if a couple or single person gave up their 3 bed house, a family with 3 children could be moved out of their one ore two bedroom flat, thus creating an empty smaller flat. whats so difficult about that for anyone to understand?
Not many couples or single people are in 3 bedroomed houses to begin with, besides pensioners whos kids have grown up and flown the nest.
Whats so difficult about that for you to understand?
I highly doubt there are families with 3 children living in one bedroomed social housing to begin with too. Maybe 2 bedroomed. Not one.
Do you understand how allocation of social housing works? People dont just go to the council and ask for a large property and be given it you know. It is based on their needs. Which why older people are more likely than any other group to be underoccupying.
if a couple or single person gave up their 3 bed house, a family with 3 children could be moved out of their one ore two bedroom flat, thus creating an empty smaller flat. whats so difficult about that for anyone to understand?
If its that simple then why charge people before giving them the choice ?
Besides, the ammount that the cut is meant to save is based on people paying for their extra rooms. If their were the right ammount of smaller places and everyone was organised into the right size accommodation then their would be no money saved and they'd have to cut something else.
up to now, people near me have refused to move. ive been accused of lying on here , or inventive, but the people i mention are real.
mrs A. she has a grown up family. she has a 4 bedroomed council house which she shares with her husband and one unemployed son. local council offers of a two bedroom flat have been declined.
across the road from me is a retired couple in a three bed semi. councils have offered them a smaller place. they can have smaller house with a garden or a flat. this couple has declined the offers because they want their spare rooms for their son when he visits. these two examples are both retired people so are exempt from HB reductions. so, my point is, that there are places to move to. and if a young overcrowded family moves into a 3 bed house , their small flat will be available for others who have moved out of their 3 bed house. easy eh?
By retired do you mean pensioners because if you do then you have this Government to blame as the rules do not apply to pensioners living in social housing. Although IMO it should especially if they have more than one spare room.
You also have to remember that a lot of pensioners now living in 3 bedroom houses were given 3 bedroom houses when they were younger they didn't ask for them. We were given a 3 bedroom house in 1970 although at the time we only had an 11 month old baby.
If its that simple then why charge people before giving them the choice ?
Besides, the ammount that the cut is meant to save is based on people paying for their extra rooms. If their were the right ammount of smaller places and everyone was organised into the right size accommodation then their would be no money saved and they'd have to cut something else.
Yes I really think that people who can't move because there are no available places should take the Government to court as it is not their fault they are in accommodation that has more rooms than their benefit pays for.
I'm in the 'rental trap'. About 42% of my gross income goes on rent (a more comfortable percentage is 30%). Very hard to try and save up for a deposit for a small house. Furthermore I am a very low priority on the council housing register (single, no children).
Here's a thought. If my local council succeed in moving many of their over-occupying tenants from their 2+ bedroomed homes to smaller ones, there will be fewer 1 bedroomed flats for me and others to bid on.
By retired do you mean pensioners because if you do then you have this Government to blame as the rules do not apply to pensioners living in social housing. Although IMO it should especially if they have more than one spare room.
You also have to remember that a lot of pensioners now living in 3 bedroom houses were given 3 bedroom houses when they were younger they didn't ask for them. We were given a 3 bedroom house in 1970 although at the time we only had an 11 month old baby.
yes. they are pensioners. they have been asked to move and refused. just because they have lived in their house since the birth of their first child shouldnt mean they can stay there. the rules should apply to them.
yes. they are pensioners. they have been asked to move and refused. just because they have lived in their house since the birth of their first child shouldnt mean they can stay there. the rules should apply to them.
Its there home, its not just a house, because they dont own it, it would be worse if they had brought it because that would mean no other person waiting for a council house would ever get it to it in the future
Yes I really think that people who can't move because there are no available places should take the Government to court as it is not their fault they are in accommodation that has more rooms than their benefit pays for.
