Forums Forums Wirral Information Wirral Council will bedroom tax affect you?

well i dont smoke or drink or go out, i live a very modest existence on benefits, ive been ob benefits about 16 months, couldnt make ends meet when i was working either, and was still getting top ups as wage was low.

i was given this 3 bed house 16 months ago, i have 2 kids aged 3 and 5 and a 20 year old at uni in london, and im being told i have a spare room to pay for, so if they wont take my own son into account who comes homes at xmas and summer hols and easter. then ther not evan singing from the same hym sheet, with young adult kids needing to stay at home longer. or isnt that what ther saying.

"From what i've read the feedback from housing associations say around 90% are willing to pay the shortfall to stay in there property"


taylor4898, according to WPH
Nearly half of social tenants who will be affected by the government’s ‘bedroom tax’ are not prepared to move to smaller properties, research has found.
Ongoing work being carried out by Wirral Partnership Homes has found 45% of its tenants who will be affected by the penalty for under-occupation will accept the reduction to benefit payments rather than moving home

http://www.insidehousing.co.uk/tena...cept-bedroom-tax-penalty/6523345.article

you state "i too face cuts due to being long term sick at the moment.and thats another thing..most people on long term sick get more money than say jsa so can still pay the bedroom tax.

This is the attitude that this country needs to change....why should the tax payers of this country pay for everything..too many people just expect a free ride..well no more""

I gather that you are happy to lose your sickness benefit then?

maybe its more the case that they "arnt prepared to move" because they cant afford to move, its very expensive to replace carpets and curtains etc and then theres the added stress of taking yourself away from family/neighbours and as stated some people with this so called spare room actually use this room so its not spare

spot on,
last year i posted a comment on inside housing, stating that this government want's us all under=occupiers to live like battery reared hens squeezed into the smallest space as possible.
I recieved a great response.
""Never mind, you will also be forced to take revenge. You will not be buying furniture as it will not fit in your little room. You will not be buying DIY and decorating material - what's the point, you'll have to move on shortly. You will not be buying electrical goods as most will have nowhere to go, and those you can fit in, you will not be able to afford to run

If no change in direction occurs then before long you will not be able to travel due to affordability, so will not be able to get to work, at which point, why even bother buying food as you will have become one of the undeserving poor - only fit for a State slot at the crematorium.

Then, you will no longer be consuming, no longer producing, no longer paying taxes - perhaps only then you will be missed by the elite (but probably not as there are so many of us cattle for them to get through""

Government 'could change' bedroom tax
25 January 2013
http://www.insidehousing.co.uk/legal/government-could-change-bedroom-tax/6525504.article


After reading the headline, I thought great news, alas after reading article it was not to be.
junior minister has said the controversial bedroom tax could change if there are impacts the government has ‘not thought of’.
Liberal Democrat Steve Webb, pensions minister, speaking in a debate in parliament on Wednesday, said: ‘I fully accept there will be disruption as a result of this measure, which is why we have a two-year programme looking at all this work, evaluating the impact and publishing the research.
‘If we need to make changes to the system as we go because there are perhaps groups or impacts that we have not thought of, we will be in a position to do that..


So basically what he is saying is that we under-occupiers can suffer the consequences of this bill, for 2 years we can starve to death freeze to death or become homeless because of the lack of smaller accommodation, before they will review the impact

I'm not a flag waverand i'm sure i will be shot down in flames, but i think WPH is taking a lot of stick for something not of there doing. It's the government who are bringing in the changes,WPH like other HA's just have to comply with them and are doing there best to see that every one of there tenants is aware of the changes coming in this year. They have been holding awaydays to inform people about the BT and universal tax credits, i know this because i'm a wph tenant and saw it on one of the leaflets and went along to both. They are trying to be responsible landlords and lessen the impact on tenants by making a fund where vunerable wph tenants can have there rent paid direct to the landlord, rather than the bank account, because they know that people will play "either or" and waste the rent on other neccessities which will impact later down the line with them having to evict. They suggest that in the 1st month of direct to tenant rent payment, over a third of their tenants will not pay the rent, this will have an disasterous affect on Wph as a social landlord trying to pay the loans they have taken out to comply with the refurbishments of houses/towerblocks/sheltered housing etc. With this in mind they are in talks to try to provide a buffer of 6 months for non rent payers before they have to consider evictions. I can't speak of other HA's, but i am of the opinion that WPH are trying to play fair with their tenants. They know it will be a total disaster , but like everyone else they have to go along with the changes.

