Bedroom tax, new thread !

[tornado]

Bed room tax will not save money in the long run the ones that dont want to work with kids growing up the same will not pay it most off them dont pay water rates and only pay electric and gas because there on a pre pay meter even then alot of them fix it.So in the end the ones that r to sick or the ones that are looking for work will suffer i say its time we had 2 rates high rate dole for the ones that have paid in and low rate for the ones that have never had a job.

[thered]

Bed room tax will not save money in the long run the ones that dont want to work with kids growing up the same will not pay it most off them dont pay water rates and only pay electric and gas because there on a pre pay meter even then alot of them fix it.So in the end the ones that r to sick or the ones that are looking for work will suffer i say its time we had 2 rates high rate dole for the ones that have paid in and low rate for the ones that have never had a job.

I would sort of agree with that, i said before that this bedroom tax should not happen to people who have lost jobs for 6-12 months

That should give them plenty of time to get another

But i agree with that, contributions based JSA should be higher paid for worker than none worker for first 6- 12 months

Would help with the extra pressure of losing job too

[gmb45]

I would sort of agree with that, i said before that this bedroom tax should not happen to people who have lost jobs for 6-12 months

That should give them plenty of time to get another

But i agree with that, contributions based JSA should be higher paid for worker than none worker for first 6- 12 months

Would help with the extra pressure of losing job too

ah good idea, them peeps who have just lost there jobs should not have to pay bed tax for at least a year

[jordigirl]

the government has backed down on some of the bedroom tax!

foster carers and people with family in the armed force's will be exempt from paying it

how can you have 2 tier jsa?

[thered]

the government has backed down on some of the bedroom tax!

foster carers and people with family in the armed force's will be exempt from paying it

how can you have 2 tier jsa?

You have now, income based and contributions based all it needs is adjusting to pay more


if you have paid in you get say ?90, after 6-12 months whatever it goes to normal rate ?71

Its irrelevant tbh as its not up for negotiation but it seems like a good idea to me

[tornado]

This is not just for people on the dole seem alot have forgot that part,u take a low paid job and no your be ok because your get help with rent etc well not any more.And if they really wanted to save some money why are they still wasting it on the work programme which dont help but is taking tax payers money then look at who owns the companies running it what a joke.

[GastonJ]

I said I wouldn't, but what the hell

With councils having so little 1 bedroom accommodation available this is designed to drive people into the hands of private landlords. More money for landlords, who picks up the bill on the over inflated rents? The taxpayer. So it's going to cost more.

The government will then look at all the empty 3 bedroomed houses and tell councils to sell them. Who loses? the taxpayer. The private landlords will gain, they'll buy them cheap to turn into flats and rent back as 1 bedroomed accommodation to rent back to councils for the taxpayer to pay for again at high cost.

There's a pattern emerging there and it seems to be that the costs for private accommodation will go up and the taxpayer will foot the bill, landlords will gain. The Tory and Liberal parties will make more friends.

[allycoops]

I said I wouldn't, but what the hell

With councils having so little 1 bedroom accommodation available this is designed to drive people into the hands of private landlords. More money for landlords, who picks up the bill on the over inflated rents? The taxpayer. So it's going to cost more.

The government will then look at all the empty 3 bedroomed houses and tell councils to sell them. Who loses? the taxpayer. The private landlords will gain, they'll buy them cheap to turn into flats and rent back as 1 bedroomed accommodation to rent back to councils for the taxpayer to pay for again at high cost.

There's a pattern emerging there and it seems to be that the costs for private accommodation will go up and the taxpayer will foot the bill, landlords will gain. The Tory and Liberal parties will make more friends.

And don't forget the Tax Breaks that the landlords will get as a sweetener from the government for letting their houses to people on benefits.

[thered]

I said I wouldn't, but what the hell

With councils having so little 1 bedroom accommodation available this is designed to drive people into the hands of private landlords. More money for landlords, who picks up the bill on the over inflated rents? The taxpayer. So it's going to cost more.

The government will then look at all the empty 3 bedroomed houses and tell councils to sell them. Who loses? the taxpayer. The private landlords will gain, they'll buy them cheap to turn into flats and rent back as 1 bedroomed accommodation to rent back to councils for the taxpayer to pay for again at high cost.

There's a pattern emerging there and it seems to be that the costs for private accommodation will go up and the taxpayer will foot the bill, landlords will gain. The Tory and Liberal parties will make more friends.

Not sure i agree tbh

Private landlords seem the scourge of the nation why?