I'd rather the rules were changed so that, what is basically a sanction, was only applied if they if they had done something wrong which, in this case, would be being offerered siutable within a reasonable distance and turning it down. In the case of other benefits, sactions are applied for breaking rules, such as turning down work(which alledgedly some do ), the same should apply with all benefits.
I'd rather the rules were changed so that, what is basically a sanction, was only applied if they if they had done something wrong which, in this case, would be being offerered siutable within a reasonable distance and turning it down. In the case of other benefits, sactions are applied for breaking rules, such as turning down work(which alledgedly some do ), the same should apply with all benefits.
yes. they are pensioners. they have been asked to move and refused. just because they have lived in their house since the birth of their first child shouldnt mean they can stay there. the rules should apply to them.
No they haven't. It doesn't apply to pensioners because they are more likely to vote Tory than younger poor people.
I'd rather the rules were changed so that, what is basically a sanction, was only applied if they if they had done something wrong which, in this case, would be being offerered siutable within a reasonable distance and turning it down. In the case of other benefits, sactions are applied for breaking rules, such as turning down work(which alledgedly some do ), the same should apply with all benefits.
yes. they are pensioners. they have been asked to move and refused. just because they have lived in their house since the birth of their first child shouldnt mean they can stay there. the rules should apply to them.
So you would evict old people throw them onto the streets?
,
oh and ALL pensioners are NOT exempt from the bedroom fine, its just another one of Cameron's lies, a lie deliberately told in order to fool those who either don't know or care about the truth,
SOME pensioners are indeed exempt, but in cases where "mixed age" couples under occupy then once the universal credit kicks in this October, they will not be exempt until both of them are of pension age,
In the case of myself and my partner (I will be 60 in June she is 51) WE wont be exempt until SHE turns 67... I will be 76 years old, and will have been a pensioner for for eleven years,
but don't worry, I am certain the Tories will do all in their power to make certain I don't live that long,
I'd rather the rules were changed so that, what is basically a sanction, was only applied if they if they had done something wrong which, in this case, would be being offerered siutable within a reasonable distance and turning it down. In the case of other benefits, sactions are applied for breaking rules, such as turning down work(which alledgedly some do ), the same should apply with all benefits.
But sometime you got to turn down jobs. I done it once as it would have cost my to much in bus fairs as it,would took two bues then another,time,as,no buses on sundays,and then it was shifted work 6-2
& 2-10 and no buses to 8 last one 18 so no good , qm
No they haven't. It doesn't apply to pensioners because they are more likely to vote Tory than younger poor people.
I will be a pensioner in 5 years time and I can assure you I would sooner tear my own eyeballs out with my fingernails than EVER vote Tory, I am 100% with Nye Bevan when he said of them, that in his opinion "they are lower than vermin"
As i said before though, their deficit aims are based on savings such as the money they believe this will save from that and, if it doesn't save what they expect, which it can't, they'll have to add it to the cuts in their next budget, which i think already has another £10 billion in cuts from welfair in it.
I will be a pensioner in 5 years time and I can assure you I would sooner tear my own eyeballs out with my fingernails than EVER vote Tory, I am 100% with Nye Bevan when he said of them, that in his opinion "they are lower than vermin"
I'm not saying all pensioners do, my grandparents were Labour voters when they were alive, but statistically a larger percentage of pensioners vote Tory than the other age groups.
how are out of touch are the p.m s did anyone see the press preview on sky news. in the daily telegraph .P m s want ro clam lunch expense WTF, how out of touch of these people
how are out of touch are the p.m s did anyone see the press preview on sky news. in the daily telegraph .P m s want ro clam lunch expense WTF, how out of touch of these people
If it was down to me they'd get a Newspaper a chocolate bar and a drink and that would be their only daily expenses.
yes. they are pensioners. they have been asked to move and refused. just because they have lived in their house since the birth of their first child shouldnt mean they can stay there. the rules should apply to them.
Who has asked them to move ?
I thought pensioners were excluded from this. If it was me I would gladly move out even if we have lived here for 40+ years but we don't have any spare rooms as my 2 youngest are both still living at home plus we pay full rent and council tax.
