Bedroom Tax

[tezza1234]

I just wanted to start a thread to get everyone views, the bedroom tax has everyone talking and many have different views on it, Please have your view, we are all entitled to our own opinion, please keep the thread sensible.

 

Ok my personal view is the bedroom tax is in principle a good idea, for those who want/choose to stay in larger LA housing than is required, of course its not working like that, people cant downsize as there are no properties, it is hitting the vulnerable and this is just wrong.

 

My other problem is the bedroom tax does not apply to persons of a pensionable age or anyone claiming any sort of disability, again each case may be individual but arnt most of the larger HA properties filled by elders in there 60's 70's 80's ect.... who refuse to move, yet they are exempt from this tax

[goodatresearch]

It isnt a tax. People just arent receiving tax payers money for something they dont need. Why should other people, many who have to pay high mortgage costs, pay for someone else to have an extra bedroom. Saying that, people shouldnt have to pay this "tax" if they have asked to be rehoused because of it but theres nothing available.

[antone]

It isnt a tax. People just arent receiving tax payers money for something they dont need. Why should other people, many who have to pay high mortgage costs, pay for someone else to have an extra bedroom. Saying that, people shouldnt have to pay this "tax" if they have asked to be rehoused because of it but theres nothing available.

 

Well, that's the thing, isn't it? There just isn't enough social housing to rehouse everyone. So I certainly agree that taxpayers should not be funding huge houses for people whose kids have left home, for example, but the implementation of this thing stinks to high heaven.

 

What the government has done is create perverse incentives. "Over-occupying" social tenants will end up in private rented flats which cost more, and they'll claim HB/LHA to cover it. This will, of course, free up social housing for people who are a bit better off. Which makes no sense at all, neither for the tenants nor the taxpayer.

[estellyn]

Erm, bedroom tax does apply to the disabled, some might get additional help with a dHP if a room's been converted or if they are a couple and need two bedrooms due to equipment (for instance a hospital bed, hoist etc), but the disabled are not exempt - only pensioners.

[estellyn]

Well, that's the thing, isn't it? There just isn't enough social housing to rehouse everyone. So I certainly agree that taxpayers should not be funding huge houses for people whose kids have left home, for example, but the implementation of this thing stinks to high heaven.

 

What the government has done is create perverse incentives. "Over-occupying" social tenants will end up in private rented flats which cost more, and they'll claim HB/LHA to cover it. This will, of course, free up social housing for people who are a bit better off. Which makes no sense at all, neither for the tenants nor the taxpayer.

 

Yes, cynically I sometimes wonder if this a policy with the purpose of increasing fodder for private landlords.

[mr_mastiff]

Tezza1234, I can name a number of disabilities/conditions that require an extra room for treatments. For example Renal patients who have dialysis at home, and I am sure I would not want to sleep next to someone with obstructive sleep apnoea whilst they are C.P.A.P. There are many other reasons. There are a number of reasons for not moving elderly people out of there homes including financial/physical and psychological were moving them would prove to be very costly. I know A number of single parents would would love to down size but as goodatresearch states there are too few available. Until the powers provides the required amount of housing needed this "TAX" is unfair and cruel because it hits hardest the people who cannot pay!

[citizenkain]

they should have given people longer to find a smaller property,the fact is their isnt many one bedroom flats about,nor social housing,people seem to be getting penalised for being left in a bigger house when their family members move out etc

[Consumer dude]

How long can anyone be given, until more social housing is built ? Me thinks one would be waiting a very long time..

[citizenkain]

well consumer dude,thats the way they should have done it! better than just imposing it on people with nothing to fall back on!

[RaeUK]

It is grossly unfair that pensioners are exempt. Clearly their vote is more important than a disabled persons vote.

[Nystagmite]

It should be done on a case by case basis, imo. In the sense that the disabled person who needs a room for medical equipment, can't sleep in the same room as their partner, etc. should be exempt. (because it's not a choice - it's a need) But the person who can downsize and chooses not to, should have to pay the tax.

 

Wasn't one of the arguments for pensioners not paying the tax because they can't increase their income? That's also true of many carers and disabled people too.

[queensclose]

sadly something had to be done. to many families are living in over occupied houses with no chance of getting a property to suit their needs. while the government are paying rents on houses under occupied. we have a lady in the next road living on her own in a three bed property. openly tells people it pays her to not work. council have tried on many occasions to rehouse her. but she refuses point blank to move.

 

while my next door neighbour who owns her own home is now selling hers now her children have grown up and married and her husband passed away. her reason is because she says the house is to big for her to maintain. she would love to stop but its time to move on

[Nystagmite]

But why penalise everyone for it? Not everyone is in a position to move and there certainly isn't enough smaller properties for everyone who needs one.

[mr_mastiff]

It is grossly unfair that pensioners are exempt. Clearly their vote is more important than a disabled persons vote.

 

I look down my street and see a number of houses that have been adapted by the council at great expense to enable pensioners to live in their own homes. It seems financial madness to move them now. Its just not financial nearly all the care given is unpaid mostly by family and friends. This "Tax" was not thought out in the first place, yes we do need housing for families but what will be the cost to society if we do not consider the individual cirumstances

[tomtom256]

It's no different to LHA and private renters, just makes the playing field fair for those that cannot get social housing but are in the same boat as those that can i.e. you get the help for the rooms you actually need.

 

Obviously those with carers etc needed looking at under different criteria, but the average Joe has similar if not the same needs.

[fightingback99]

It's no different to LHA and private renters, just makes the playing field fair for those that cannot get social housing but are in the same boat as those that can i.e. you get the help for the rooms you actually need.

 

Obviously those with carers etc needed looking at under different criteria, but the average Joe has similar if not the same needs.

 

Would agree with above.

[antone]

sadly something had to be done. to many families are living in over occupied houses with no chance of getting a property to suit their needs. while the government are paying rents on houses under occupied. we have a lady in the next road living on her own in a three bed property. openly tells people it pays her to not work. council have tried on many occasions to rehouse her. but she refuses point blank to move.

 

while my next door neighbour who owns her own home is now selling hers now her children have grown up and married and her husband passed away. her reason is because she says the house is to big for her to maintain. she would love to stop but its time to move on

 

Something needed to be done, sure. Provision of affordable and available housing would have helped a lot. Serious reversal of the rules that forced councils to sell their houses at well below market value and then forbade them from using the meager profits to build new housing stock, that would have been a good idea.

 

But if (charitably) we assume that the bedroom tax is merely incompetence, rather than malice and caprice, we're left with the old "something must be done" problem:

 

1. Something must be done.
   
2. This is something.
   
3. Therefore we must do this.
   

I believe it was known in Yes Minister as the "Politicians' Syllogism".

[abc123def]

Saying this is just equalising the social housing situation with the private rental one by paying only for bedrooms needed is not true. If someone has a housing need for a 2 bed property they are allowed to claim the maximum LHA for a 2 house if privately renting, if they find a 4 bed house at or under that LHA allowance then every single penny of the rent for a 4 bed property is paid, despite their need only being for a 2 bed. That is totally different to the situation now for those in social housing.

[RaeUK]

Quite so, abc, they are two completely different beasties.