me buy a wood-chipper for my birthday...... yet!
In the middle of all the angst this really made me laugh :roflanim: :roflanim:
With respect to the original post - in principle and on paper this seems to make sense but as always policies seem to be knee-jerk and not properly thought through. Cases should be tested to see if needs justify an extra room, this would surely help out those with disabilities for instance.
However, I am not in favour of extra rooms being paid for out of my taxes because a couple have become separated - are we really saying we have to pay for 3 bedroom houses for 2 people because the children are in different homes at different times? And before anyone jumps to conclusions - I have been there, with a boy and a girl and have lived in a two bedroom home because that was all that was available at the time.
Where people own their own home, if they are living beyond their means then they have to make practical decisions and this may mean down-sizing. When everyone in the country is having to tighten their belts why should some continue to live with 2 spare bedrooms when other families may be living in B&B? There is only a finite amount of resources to go around sadly.
Overall I think that the principle comes from a sensible premise but in reality, as it usual with this government, it's badly thought through and will probably result in another U-turn.
Donna
-
so are you in favour of politicians buying their second homes with your taxes? is that ok?
-
Deep in the woods - I find it interesting that when someone disagrees with you - be it on nuclear power or indeed the cut in benefits - which defacto cannot be equated to a tax - you play the man not the ball. You may not like my argument - but that does not make it "crap".
BTW - politicians can only rent properties through IPSA or pay the interest on a mortgage - so that comment is factually incorrect. I won't however call it "crap". That would be unfair.
-
Ok the offer 2 years ago was, if you would move out of your house that had extra bedrooms you would be paid £1000 per room. Trouble was there is not enough smaller houses to move people into . Bedroom tax is unfair because it goes for the people who need the most help. would the rich move out of their big houses to give a family more room, I think not. By allowing people to come into our country with no job or money to support themselves we are now in such a mess, lack of housing is a major concern. Selling council housing was the first mistake and not building more the 2nd. It should be that to be allowed into our country you should have money to support yourself and a job to come too like other countries.
-
im sorry ettc. but no one has played my ball. no one has answered my original point.
what is my friend with fybromyalgia, and countless others, supposed to do? ??? ?
maybe if someone would actually argue a point i would too?
-
Its going to be interesting to see just how many people will end up not being able to afford thier rent, where are they all going to go when evicted? and at what cost?
-
precisely. and they will be, in their droves.
who will pick up that tab?
the taxpayer.
in b and b costs cos thats where they end up.
-
in b and b costs cos that's where they end up.
:innocent: maybe we should hang on then, although we have had a few homeless but they were waiting for their new homes.
I think collecting the un paid rent arrears is going to cost a packet!!! People with money are going to be so very vulnerable too when they have their property taken, or used for squats, as will things such as wiring, plumbing, lead roofs, etc etc,
-
very true.
ive gotta go bed now, early start n all. but i hope anyone reading this thread for the first time has been able to see a more realistic side to this argument. and i think, castle farm and escaped to' you have done that much better than i ever could with your empty and shallow methods of arguing.
so i ask you once more. what is my friend supposed to do?
-
Deep in the woods - sorry but do you think I will engage with someone who makes personal comments like the one you just did (again). I haven't called your arguments shallow. You have now called mine "shallow" and "crap". Silly.
-
yet another distraction technique. im not stupid u know.
what is my friend supposed to do??
-
Deep in the woods - with respect - a few months ago you DM asking for advice about your business which I happily give and now because you disagree with points I make you think it's OK to go down the name calling route. Good luck! As I said before I'm not engaging with that type of silliness.
-
im sorry ettc. but no one has played my ball. no one has answered my original point.
what is my friend with fybromyalgia, and countless others, supposed to do? ??? ?
maybe if someone would actually argue a point i would too?
On this point I agree with you entirely - the 'one size fits all' hatchet approach to evaluating for this tax is rubbish and there should be a sort of 'means test' to ensure that people like your friend continue to be supported with their difficult circumstances. The welfare state was set up to provide a safety net for vulnerable people like this and should continue to do so.