If it was down to me they'd get a Newspaper a chocolate bar and a drink and that would be their only daily expenses.
Why should they even get that though?
I dont get an expense account for when I am at work. I cant just go out and buy a new laptop, say its for business and charge it to my employer. I doubt many other people can either. What makes MPs so special?
I have never understood why they get an expense account. I can understand the taxpayer coughing up for second homes (though I dont see why they have to be as nice as they are...anywhere with a roof that is near work would do) but expenses...I dont get it.
how are out of touch are the p.m s did anyone see the press preview on sky news. in the daily telegraph .P m s want ro clam lunch expense WTF, how out of touch of these people
I've just read that story - they want the 'dinner expense' to be used at lunchtimes so MP's can have a choice of whether their main meal of the day is taken at lunchtime or at night if working late. They aren't asking for an increase to the £15 dinner allowance just that the £15 can be used at lunchtime.
I've just read that story - they want the 'dinner expense' to be used at lunchtimes so MP's can have a choice of whether their main meal of the day is taken at lunchtime or at night if working late. They aren't asking for an increase to the £15 dinner allowance just that the £15 can be used at lunchtime.
I dont get an expense account for when I am at work. I cant just go out and buy a new laptop, say its for business and charge it to my employer. I doubt many other people can either. What makes MPs so special?
I have never understood why they get an expense account. I can understand the taxpayer coughing up for second homes (though I dont see why they have to be as nice as they are...anywhere with a roof that is near work would do) but expenses...I dont get it.
Self employed people get some expenses. I'm not entirely sure what the limits are but a friend of mine who's a widow cleaner was able to claim back the cost of the van he needed for work and another friend of mine, a builder, was able to claim back a van and an Ipad.
Self employed people get some expenses. I'm not entirely sure what the limits are but a friend of mine who's a widow cleaner was able to claim back the cost of the van he needed for work and another friend of mine, a builder, was able to claim back a van and an Ipad.
Well I must be doing something wrong then, because since going self employed in 2009 I have spend something in the region of 7,000 pounds of my OWN money to buy the equipment and the materials I need, I even sold my beloved motorbike when I first started out, and I have not had ONE PENNY, from the government, other than claiming housing benefit, and working tax credits,
(things I would be claiming if I wasn't self employed as I would most certainly only be on the national minimum wage IF I could find a job,... at 60, in the north east)
and the HB has only been claimed for the last 2 years after my partner had to give up her full time job due to her illness, (and that was 2 years AFTER her GP insisted that she should stop working)
Comments
Not many couples or single people are in 3 bedroomed houses to begin with, besides pensioners whos kids have grown up and flown the nest.
Whats so difficult about that for you to understand?
I highly doubt there are families with 3 children living in one bedroomed social housing to begin with too. Maybe 2 bedroomed. Not one.
Do you understand how allocation of social housing works? People dont just go to the council and ask for a large property and be given it you know. It is based on their needs. Which why older people are more likely than any other group to be underoccupying.
If its that simple then why charge people before giving them the choice ?
Besides, the ammount that the cut is meant to save is based on people paying for their extra rooms. If their were the right ammount of smaller places and everyone was organised into the right size accommodation then their would be no money saved and they'd have to cut something else.
By retired do you mean pensioners because if you do then you have this Government to blame as the rules do not apply to pensioners living in social housing. Although IMO it should especially if they have more than one spare room.
You also have to remember that a lot of pensioners now living in 3 bedroom houses were given 3 bedroom houses when they were younger they didn't ask for them. We were given a 3 bedroom house in 1970 although at the time we only had an 11 month old baby.
Yes I really think that people who can't move because there are no available places should take the Government to court as it is not their fault they are in accommodation that has more rooms than their benefit pays for.
I'm in the 'rental trap'. About 42% of my gross income goes on rent (a more comfortable percentage is 30%). Very hard to try and save up for a deposit for a small house. Furthermore I am a very low priority on the council housing register (single, no children).
