Shortage of homes for smaller familes.

[Guest BlueBrett]

Demand for smaller properties is likely to soar from April, as social tenants look to downsize to avoid the impact of the government’s ‘bedroom tax’ for underoccupation

Surely social housing should never be underoccupied in the first place? Maybe I'm not understanding how this works but wouldn't it have been better to just pay these people housing benefit and required them to rent from private landlords rather than moving them in to houses with multiple bedrooms that they don't need?

In fact I don't see why anyone other than the most vulnerable should get 'social' housing as such and I'm sure the million people mentioned in the OP don't all fall into this category

[Finnegan]

Because thats the way our state works. The only thing keeping me at work rather than spending all day at home with my wife and child is professional pride.

And the fact I don't like children.

Plus the fact you earn infinitely more by working and enjoy a much more comfortable life?

It's a very silly myth that anyone claiming benefit is better off.

[The People's Hero]

Surely social housing should never be underoccupied in the first place? Maybe I'm not understanding how this works but wouldn't it have been better to just pay these people housing benefit and required them to rent from private landlords rather than moving them in to houses with multiple bedrooms that they don't need?

In fact I don't see why anyone other than the most vulnerable should get 'social' housing as such and I'm sure the million people mentioned in the OP don't all fall into this category

Because the entire social housing issue is a complete joke and needs a massive overhaul.

Its dealt with better in some areas than others, but in general its an absolute shambles.

You are making the understandable error of assuming that a) common sense has been applied at any stage of decision making b) people only get what they 'need' c) there is any level of competency amongst the decision makers/administrators/facilitators or d) any real accountability when these idiot public sector pen-pushers make daft decisions.

The system is flawed, but it doesn't help that the departments are largely staffed by idiots.

[The People's Hero]

Plus the fact you earn infinitely more by working and enjoy a much more comfortable life?

It's a very silly myth that anyone claiming benefit is better off.

I am better off, of course, not only financially but spiritually and morally, far better off (not to generalise, but I think that work is simply good for the soul)

It's skewed though isn't it. I struggle massively financially to meet my commitments and yes, I do have a mortgage and that was my choice and my house really is too small for my family, so can you see why those on benefits, often contributing zero (and in many cases always having contributed zero) are living in houses largely than they require.

Admittedly there isn't a lot of social housing around where I live and thats partly why I moved here.

[Finnegan]

Surely social housing should never be underoccupied in the first place? Maybe I'm not understanding how this works but wouldn't it have been better to just pay these people housing benefit and required them to rent from private landlords rather than moving them in to houses with multiple bedrooms that they don't need?

In fact I don't see why anyone other than the most vulnerable should get 'social' housing as such and I'm sure the million people mentioned in the OP don't all fall into this category

Family of five gets given a two or three bed house, kids grow up, move out. Or parents divorce and one moves out or maybe somebody dies. That's a common one, especially given we've a lot of very elderly tenants.

We don't give huge houses to solitary individuals but if their circumstances changes there's not really been processes in place to interrogate those situations and force them in to more appropriate housing.

I do believe that's changing currently, however. I think it came up at our last team meeting but I was nodding off to be honest! It's not very relevant to my team.

[Finnegan]

I am better off, of course, not only financially but spiritually and morally, far better off (not to generalise, but I think that work is simply good for the soul)

It's skewed though isn't it. I struggle massively financially to meet my commitments and yes, I do have a mortgage and that was my choice and my house really is too small for my family, so can you see why those on benefits, often contributing zero (and in many cases always having contributed zero) are living in houses largely than they require.

Admittedly there isn't a lot of social housing around where I live and thats partly why I moved here.

As you say, though, it's your decision to live in a reasonably pricey area and live a more comfortable, quality life.

You might have overheads and commitments that a council tenant doesn't have to worry about but I'm willing to bet the satisfaction of your lifestyle is much better than someone wasting their life away on the St Matthews, shopping at Aldi and Primark beneath the breadline.

[The People's Hero]

I cite Kent as a place where this is done appallingly and its a complete lottery as to what you get.

A friend of my wife's is a single mum with 2 boys who like to share a bedroom. She asked for a 2 bedroom flat.

She got a new 4 bedroom house, furnished, with an amount to also spend on additional soft furnishings etc.

She duly spent it all on drugs and pets (she has about 20 pets, not joking)

Choose not to believe that if you don't want to. I didn't believe that at first, but we took round some selections boxes at Christmas so I've seen it myself.

The house is an absolute tip now.

On another subject, i genuinely don't get how people can live like such animals.

[The People's Hero]

As you say, though, it's your decision to live in a reasonably pricey area and live a more comfortable, quality life.

You might have overheads and commitments that a council tenant doesn't have to worry about but I'm willing to bet the satisfaction of your lifestyle is much better than someone wasting their life away on the St Matthews, shopping at Aldi and Primark beneath the breadline.

Definitely. Its a choice I make.

I'm just waiting for the Gov't to find some way to withdraw the only benefit I do receive which is child allowance. Since we live on one income, I obviously have to try to earn as much as possible.