However, as I have said before, there are still some cases where I believe that those living in houses that provide them with 'spare' bedrooms should make them available to those with more need as long as they can suitably be re-homed. In an ideal world of course everyone should be able to stay where they are - but we are living in a far from ideal world sadly and lots of people are having to make changes to accommodate the global downturn.
-
im sorry ettc. but no one has played my ball. no one has answered my original point.
what is my friend with fybromyalgia, and countless others, supposed to do? ??? ?
maybe if someone would actually argue a point i would too?
.
However, as I have said before, there are still some cases where I believe that those living in houses that provide them with 'spare' bedrooms should make them available to those with more need as long as they can suitably be re-homed. In an ideal world of course everyone should be able to stay where they are - but we are living in a far from ideal world sadly and lots of people are having to make changes to accommodate the global downturn.
i agree. but dont you think these people supposedly having room spare have probably already moved or been moved? they just dont exist, or there are so very few of them it really doesnt affect the deficit in the slightest.
however, a tax on the super rich would.
the recovery from the global downturn isnt the responsibility of the poor and disabled. thats the job of the fit and able to sort out.
since when has this country forgotten its duty of care to these people? its the job of the fit and able to LOOK after the disabled, not make them pay the rich gamblers debts off.
-
My neighbour is on her own and living in a three bedroomed housing association house. The council has offered her one bedroom accommodation a couple of times but she didn't like the areas they were in so turned them down. I don't want to lose my neighbour but a whole family could live in that house.
On the other hand, my friend is disabled and lives in a three bedroomed HA house. She can't manage the stairs so lives downstairs. As it is, she has fallen a few times and not been able to get up unaided. She has been waiting for MORE THAN A YEAR for a suitable supported living place to become available. She desperately wants to move to a smaller place and is onto the council every week but nothing has become available. She is now going to have to pay for those two bedrooms by losing some of the benefits she needs to live on. She would actually love to go to work but cannot manage to.
She is the sort of person that is being hit hardest by this tax.
-
However, as I have said before, there are still some cases where I believe that those living in houses that provide them with 'spare' bedrooms should make them available to those with more need as long as they can suitably be re-homed. In an ideal world of course everyone should be able to stay where they are - but we are living in a far from ideal world sadly and lots of people are having to make changes to accommodate the global downturn.
since when has this country forgotten its duty of care to these people? its the job of the fit and able to LOOK after the disabled, not make them pay the rich gamblers debts off.
You have mis-quoted me slightly here by removing some of my earlier post - I did say that I do think it is the duty of the welfare state to look after those most in need. I also believe there is a bunch of very rich people in this country who are sitting pretty - we are never gonna change that, need to accept it's the way of the world and move on.
However, as a tax and NI payer, I do not like having to pay for everyone who decides it's quite nice to have 2 spare rooms now their kids have moved on for instance. Great in an ideal world to let this continue - but we are not in an ideal world.
I do work, very hard, in the public sector. In the past few years I have been subject to a pay freeze which the chancellor has seen fit to extend once again to 2016. My pension contributions have gone up by 6% and will do the same again next April whilst I have to wait 7 years longer for that pension and will get less when I do get it. My tax and NI have also gone up in that time - overall I take home over £400 a month less than I did 2 years ago, whilst the cost of living continues to rise. Within that climate my class sizes have become bigger and bigger and I am told daily by the education secretary that I am rubbish at my job!!!
My point is - which should ensure everyone in the country is contributing to the recovery whilst protecting the very vulnerable and not subjecting them to more stress. But we have to do something about those who are taking an easy ride because there is not enough money left in the pot.
-
Deep in the woods - with respect - a few months ago you DM asking for advice about your business which I happily give and now because you disagree with points I make you think it's OK to go down the name calling route. Good luck! As I said before I'm not engaging with that type of silliness.
i havent called you names. i just said your arguments were 'shallow' and 'crap'
should i have maybe said 'not of sufficient depth' and 'throw away' ?
what is my friend supposed to do? you have yet to offer any answer to this question i originally posed.