Slightly off topic but would like to ask if people in social housing e.g. sheltered accomodation or tower blocks have to contribute to maintenance payments?

Pensioners in privately owned flats etc. although they have bought their flats, still have to pay approx. an additional £300 per month for maintenance etc. out of their state pension of less than possibly £470 per month (single). Plus bills.

That is how I understand it to be.

Just as a contrast.

I think the housing authority foots the bill. Just by the Holy Doughnut it looks like the houses are being refurbished outside and the blocks of flats near Duke Street and the other tower blocks have been done. I'll have to save some brass before I can do mine.

just been reported on itv news how controversial this is, lets hope the rest of the media wake up now

I was always taught to live within my means. If my wages did not cover a 3-bed house, then I'd rent a 2-bed one. The benefits system was there for people in hardship. As mentioned earlier, there should be something in place for people who need short-term help eg for disability, redundancy. The benefits are available for those who rent accommodation but they are not free handouts. People who buy houses can downsize if they think they are not managing nor can forsee a change detrimental to their lifestyle. I do hope the government reviews their rules and makes it clear about timescales expected of people who need to move as their wages would not cover their rent due to the withdrawls of the extra rooms not covered by benefits.

there are a lot of people who want to down size so they can live within their means but there isnt enough 1 bed properties available to meet demand

My 1st post in this thread I said it was an idea with good intentions but badly planned.

I do see all sides argument, it is not the fault of WPH also.

I want to make this point too, when people who are working and have a mortgage choose to downgrade they can plan it sensibly, decide what area and how many rooms they require etc which is correct as they pay their own way when doing so. When it comes to WPH and housing association tenants paying for a spare room I believe it is possibly breaching the tenancy which was signed.

No WPH or housing association home is let with spare rooms they become spare when children leave home, people die or families split up so people don't choose and can't decide at 1st point to have a home with spare rooms.

Private landlords will be milking it in April as they can let a 3 bed house to a couple claiming Housing Benefit and if they are not working the rent will be paid as this rule does not apply to private lettings.

The problem with moving people who choose to is not straight forward too, there is not enough 1 or 2 bedroom properties for the amount that would require these, also I believe that everyone has a right to stay in the area they are settled, I would say that if there is no property within half a mile from were you live now you should stay put.

I know a couple in Bromborough in the late 40's early 50's who will have 1 spare room. The female suffers with MS and is blind and they were offered a property just over 5 miles away in a 2 bed flat on the 3rd floor. A blind woman living on the 3rd floor please that cant be right in anyone's book.

This is a very short term plan for a long term problem seemingly no plan on building properties needed for the future. The GOVT spend on building 1 and 2 bed properties for councils to let thus creating jobs for local areas which is also planning ahead.

Dizdazdoz - That sounds unfair that private tennants can claim for a spare room but not those renting from a housing association.

It is the truth though, sure someone on here more clued up will explain it better :-)

Taken from here SOURCE

Find out more about the bedroom tax, the part of welfare reform that will cut the amount of benefit that people can get if they are considered to have a spare bedroom.

Welfare reforms will cut the amount of benefit that people can get if they are deemed to have a spare bedroom in their council or housing association home. This measure will apply from April 2013 to tenants of working age.

The power to do this is contained in the Welfare Reform Act 2012 and is commonly referred to as the bedroom tax, size criteria or under-occupation penalty.