Many dont take DSS

The ones that do are pegged to be similar price as council homes

You cannot under occupy and get full benefit

Building cheap houses for poor to rent, Great when most are on housing benefit anyway

Better have then in private sector landlords than waste billions in housing

Works ok with a sound working economy, but we dont have one, then after its built the work runs out and they all sat in their newly built homes on housing benefit causing 10 times the problems we have now


All paid by taxpayer btw


Its not 1945 the country has declined rapidly since it was a superpower and we gave everything back, we are service economy and will get little growth until our country is so bad it makes shoddy crap to export to china

[jordigirl]

my other half rents out flats, non are x council, his rents are very reasonable ( less than council rent ) all in good area's,

there all very well maintained, and modern, on top of him doing his own maintenance. he works full time pays tax on his wages, and then an extra 25% tax on his rents (less costs of repairs etc.)
he has 1 dss tenant, who in himself is ok - but dealing with housing is a nightmare -
theres a problem his rent stops,
he's accused of something - his rent stops
they never inform you, or keep you in loop

when this new universal benefit come's in it will be even worse as the housing benefit will be paid direct to the claimant instead of the landlord, how many will get the rent off them then??

a lot of landlords do a good service, and saves councils on repairs and maintenance, so less staffing is needed.

oh and if he decide's he would like to sell them the government would like 40% in capital gains tax off him,

wonder if they would stump up 40% if he made a loss??

[Shady]

my other half rents out flats, non are x council, his rents are very reasonable ( less than council rent ) all in good area's,

there all very well maintained, and modern, on top of him doing his own maintenance.

stop advertising jo

[jordigirl]

am not shady

[flyingpig]

I said I wouldn't, but what the hell

With councils having so little 1 bedroom accommodation available this is designed to drive people into the hands of private landlords. More money for landlords, who picks up the bill on the over inflated rents? The taxpayer. So it's going to cost more.

The government will then look at all the empty 3 bedroomed houses and tell councils to sell them. Who loses? the taxpayer. The private landlords will gain, they'll buy them cheap to turn into flats and rent back as 1 bedroomed accommodation to rent back to councils for the taxpayer to pay for again at high cost.

There's a pattern emerging there and it seems to be that the costs for private accommodation will go up and the taxpayer will foot the bill, landlords will gain. The Tory and Liberal parties will make more friends.

The majority of houses for social rent are owned by Housing Associations, which in turn, are owned by the banks. Long gone are the days that the local councils have the housing stock.

Housing Associations cannot sell off houses becuase the government tell them as the income from each unit is taken into account in the Business Plan.

Here is a little calculation so you can see how the impact of 100 units (houses) can make on a HA.

80 (average rent per week) x 52 = ?4,160 per annum.

?4,160 x 100 houses = ?416,000 per year for 100 houses.

If you take that over a 30 years business plan that equates to ?416,000 x 30 is in excess of ?12m and that is at todays money - I haven't bothered doing the future value which is way higher as the rent will compound at around inflation + 1% each year.

As you can see, Housing Associations cannot even afford 50 properties to be taken out of their business plan. The average size of Housing association is around 7000 units.

This will not force tenants into private rented accomodation as they face the same principles. The rent is not free range, it is based on a complex formula the same as a housing association, and there is a maximim upper limit.

[tshirtman]

This is not just for people on the dole seem alot have forgot that part,u take a low paid job and no your be ok because your get help with rent etc well not any more.And if they really wanted to save some money why are they still wasting it on the work programme which dont help but is taking tax payers money then look at who owns the companies running it what a joke.

The work programme is a joke, I take a couple of clients to 2 different providers,
G4S, are a complete waste of time, they have not offered any help whats-so-ever,
Seetec, are slightly better, but they are both just completing a box ticking exercise,

what some people may not realise, that once on the work program, you no longer have to sign on at the job center,
once a fortnight DWP send out a slip to the claimant, they sign it, and drop it in a box near to the door at the job center, with no need to see anyone.

The work programme providers dont have to push the unemployed to find a job, because they get paid regardless,
yes, they get paid more if they find someone a job that lasts longer than 6 months,
but from what I've seen there only interest is people come in to there offices once a fortnight and sign a form,
A 3.5 per cent success rate of people finding a job, on the work programme backs this up,
compared to a 5 per cent success rate for those not on the work progamme

and the cost for this: ?500 million.

[flyingpig]

Saltire - I did get to see first hand a person who will be badly affected by the tax, and I truly felt for this person.

She was in her 50's and in her family home. Unfortunately her children had left home, and her husband had left her, which left her in a 3 bed house and a cost of ?25 per week to find for the rent. She told me she was a kept woman by her husband as they had a traditional marriage where she stayed at home brought up the kids, and done the housework. She thought she would never find a job, as she had never worked but allowed her husband to have a good job by her support. Now she is on ?65 a week, and we are looking to take ?25 of that for rent.

That leaves her ?40 a week for food, gas, elec, water, clothes etc..... I felt sorry for her, and I think as long as she is willing to move to a smaller property than Housing Associations such as mine, should forego the rent unless she is unwilling to move.

The rule should be you dont pay but if you refuse the 1st 2 smaller properties that you are offered you will have to pay. That would seem fair?