Stop the bedroom tax - petition

[monkey69 10]

Why should there be massive media coverage ? Id rather the media concentrate on more important issues rather than reporting on people complaining about the Govenrment no longer being prepared to pay for rooms that people dont use ,or need.

 

If someone wishes to rent a home which has extra bedrooms they dont use , then thats their choice as long as they are paying the rent themselves,but the taxpayer should not be picking up the bill for someone to live in a house with spare bedrooms they dont use or need.

 

Jez do you think the queen pays for all those empty rooms herself?

[Anna B 1,414]

Why should there be massive media coverage ? Id rather the media concentrate on more important issues rather than reporting on people complaining about the Govenrment no longer being prepared to pay for rooms that people dont use ,or need.

 

If someone wishes to rent a home which has extra bedrooms they dont use , then thats their choice as long as they are paying the rent themselves,but the taxpayer should not be picking up the bill for someone to live in a house with spare bedrooms they dont use or need.

 

Over 50 demonstrations in many big cities around the country today sounds worth reporting to me...

[go4it 10]

but the taxpayer should not be picking up the bill for someone to live in a house with spare bedrooms they dont use or need.

 

I cannot see how anyone can argue against the above.

[kidley 48]

Such confidence is misplaced in the current climate of cuts.

 

Do you not realise yet that cuts mean that the council doesn't necessarily have the resources available to help people who need it. Which is why people are protesting against the cuts! (Not that you'd know it from media coverage.)

 

With the best will in the world, councils are no longer able to help everybody who needs it anymore.

 

Let's hope that Toeless gets lucky, you are right that he will probably be better off in council accommodation.

 

Are you seriously advocating that a private landlord would be better.

 

The council would be a lot better no matter what cuts are being planned they would put him in a house with facilities conducive to his needs he has all ready said he has spent a lot of money he would not have had to do that if he had gone the council way, as i have said before the council have a duty of care no matter what their budget is. no private landlord can come anyway near this.

 

Plus he has security of tenure with SCC he has not going private

Edited March 30, 2013 by kidley

[Squiggs 11]

I cannot see how anyone can argue against the above.

Because there isn't a realistic CHOICE

 

"Would you like a 1 bedroom or a 2 bedroom property"

- "I only need a one bedroom"

"We don't have any. You can have a 2 bedroom or nothing"

- "Any joint tenancies?"

"No"

- "Can I sub-let. You get the rent paid, no big deal"

"If you do that your accommodation will be 2 to a cell"

- "So if I want a roof over my head I have to take a room that I don't want or need"

"Yes"

[sheff1johnny 10]

Maybe a more sensible idea would have to been to ask everyone in a council home, to pay £5 towards their housing benefit bill. It would have probably bought more money in, and there would be no anomalies. As it stands some people, MPS can have a second house, paid for by the taxpayer.

[ricgem2002 11]

Maybe a more sensible idea would have to been to ask everyone in a council home, to pay £5 towards their housing benefit bill. It would have probably bought more money in, and there would be no anomalies. As it stands some people, MPS can have a second house, paid for by the taxpayer.

why not just stop mps from having a second home paid by the taxpayer?

[stressconsul 10]

From what I can understand this bedroom tax is going to end up costing the tax payer more because there are so few 1 or 2 bedroom properties available in social housing. People who cannot afford this tax then go into private rented 1-2 bedroom properties which are more expensive but free of the tax. This Government, who have never had any experience of running anything other than the odd PR company are working out their policies on the back of a fag packet - causing great human misery, including the disruption of children's education and the break of of supportive communities, at the tax payers expense. As a tax payer I am gob-smacked at the stupidity of these out-of-touch fools.

[kidley 48]

From what I can understand this bedroom tax is going to end up costing the tax payer more because there are so few 1 or 2 bedroom properties available in social housing. People who cannot afford this tax then go into private rented 1-2 bedroom properties which are more expensive but free of the tax. This Government, who have never had any experience of running anything other than the odd PR company are working out their policies on the back of a fag packet - causing great human misery, including the disruption of children's education and the break of of supportive communities, at the tax payers expense. As a tax payer I am gob-smacked at the stupidity of these out-of-touch fools.

