Jump to content
We’re excited to announce the forum is under new management! Details to follow.

Bedroom Tax megathread

Recommended Posts

 

I read the article when it was published in the Guardian a few days ago.

 

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2013/nov/19/mps-bedroom-tax-hypocrisy-block-of-flats

 

I've got to say the stories of people killing themselves because of the bedroom tax, and then the MPs who voted for it raking in the housing expenses filled me with rage.

 

Such MPs should hang their heads in shame. But they won't as they don't give a ****

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I read the article when it was published in the Guardian a few days ago.

 

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2013/nov/19/mps-bedroom-tax-hypocrisy-block-of-flats

 

I've got to say the stories of people killing themselves because of the bedroom tax, and then the MPs who voted for it raking in the housing expenses filled me with rage.

 

Such MPs should hang their heads in shame. But they won't as they don't give a ****

 

And it seems there's nothing we can do about it...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I've got to say the stories of people killing themselves because of the bedroom tax, and then the MPs who voted for it raking in the housing expenses filled me with rage.

Except that the stories are probably untrue.

So it's the journalists who should hang their heads in shame. But they won't as they don't give a ****

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Except that the stories are probably untrue.

So it's the journalists who should hang their heads in shame. But they won't as they don't give a ****

 

Which stories do you think are untrue, the ones of people committing suicide or the ones about MP's stuffing their pockets with tax payers money?

 

Just a word to the wise, when I masked a word on another thread the post was removed and I was told it was not allowed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

why is it if your on housing benefit and your rent is 93 per wk (council) for a 3 bed.. and you move to a 2 bed (different landlord) where the rent is 118 per wk.. you get your full rent paid (apart from water rates etc) (because of the tax bracket)

this clearly is costing more for the two bed ...

yet under the new bedroom tax... its cost more to stay in the 3 bed to those who claim the benefit ... and the government more to pay out if the move to the two bed???

this was well thought through wasn't it???

NOT!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
why is it if your on housing benefit and your rent is 93 per wk (council) for a 3 bed.. and you move to a 2 bed (different landlord) where the rent is 118 per wk.. you get your full rent paid (apart from water rates etc) (because of the tax bracket)

this clearly is costing more for the two bed ...

yet under the new bedroom tax... its cost more to stay in the 3 bed to those who claim the benefit ... and the government more to pay out if the move to the two bed???

this was well thought through wasn't it???

NOT!

 

Madders, this is the absolute proof that this is not in any way about distributing social housing more fairly, but about punishing the poor simply for the crime of being poor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
why is it if your on housing benefit and your rent is 93 per wk (council) for a 3 bed.. and you move to a 2 bed (different landlord) where the rent is 118 per wk.. you get your full rent paid (apart from water rates etc) (because of the tax bracket)

this clearly is costing more for the two bed ...

yet under the new bedroom tax... its cost more to stay in the 3 bed to those who claim the benefit ... and the government more to pay out if the move to the two bed???

this was well thought through wasn't it???

NOT!

 

I was under the impression that this legislation (NOT A TAX!) was to help distribute the social housing more fairly, not to save money. The goal in your example would be to free up a 3 bedroom house for someone that needs it, not to save money.

 

Madders, this is the absolute proof that this is not in any way about distributing social housing more fairly, but about punishing the poor simply for the crime of being poor.

 

No it really isn't. How does anything "madders" said prove anything about the fair distribution of social housing. Also, this is not a punishment. All that is happening is that people are getting given less free money. If you would like to punish me by giving me a small amount of free money then please do so.

 

A woman who committed suicide last year because she couldn't afford the bedroom tax would have been exempt and eligible to a housing benefit refund if she was still alive and it seems many more may be exempt.

 

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/jan/10/bedroom-tax-exemptions-stephanie-bottrill

 

 

Whilst it is sad that she killed herself, she should really take some responsibility herself. No love, the only person to blame for you ending your life is yourself and not the government. The woman qualified for a loop hole exemption because she has been claiming housing benefit on the same house since at least 1996. That means she had a free house for 17 years. 17 years! I have never had a free house and if someone offered to pay my rent for 17 weeks I would be grateful. Seems this lady was resentful when her beneficiary decided she could no longer live for free.

 

Like I said it is sad that someone died, but the burden is her rent (for a 3 bedroomed property she lived in alone) she fall in her shoulders or those of the people who loved her. She had a bedroom to person ration of 3:1. Would you people supporting her case support the case of a Muslim family of 5 who wanted the state to pay for a 15 bedroomed house (same 3:1 ratio)? I very much doubt it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I was under the impression that this legislation (NOT A TAX!) was to help distribute the social housing more fairly, not to save money. The goal in your example would be to free up a 3 bedroom house for someone that needs it, not to save money.

 

1) Then why should it matter that someone has to be hounded out of their home of however many years because they are expected to pay this extra?

 

2) There aren't the smaller houses available for the "over-occupiers" to downsize into.

 

No it really isn't. How does anything "madders" said prove anything about the fair distribution of social housing. Also, this is not a punishment. All that is happening is that people are getting given less free money. If you would like to punish me by giving me a small amount of free money then please do so.

 

I'll say it again... you are wrong. People are being forced to pay the extra because there just aren't the smaller properties to downsize into.

 

It's not free money, folk have worked and paid national insurance and taxes to "invest" against a time where they may need to draw upon the state in time of need.

Oh, sorry I forgot, no pensioner or benefit claimant ever paid into the scheme which was meant to keep them financially safe when they had need, did they?

 

Whilst it is sad that she killed herself, she should really take some responsibility herself. No love, the only person to blame for you ending your life is yourself and not the government. The woman qualified for a loop hole exemption because she has been claiming housing benefit on the same house since at least 1996. That means she had a free house for 17 years. 17 years! I have never had a free house and if someone offered to pay my rent for 17 weeks I would be grateful. Seems this lady was resentful when her beneficiary decided she could no longer live for free.

 

Like I said it is sad that someone died, but the burden is her rent (for a 3 bedroomed property she lived in alone) she fall in her shoulders or those of the people who loved her. She had a bedroom to person ration of 3:1. Would you people supporting her case support the case of a Muslim family of 5 who wanted the state to pay for a 15 bedroomed house (same 3:1 ratio)? I very much doubt it.

 

It's nothing to do with resentment.

 

If the legislation had been better thought out, and fairer, MS Bottrell would probably not have been driven to such desperation. even the flaming housing authorities who had to administer this evil and septic tax did not understand the calculations, and this "post 1996" retrospective came to light too late for this desperate woman.

 

It's not just sad, it's beyond tragic, in this day and age, that someone should be in such a desperate state financially as to face losing the roof over their head.

 

Last week, on the choice based lettings site for Sheffield, there were 18 one-bedroomed properties. They were all flats, none were bungalows.

 

Of that 18, all but four were upper floor flats, and therefore not suitable for anyone with mobility difficulties.

 

Three of that four, were stepped, and, again, unsuitable for anyone with more than a mild impairment.

 

The one remaining property did have a ramped entrance, but was in an area where the terrain would be difficult for a wheelchair to negotiate (poor dropped kerbs, very steep etc)

 

How many thousands would be chasing these 18 properties, out of the 20,000 people on the waiting list? And how many would be left paying this unfair and punitive tax as unsuccessful bidders for those 18?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.