If that threshold comes down much though, I'll have to think about whether that £80 per month is worth more to me than working another job.

[danny.]

Plus the fact you earn infinitely more by working and enjoy a much more comfortable life?

It's a very silly myth that anyone claiming benefit is better off.

Not from what I have personally seen, I know of two families, both in 4-bed houses (even tho' three people live there) who also get a free car (servicing/insurance all paid) plus spending money, much of which goes on beer. None of them work, they have way more disposable 'income' than most of my friends who work full time and have to house share.

Another couple I know who now do work, but used to be on benefits told me they got the equivalent of £24k a year (after tax) on benefits when including free rent etc. so didn't work as only one person could work and they wouldn't be able to earn anywhere near as much, esp after tax. They had an awful lot of disposable 'income' compared to me.

Maybe I have seen some freakish 0.0001% of overall cases (would like to think so) but based on what I have seen personally both with people working and not working, I couldn't agree that working means "you earn infinitely more", I couldn't even agree you earn more at all in many cases.

[The People's Hero]

I don't earn a bad salary, but I'm ok considering my overall package, if you like, which includes some benefits which make a direct comparison difficult, but I have had serious conversations with my wife about how we would be better off (we have kids)

[MooseBreath]

Plus the fact you earn infinitely more by working and enjoy a much more comfortable life?

It's a very silly myth that anyone claiming benefit is better off.

Not really. On benefits you can get a £500p/m flat to yourself for free with no bills which saves you another £150 or so. Then you get JSA which gives you a few hundred pounds spending money. So financially you're getting about £1k per month, about the same as someone on a £14k salary. There are lots and lots of people who work full time for £14k or less. It's not a silly myth to say they would be better off on benefits, it's simple maths.

[Guest BlueBrett]

Family of five gets given a two or three bed house, kids grow up, move out. Or parents divorce and one moves out or maybe somebody dies. That's a common one, especially given we've a lot of very elderly tenants.

We don't give huge houses to solitary individuals but if their circumstances changes there's not really been processes in place to interrogate those situations and force them in to more appropriate housing.

Wouldn't paying them rather than housing them help solve this problem? Especially the divorce part. In the case where kids move out they could be required to report their change in circumstance or else be liable to prosecution for benefit fraud?

Housing policy just feels like such a mess and in so many cases unfair. I don't know much about it and that has been to my detriment. I was renting a place in London but then I lost my job (my own fault). I knew I could get another similar one but that it might take 2/3 months so I decided to claim benefits. I was told I'd been awarded housing benefit but nobody ever actually mentioned the amount I would be paid. I foolishly just assumed it would cover me since I only occupied a room in a shared house, but when the money actually came through it turned out the cap for my area was only around half the amount of my rent. By this point the rent was due so I had to put up the rest but obviously I couldn't keep doing this so had to move out and leave London for a bit. I'm not saying I'm worthy of having all my costs paid but it does make me a bit resentful to think that I was eligible for so little even for a short period of time when some people seem to get quite a lot indefinitely.

[ADK]

Not really. On benefits you can get a £500p/m flat to yourself for free with no bills which saves you another £150 or so. Then you get JSA which gives you a few hundred pounds spending money. So financially you're getting about £1k per month, about the same as someone on a £14k salary. There are lots and lots of people who work full time for £14k or less. It's not a silly myth to say they would be better off on benefits, it's simple maths.

If there's a problem it's because people who work are not getting enough money or the cost of living is too high. Benefits are supposed to provide a subsistance quality of life. Housing and bills + a couple hundred quid is about right imo.

[Finnegan]

Not really. On benefits you can get a £500p/m flat to yourself for free with no bills which saves you another £150 or so. Then you get JSA which gives you a few hundred pounds spending money. So financially you're getting about £1k per month, about the same as someone on a £14k salary. There are lots and lots of people who work full time for £14k or less. It's not a silly myth to say they would be better off on benefits, it's simple maths.

If it's simple maths I think you need a trip back to school. I was on JSA and housing and after everything was paid up (rent at the time was 50% share of 500) I had almost no disposable income. O could feed myself and manage a night out maybe once every six weeks.

I was vastly more comfortable after taking on twenty five hours a week minimum wage and stopped claiming. And that was under a Labour government when claiming was easier.

I'd have had better support if I'd had a kid, definitely, but then you're discussing single people.

[The People's Hero]

If it's simple maths I think you need a trip back to school. I was on JSA and housing and after everything was paid up (rent at the time was 50% share of 500) I had almost no disposable income. O could feed myself and manage a night out maybe once every six weeks.

I was vastly more comfortable after taking on twenty five hours a week minimum wage and stopped claiming. And that was under a Labour government when claiming was easier.

I'd have had better support if I'd had a kid, definitely, but then you're discussing single people.

But I do have children AND if my wife and I needed to be 'separated' in the eyes of the Government then fair enough.

SHOW ME THE MONEY!

[MooseBreath]

If it's simple maths I think you need a trip back to school. I was on JSA and housing and after everything was paid up (rent at the time was 50% share of 500) I had almost no disposable income. O could feed myself and manage a night out maybe once every six weeks.