-
colliewobbles, im sorry for the misquote, i was more concentrated on the latter half.
-
colliewobbles, im sorry for the misquote, i was more concentrated on the latter half.
Ta :thumbsup: no harm done
-
im sorry ettc. but no one has played my ball. no one has answered my original point.
what is my friend with fybromyalgia, and countless others, supposed to do? ??? ?
maybe if someone would actually argue a point i would too?
Well I'm sorry, but I don't know what your friend is supposed to do. But repeating your question time and time again doesn't seem to be helping much and getting many answers.
For what it's worth, my opinion is that this tax if they had to bring it in, could have been a whole lot better thought through.
Beth
-
Maybe the likes of ian duncan smith could rent out a few of the spare rooms in the mansion that he lives in rent free ? Or some of the hard working home owners who are sick of paying taxes to keep the unemployed in the lap of luxury could do the same and give a homeless person a room ? , there will be plenty to choose from very soon . After all we are all in this together , aren't we ? How many bedrooms in buck house ? Who pays for them ?
-
beth.
there isnt an answer to my question. not that i can see anyway. which is why this is a serious injustice. and why i keep arguing the point.
and your opinion, is the same as mine. it didnt have to be this sledgehammer. and would have yielded much better returns if done carefully.
-
If this bloody government stopped being such a soft touch on immigration , and stopped supporting thirdworld dictators who want to build their arms stockpiles bigger than their neighbours, -----Yes we will sell you 50 fighter planes and a 100 tanks, and give you the money to buy them with----because we would like your mineral deposits, oil, etc , which we willl buy at inflated prices on the spot markets , only to find you have already sold the rights to Russia , America etc. Oh never mind ,use the money to get youself another palace with a gold throne,
Meanwhile , back at the ranch, people in the UK (MUGS) can go without food, heating , and somewhere to sleep.. :rant: :rant: :rant:
STOP THE FOREIGN AID AND LOOK AFTER YOUR OWN PEOPLE CAMMERON.
You want to come and live here ? prove you have a job to go to , and somewhere to live first,
or you are back on the next plane at your own expense.
no benefits for the first 3 years of being here , pay in before you can draw out.
Leaving school and no qualifications ? here is your uniform, you are in the army now where you will learn a trade and put it to good use.
-
I think if your spare bedroom is tiny then it CANNOT be classed as a bedroom for the purpose of this tax, cant remember the exact measurement
-
You want to come and live here ? prove you have a job to go to , and somewhere to live first,
or you are back on the next plane at your own expense.
no benefits for the first 3 years of being here , pay in before you can draw out.
Leaving school and no qualifications ? here is your uniform, you are in the army now where you will learn a trade and put it to good use.
I totally agree with this. BUT Some, not all immigrants come here, get a job and rent a home.
The majority of the long term unemployed don't want work and David C is right in cutting benifits and whatever else he needs to do to get those idle buggers off the dole and into work.
It must be really galling to walk past a house at god knows what time in the morning on your way to work to know that that a house you pass has a grown-up family living in it at out expence.
The boat we all live on has a huge hole in it caused by the last goverment and bankers playing silly buggers. When a ship is in peril the first thing you need to do is dump all the crap over board to lighten the load.
I can see re-introduction of Victorian workhouses and the 'poor' who for whatever reason did'nt save up for a situation like this are going to suffer more.
Everybody in the UK had a chance of a good education, but quite alot didn't bother and those are the ones we that did get one are paying for.
If you want to see real poverty go to the slums of India and Africa.
In the UK it's a lot better and thats why people are trying to come here.
-
My granny lived out her days in a very large 3 bedroom council house with a huge garden. Once she died it was demolished and they fitted about 4 houses on the plot. It was cold and draughty with an outside loo. No one ever suggested any alternatives for her or to her.
