Bedroom Tax - Is This Fair ?????

[Gizmonster]

I'm not on about the bedroom tax per se, I'm on about a part of it that I've only just found out about:

"The changes will only affect council tenants and housing association tenants. If you rent a property from a private landlord you will not be affected."

So, imagine the following scenario:
2 identical families, both claiming housing benefits, living in identical houses, in exactly the same financial situation ..... the only difference between the 2 families is that one of the families rents from a private landlord; whilst the other rents from the council (or a housing association).

What gives ?? Both families are claiming HB from the government, why will one family be penalised and not the other. I can't get my head round this ....... anyone have any ideas ...... am I missing something ????

[factor-fiction]

I see your point if the main objective is to save money but in the case of council housing the stated aim is to encourage council house tenants to find a smaller property and free up the larger properties for families who need them.
But I also think they realised there would be enough hassle just on the issue of social housing

[murraymints]

It is supposed to encourage people in social housing to only occupy the size of property needed and free up accommodation for those who require more bedrooms

[sherrardk]

You only get so much HB based on how many bedrooms you are deemed eligible to need. HA accommodation is generally cheaper than private rentals so the private renters are finding the 'extra' from somewhere somehow.

[Mamyalynne]

If you rent privately, then your HB is governed by how many rooms you are allowed - the local LHA.

[Mamyalynne]

pop your postcode in here to find your local LHA


https://lha-direct.voa.gov.uk/search.aspx

[rockyracoon]

It's because it's not likely to affect private tenants, there's only a certain amount they receive in housing benefit for their circumstances, ie single person will recieve enough for 1 bedroom and the rent on a 2+ bedroom would be way above that.

[Gizmonster]

.... and there you go .... I was missing the point after all.
I thought the main aim of this, was simply to try and reduce their HB liability, as they are paying too much in HB to people in oversized houses, so they are trying to encourage them to downsize to a smaller house, which would require less HB.
To be honest, I still think that the money is their primary issue .....

[DaisyNonna]

Suppose it would be good for removal companies.
Misery for those forcibly removed from their homes.
A spare room is often used for family or friends visiting. Do let the government isolate people further.
Not all people claiming housing benefits are scroungers.

[factor-fiction]

I think the idea has merit but I'd have thought that tenants would need to be given notice of maybe 12 months to give them chance to find a smaller property if they choose to do so. How quickly are the changes going to be put in place?

[sherrardk]

One of the really stupid things that they did for a bit (well, here at least) was that if your actual rent was lower than the HB you were eligible for, they would given you up to £15 a week. We were on benefits after we lost everything (five years ago) and we were four bedroom eligible but rented a three bed (all we could get). The rent was low so we got £60 a month for some bizarre reason.

[sherrardk]

I've said this before, it's social housing for people who need it. If people want an extra bedroom (a luxury for most) they should rent privately and pay the extra.

[Old_Geezer]

If they can get a place to rent from a private landlord at the same price that they can from the council then best of luck to them. The rent should reflect the dwelling being rented not whether the bedrooms are all filled.

[sherrardk]

OG - how would that work? Everyone on HB would be wanting bigger and better houses than they are 'entitled' to. When we were on benefits, I could have said 'oi, give us £1500 a month for this 7 bed house (one for each of the kids, plus a spare for guests)). There has to become sort of formula.

[sherrardk]

Whoops ^ sorry for the typos.

[Old_Geezer]

How wouldn't it work ? You could say. "Oi, give us £1500 a month for this 7 bed house (one for each of the kids, plus a spare for guests)" and the council should then tell you exactly what you can do with that demand. The council should provide the right size house for the family being housed *and then should charge you according to the size of the property then supplied*. If a larger than necessary property is offered because nothing smaller is available then that attracts a larger rent should the family want to take up the offer. As for housing benefit than should be set according need also. You don't go offering a large property and then charge less because you've only put one person in it. Nor charge less than is applicable for the area the property is in. The tax payer ought not be expected to fund a fancy house in a fancy area for someone on welfare when they could not afford such luxury themselves.

[Old_Geezer]

Your problem seems to be centred around the idea that housing benefit should rise according to what the council charges. It ought not. It should be set to what is reasonable for the property needed.

[sherrardk]

Apologies OG, read your response arse about tit. Totally agree with you. When we needed (but didn't get) social housing we offered to take a smaller house than we were 'eligible' for and weren't allowed to .

[Old_Geezer]

I think my point is more along the lines of, if the right rate was already being charged then there is no need to go counting bedrooms and raising charges now. The latest change indicates to me that they weren't getting it right already. I'm not keen on council renters having spare rooms that can be more usefully used by others who need them, but I think there should be a limit on what can be imposed after folk have moved in. If a fair rent is still paid one ought not get too hot under the collar because the kids have grown up and moved out. For the sake of treating folk reasonably a little slack in the system ought to be tolerable.

[sherrardk]

Totally agree ... BUT people in privately rented houses only have about four to six weeks notice if the landlord wants them out. Social housing shouldn't be for life. (But saying that, when we needed it I wouldn't have dreamt of the authorities making someone move out their home so we could have it, even though we were classed as homeless.)

[EDDIE51]

factor fiction this starts from next month , the new tax year.