 

I think you will find that a couple who rent private housing who are on benefit will only get benefit for a one bedroom dwelling, which social housing is coming into line with. can give link if rqd

 

of the top of my head the max benefit for the above is £250 month

[cgksheff 44]

New Local Housing Allowance rates:

 

http://www.voa.gov.uk/corporate/RentOfficers/lharates/april2013lha.html

[kidley 48]

New Local Housing Allowance rates:

 

http://www.voa.gov.uk/corporate/RentOfficers/lharates/april2013lha.html

 

my memory is not as good as it once was:)

[Plain Talker 11]

Are you seriously advocating that a private landlord would be better.

 

The council would be a lot better no matter what cuts are being planned they would put him in a house with facilities conducive to his needs he has all ready said he has spent a lot of money he would not have had to do that if he had gone the council way, as i have said before the council have a duty of care no matter what their budget is. no private landlord can come anyway near this.

 

Plus he has security of tenure with SCC he has not going private

 

Ten years ago, *I* was put in a property conducive to my needs. It's adapted to the level I need, with the facilities that I need. And a second bedroom so that when I am really ill, I have the facilities for someone to stay over and assist me.

 

It's a 2-bedroomed property, which means that, despite me being placed in this property "as of need", I apparently "don't" need what I have been decided as needing. As such I am going to have to pay nearly £20 a week for the privilege of living in a property which is as-per my needs.

 

I don't see having a second bedroom as being extravagant, In my opinion the legislation should have been written that anything over a spare room should be penalised.

 

Parents having overnight access should be able to have a room for their child. (Surely it goes against anyone's human rights to be denied access to their child? And doesn't it contravene the child's rights to be deprived of its parent?)

 

If the home is adapted for disability needs, and a disabled person is occupying that property, then, again, the occupants should be exempted whilst-ever the disabled person is in residence.

 

If the home is occupied by a couple and they need to sleep in separate rooms because of disability or medical needs, then, again, they should be exempt whilst-ever that situation is current.

 

I have grave concerns that the legislation is totally cockeyed in its thinking.

 

for example,

 

I can't stay, without penalty, in my two-bedroomed property, at the current rent...

 

YET! the government will pay rent of £20 or more ON TOP OF WHAT I CURRENTLY PAY, for me to move into a one-bedroomed property...

 

Where's the logic in that, if the gov't are trying to reduce costs?

 

I cannot stay in my current property without penalty, which is adapted to my needs....

 

YET! the Government will pay thousands and thousands of pounds to adapt a presently-non-adapted one-bedroomed property, when the property I currently occupy is already adapted to my needs, not incurring any extra costs.

 

Isn't that what anyone, with an IQ greater than that of a gnat, would describe as "Throwing good money after bad?"

 

I cannot stay in my current property without penalty, which is adapted to my needs....

 

YET! The government want me to move into a smaller, non-adapted property, and wait for the council to come out and make an assessment of what adaptations are needed... And then, wait for the monies to be found for said-adaptations... And, once the monies are agreed, wait a bit more until the actual adaptations can be put in place.

 

Doesn't the situation of not having adequate washing and hygiene facilities available, go against any dignity I deserve, not to mention the risks to my general health, and the health of tissue put at risk by not being able to cleanse properly?

 

Who will pay for the extra assistance that a disabled person, living in inadequate housing needs? The extra care of having assistance to use a bathtub when they could be in a property with a shower, whereby they could need exponentially less assistance?

 

This is not just the situation I, personally, face. This is being repeated in households up and down the country.

 

The whole shebang of this legislation is nothing more than a direct attack on the neediest people in the community.

 

Isn't it my human right, as a disabled person, to have a property that is suitable for my needs? Look at the horrendous situation that Dame Tanni Grey-Thompson was in, just this last week.

 

The lift in the block of flats in which she lives was broken down.

 

She had to crawl, dragging her wheelchair with her, up twelve flights of stairs.

 

Why should other disabled people face similar scenarios, by being forced into inadequate housing?

 

Why should a wheelchair user be forced to live in a property which cannot accommodate their wheelchair? Why should someone with a mobility issue be forced to live in a property that does not have things like grab-rails to assist them?