So there are some cases where a policy of moving people to smaller and more suitable accommodation would have benefitted everyone. However I do think there's an issue with the availability of suitable smaller alternatives in the local are, and those need to be put in place if this isn't in effect to be just a cut in benefits. Discretion should also be put in place with those with genuine disabilities. I don't have an issue with a decent sized room being shared by two children of the same sex tbh. And being blunt, council housing ought to be a safety net, and for most people a temporary one, rather than being better than what they could afford if they worked full time. Otherwise why would people bother to work.
I do think some posters on this thread have been aggressive to the point of being quite unpleasant, there is a difference between having an honest disagreement and being plain rude. There's no need for it, let the strength of the case people hold act as its force.
-
well i live in aviemore in the Holiday village my dad lives at the croft I'm disabled and haw i see it is there is them that have it and them that dont .I think it will divide the people in UK.There is other things that could be done to help the state of the country .iv never voted as no bodey has ever helpt me the country will go bust and there will be looting robing etc this is haw i see it. We should look after those that ha vent got no think the old sick etc
-
You want to come and live here ? prove you have a job to go to , and somewhere to live first,
or you are back on the next plane at your own expense.
no benefits for the first 3 years of being here , pay in before you can draw out.
This part of the previously qouted post i could wholeheartedly agree with. There are strict rules elsewhere governing entry and work into other countries why not here. The perceptibly@free@ money isn't free is it........it's mine and yours........or maybe that's too sweeping a statement to be correct.
The majority of the long term unemployed don't want work
This part of the post i can't agree with. Night after night there are endless programmes documenting the plight of the unemployed.....the largest group being the 50 pluses. Now i understand that there are also documentaries on those that know how to work the system to the n..th degree and have been brought up in generations of it and will never want to work....surely those people are in the minority?
With a failing economy and companies going bust on a grand scale on a daily basis where are the jobs supposed to come from? There will be people out of work for god knows how long for whom being unemployed will be their worst nightmare and through no fault of their own.
My husband could well be one of them following a serious work accident just over a year ago. He will now have serious restrictions as to what he can and cannot do within the world of work and is still struggling to come with the pschological effects of the accident. Now the very last thing this man wants to be is unemployed so without mithering on i find it thoroughly distasteful and unecessary to make such a sweeping statement.......we've had months of worry and anxiety with many more to come but carry on as optimistically as we can.
-
a suggestion....
HA cannot sublet but they could maybe take in someone without rent ..... share bills and save the benefit loss.
some of this thread is rather unpleasant to read .... its an emotive subject but dont think this is the place to vent individual issues.
-
What a shame the government seem hell bent on forcing this one through, despite the unfortunate consequences for so many disabled people, or folks who find themselves in that situation through circumstance rather than choice.
I do wonder if the bedroom tax is going to be this generation's poll tax - feelings seem to be running very high, don't they?
-
This is a benefit cut, not a tax, it only effects those in social housing in receipt of housing benefit and brings it in to line with those in private rented housing in receipt of housing benefit, is that fairness? Sounds like it to me.
Why is the tax and benefit system the only way to redistribute wealth? It is a bureaucratic and inefficient way to achieve this, I donate to the local food bank, 100% of my money there goes to help those in need and not pay some sniffling servants (Civil Servants, I Can say that I am one, lol).
No court in the land will evict someone in a wheelchair who is ill, until they have found somewhere suitable to move to, so you friend should look for somewhere to move to and not worry; she will not be put on the streets.
There are charities and people out there to help; it doesn’t all have to come through tax and benefits system. Yes we have a duty of care to help those in need, but the money the government has is finite and the priorities have to be balanced, in an ideal world things would be different, but we are going through a bad time right now!
-
there isnt anywhere for her to move to. this is the problem.
-
Apparently one Council has used a bit of lateral thinking. They have decided that high rise buildings are unsuitable for raising familes, so all such flats are automatically being re-categorised as single bedroomed. Neat eh? Yes there would still be problems for some people with certain disabilities to use them, but it will at least free up any more suitable accommodation for them, while housing the fit singles or couples with no dependents in the high rise blocks.