I was vastly more comfortable after taking on twenty five hours a week minimum wage and stopped claiming. And that was under a Labour government when claiming was easier.

I'd have had better support if I'd had a kid, definitely, but then you're discussing single people.

Clearly you need to up your claiming game, son. There are obviously people who get their whole rent and bills plus spending money which is more than some full time workers

[Guest]

If there's a problem it's because people who work are not getting enough money or the cost of living is too high. Benefits are supposed to provide a subsistance quality of life. Housing and bills + a couple hundred quid is about right imo.

You have a strange definition of "subsistence quality of life". Maybe we are all too greedy and want too many unnecessary things.

If it's simple maths I think you need a trip back to school. I was on JSA and housing and after everything was paid up (rent at the time was 50% share of 500) I had almost no disposable income. O could feed myself and manage a night out maybe once every six weeks.

If you are not contributing to the community welfare yet benefitting from that ciommunity why should you also have a disposable income?

I would have felt ashamed to be taking all that monry without doing anything. I think you make a great argument for community service being a condition of benefit payment after a reasonable period of "job searching and training".

[FoxyPV]

Clearly you need to up your claiming game, son. There are obviously people who get their whole rent and bills plus spending money which is more than some full time workers

That's DLA not JSA.

StepFoxy3's waste of space ex is on DLA due to having acute diabetes but he also hams it up when in the GP's surgery to claim for more. He is down as a drug addict and an alcoholic. He gets a small fortune. Twat.

I know there are many people for whom this benefit is essential, but it is ****heads like him these who ruin it for everyone. The GP should be able tell the difference between those who can't and those who won't.

[The People's Hero]

I don't want to bang on about this particular woman and her lot, but she's constantly at concerts, wear genuine designer gear, smokes like a chimney, does a load on weed, other drugs too, buys a new pet every month (last one a not cheap pair of komodo dragon things), has 4 x boxes in her house (of 3 people), every game going, full sky tv package and still has more disposable income than us. This is a FOUR bedroom house which was new a few years ago when she got it which she keeps damaging and the council keep fixing up for her!!

She is going to Center Parcs in summer (check the prices out) and can't believe that we can't afford to join her. (Thank the lord, I'd rather pull out and eat all of my own teeth, fingernails (without teeth) and nipples)

She has admittedly played the benefits system like a pro - and not everyone does, but lets not pretend there aren't thousands and thousands of cases like this.

[ADK]

Love how every topic descends into tabloidesque ranting at "benefits scroungers"

[Finnegan]

You have a strange definition of "subsistence quality of life". Maybe we are all too greedy and want too many unnecessary things.

If you are not contributing to the community welfare yet benefitting from that ciommunity why should you also have a disposable income?

I would have felt ashamed to be taking all that monry without doing anything. I think you make a great argument for community service being a condition of benefit payment after a reasonable period of "job searching and training".

I at no point said I should have had more disposable income, I had no wish to spend public money on myself.

I fed myself and looked for a job like a lot of other people on JSA. I'm not really sure what your point is. Then again I don't suppose you have a point, I'm guessing you're just looking for someone other than yourself to hate for the fact you've made a weapon of yourself on here lately?

**

And yes, Moose, possibly I'm a rubbish benefit claimant. But having worked with and around them for the last four or five years I'm still pretty adamant that the stereotype is predominantly spurious rubbish perpetuated by right wing media in order to get the working and middle classes blaming those round and beneath them for the financial situation instead of those individuals and companies making obscene, untaxed money.

[indierich06]

I don't want to bang on about this particular woman and her lot, but she's constantly at concerts, wear genuine designer gear, smokes like a chimney, does a load on weed, other drugs too, buys a new pet every month (last one a not cheap pair of komodo dragon things), has 4 x boxes in her house (of 3 people), every game going, full sky tv package and still has more disposable income than us. This is a FOUR bedroom house which was new a few years ago when she got it which she keeps damaging and the council keep fixing up for her!!

She is going to Center Parcs in summer (check the prices out) and can't believe that we can't afford to join her. (Thank the lord, I'd rather pull out and eat all of my own teeth, fingernails (without teeth) and nipples)

She has admittedly played the benefits system like a pro - and not everyone does, but lets not pretend there aren't thousands and thousands of cases like this.

She sounds like a right old ****, you should burn her house down!

[Guest]

I'm guessing you're just looking for someone other than yourself to hate

Why would I hate you?

You are just a poster on a relatively anonymous web site.

Don't make things so personal. I'll have forgotten your username within a few days.

[Finnegan]

Why would I hate you?

You are just a poster on a relatively anonymous web site.

Don't make things so personal. I'll have forgotten your username within a few days.

yeah you never take this place seriously, you and Moose could be besties really.

[The People's Hero]

She sounds like a right old ****, you should burn her house down!

It's not her house though, its the council's ie by extension they taxpayers' ie ours.

She got her boiler fixed for nothing. Mine was about £500 down the toilet.

I wonder if the council wants to buy my house, add a few rooms and give it back to me.