Here's a thought. If my local council succeed in moving many of their over-occupying tenants from their 2+ bedroomed homes to smaller ones, there will be fewer 1 bedroomed flats for me and others to bid on.
yes. they are pensioners. they have been asked to move and refused. just because they have lived in their house since the birth of their first child shouldnt mean they can stay there. the rules should apply to them.
Its there home, its not just a house, because they dont own it, it would be worse if they had brought it because that would mean no other person waiting for a council house would ever get it to it in the future
I'd rather the rules were changed so that, what is basically a sanction, was only applied if they if they had done something wrong which, in this case, would be being offerered siutable within a reasonable distance and turning it down. In the case of other benefits, sactions are applied for breaking rules, such as turning down work(which alledgedly some do
Agreed.
No they haven't. It doesn't apply to pensioners because they are more likely to vote Tory than younger poor people.
Yes off course that would be a better way.
So you would evict old people throw them onto the streets?
,
oh and ALL pensioners are NOT exempt from the bedroom fine, its just another one of Cameron's lies, a lie deliberately told in order to fool those who either don't know or care about the truth,
SOME pensioners are indeed exempt, but in cases where "mixed age" couples under occupy then once the universal credit kicks in this October, they will not be exempt until both of them are of pension age,
In the case of myself and my partner (I will be 60 in June she is 51) WE wont be exempt until SHE turns 67... I will be 76 years old, and will have been a pensioner for for eleven years,
but don't worry, I am certain the Tories will do all in their power to make certain I don't live that long,
& 2-10 and no buses to 8 last one 18 so no good , qm
I will be a pensioner in 5 years time and I can assure you I would sooner tear my own eyeballs out with my fingernails than EVER vote Tory, I am 100% with Nye Bevan when he said of them, that in his opinion "they are lower than vermin"
As i said before though, their deficit aims are based on savings such as the money they believe this will save from that and, if it doesn't save what they expect, which it can't, they'll have to add it to the cuts in their next budget, which i think already has another £10 billion in cuts from welfair in it.
I'm not saying all pensioners do, my grandparents were Labour voters when they were alive, but statistically a larger percentage of pensioners vote Tory than the other age groups.
If it was down to me they'd get a Newspaper a chocolate bar and a drink and that would be their only daily expenses.
Who has asked them to move ?
I thought pensioners were excluded from this. If it was me I would gladly move out even if we have lived here for 40+ years but we don't have any spare rooms as my 2 youngest are both still living at home plus we pay full rent and council tax.
Why should they even get that though?
I dont get an expense account for when I am at work. I cant just go out and buy a new laptop, say its for business and charge it to my employer. I doubt many other people can either. What makes MPs so special?
I have never understood why they get an expense account. I can understand the taxpayer coughing up for second homes (though I dont see why they have to be as nice as they are...anywhere with a roof that is near work would do) but expenses...I dont get it.
I've just read that story - they want the 'dinner expense' to be used at lunchtimes so MP's can have a choice of whether their main meal of the day is taken at lunchtime or at night if working late. They aren't asking for an increase to the £15 dinner allowance just that the £15 can be used at lunchtime.
Its wrong they get expenses for lunch or dinner.
Self employed people get some expenses. I'm not entirely sure what the limits are but a friend of mine who's a widow cleaner was able to claim back the cost of the van he needed for work and another friend of mine, a builder, was able to claim back a van and an Ipad.
Well I must be doing something wrong then, because since going self employed in 2009 I have spend something in the region of 7,000 pounds of my OWN money to buy the equipment and the materials I need, I even sold my beloved motorbike when I first started out, and I have not had ONE PENNY, from the government, other than claiming housing benefit, and working tax credits,
(things I would be claiming if I wasn't self employed as I would most certainly only be on the national minimum wage IF I could find a job,... at 60, in the north east)
and the HB has only been claimed for the last 2 years after my partner had to give up her full time job due to her illness, (and that was 2 years AFTER her GP insisted that she should stop working)