-
That is sensible thinking.
-
This made me laugh though (http://newsthump.com/2013/04/02/i-thought-you-meant-53-pounds-of-pheasant-admits-iain-duncan-smith/) ;D
-
Brilliant site. Just wet myself laughing at the one about Jeremy Kyle
-
DITW I think you are fighting a losing battle. In principle I agree with the changes but unfortunately people will get caught out unfairly but you can't bring in sweeping changes without some casualties, nothing is ever fare for 100% of the people. There are safety nets, charities, government bodies etc to help people in need and I expect this policy will end up getting tweaked along the line.
As the majority of the population is in work I think that the government (rightly or wrongly) will have the support they need to carry on. There is no opposition in this country Labour have nothing to offer, no alternatives just hot air.
You can't keep knocking the wealthy and blaming them for everything, wealthy people create jobs there is no shame in being rich, if you keep 30 or 3000 people in work why should you be persecuted because you have wealth. If labeling everyone on benefits as scroungers is wrong so is labeling everyone who is rich and successful as the devils spawn.
-
Just had our council tax guide come by post.
According to Powys : "a bedroom is allowed for a non residential carer and for other residential adults"
So can I have the big nubile blonde as my carer now ?
-
you have to be registered disabled or have Kemo
-
As an extra problem my friend lets out most of his private house to single tenants most of whom are on housing benefit. At the moment it is paid directly to him as a registered provider of housing.. He accepts a lower rent than he could command per room as he knows it WILL be in the bank ever month.
In the future he feels he will have to say no to people on housing benefit and as he has had too many problems in the past and will only accept employed people who set up a direct debit at a higher rate than he now gets. (this is his main form of income)
Where will all these people go and the millions who are in the same boat.
-
If this helps?
-
so there is a tax that you can get refunded if you fill out the right form ..I wonder if there is one for mums in care homes
£2585 a month... all because she worked all her life as a nurse and now has Alzheimers ..a brain illness that is not recognised as a mental illness... why!!! because mental illness is paid by the state
-
I know, its just not fair!! My mum has dementia too :(
-
Re Alzheimers. In Swansea, a friend of mine has just had thousands refunded to her after her mum passed away with Alzheimers. Initially she had to pay for care, but she appealed and it was recognised as being a mental illness requiring nursing care (rather than just social care which is not funded by the state). Despite the fact that her mum had since died she received all the money back. Unfortunately, it seems the difference lies in the type of dementia and whether the care needs qualify as nursing or social (funded or not funded).
-
Re Alzheimers. In Swansea, a friend of mine has just had thousands refunded to her after her mum passed away with Alzheimers. Initially she had to pay for care, but she appealed and it was recognised as being a mental illness requiring nursing care (rather than just social care which is not funded by the state). Despite the fact that her mum had since died she received all the money back. Unfortunately, it seems the difference lies in the type of dementia and whether the care needs qualify as nursing or social (funded or not funded).
I don't think they are the only case either so it is well worth pursuing.
-
I am wondering where all the one bedroom properties are for people who are forced to downsize? Yet again another Tory policy that hasn't been thought through...bit like the local council.
But Castle Farm has a point, empty properties should be CPO'd and put to better use.
I think you'll find it was an idea first mooted by labour during their 1997 era when they were in office and pushed fairly hard at that..
To me it is such a shame that a housing subsidy was ever given in the first place to fool people into staying put in a place that they could not afford . Perhaps a new masive house building should be government financed , taken out of the hands of the local authorities and made into housing associations that run on a commercial basis rather than a political charity system.
CPO's would most likely take years to complete and be far more expensive than new builds with emphasis on one , two & three double bed rooms . I say this because before any older property could be rented out it wouild have to comply with the latest legislation wrt safety and buildings regs .
Doing up our place after a long term flood from a buried in concrete leak on the central heating just over four years ago cost us at least an extra £ 19 or £ 20 K