Bedrooom tax hits Sheffield

[Dardandec]

Not always, work doesn't suit everyone

 

What through illness or disability? I've got every sympathy for those people, unfortunately there are abusers who "work" the benefit system and spoil it for genuine claimants. That's life I'm afraid, I have to pay about £30 a year extra on my car insurance to make up for the fraud that occurs in that sector, but crap happens.

[holymoses]

Not always, work doesn't suit everyone

Your quite right

It certainly doesnt suit me. Id love to stay in bed instead of getting up at 6:30am

And Id rather have lots of spare time instead of having a job to do.

And Id rather be given a handout than earn a wage from working 50-60 hours a week.

But then again having a house that is mine and paid for, with a couple of spare bedrooms and no hassel of my wages being cut because of the rooms. I think the working might just beat the benefit system.

[Ms Macbeth]

I've just had a look at the properties advertised at the moment, out of a total of 50 three bedroomed properties across the city, 28 are maisonettes in Gleadless Valley. Most area advertised as First Come First Served, that means as long as a family of the right size have their name on the register, in most circumstances they could have one pretty much straight away.

 

I hope the working families who are paying over the odds to rent privately know there are three bedroomed properties renting for under £80 a week. Details are here: https://www.sheffieldpropertyshop.org.uk/Data/ASPPages/1/43.aspx?LastSearch=1&CurrentPage=1

 

Unfortunately, they aren't nearly as attractive as a house under the Right to Buy so perhaps thats why there isn't much interest. Or is that me just being cynical.

[GLASGOWOODS]

Not always, work doesn't suit everyone

 

Hahaha!

 

I guess so.

 

No worries though. I shall keep on grafting my nads off, so those who aint suited to work can do nowt all day.

[Ms Macbeth]

Can you let me know where these properties in S14 are please?

 

Gleadless Valley, have a look at the link in my previous post.

[charmer]

It's a pity they can't do a Maria Miller and borrow £90,000 from the taxpayer to buy their gaff.

 

She should be prosecuted in the same way that someone who took £90,000 extra in benefits would be.

 

Nobody has stopped to think about the impact that benefit cuts has on peoples lives.

 

I have, it funds things like the increase in tax threshold that goes directly into my pocket.

 

Do you know what, regardless of title or weather this is a tax or a reduction that sort of post was done to death last year and was a completely different thread, i am unemployed and have been paying it for must be a year now just been another hurdle to get over such is life,

 

but if this is right what basset one is stating then surely councils are becoming worse off to something that wasn't thought out properly i could bleat on but what the point if this is just going to be bash benefit claimants version 2 !!!

 

I am not bashing any benefit claimants, my dear departed mother was one. However, there is no debate, this is not a tax in any shape or form. No legislation is ever going to be perfectly implemented as they are implemented by humans. The problem with using humans is that they make mistakes. I think that the legislation has been largely successful, though could do with some tweaking, such as allowing people who need (not want) an extra bedroom should be exempt. One of the few examples of this I can thing of is specially adapted housing for disabled people.

[Leadhammer]

She should be prosecuted in the same way that someone who took £90,000 extra in benefits would be.

 

 

 

I have, it funds things like the increase in tax threshold that goes directly into my pocket.

 

 

 

I am not bashing any benefit claimants, my dear departed mother was one. However, there is no debate, this is not a tax in any shape or form. No legislation is ever going to be perfectly implemented as they are implemented by humans. The problem with using humans is that they make mistakes. I think that the legislation has been largely successful, though could do with some tweaking, such as allowing people who need (not want) an extra bedroom should be exempt. One of the few examples of this I can thing of is specially adapted housing for disabled people.

 

Ok well that's fair to hear that you are not bashing benefit claimants but to be fair there are many that would on this forum and i am always defensive to that and be the first to fight back, as i do try to look for work despite the growing applications per job advertised,

 

as regard to you stating your legislation claims and the fact that it isnt a tax are founded, its actually under occupancy rule/act to the best of my knowledge, but when this act was introduced it was probably the media that gave it the name bedroom tax and that sticks in people minds and often is stuck by when people see rulings for the first time either it be the daily tabloid or the news,

 

therefore i don't think this so called heated discussion that some hold on here will never be any different some will always say its a tax while others wont it all depends on where they heard it first and im sure it will always be that way until either the torys are voted out or back in next year (which i doubt) and labour to rename it if they get back in to something more pleasing to the masses, where again the media will rename it something else.

 

But thats why i say regardless of name tax or reduction of benefit people will always have a name for it based on when and where they heard if first weather it be media or tv .

Edited April 8, 2014 by Leadhammer

[TomA]

This is a deserved tax that should have been implemented in the first place. People are only complaining because someone realised loads of people have council property that is too large for their needs. If you want a choice in where to live then privately rent or buy somewhere!

 

Obviously there are exceptions such as a death in the household or a genuine disability that requires a larger property but largely people just seem to be complaining because they now have to pay a fair amount for the size of their property!

[Leadhammer]

This is a deserved tax that should have been implemented in the first place. People are only complaining because someone realised loads of people have council property that is too large for their needs. If you want a choice in where to live then privately rent or buy somewhere!

 

Obviously there are exceptions such as a death in the household or a genuine disability that requires a larger property but largely people just seem to be complaining because they now have to pay a fair amount for the size of their property!

 

well it is and it isnt who is to dictate when it should have happened,

 

you say,

 

(This is a deserved tax that should have been implemented in the first place)

 

just when was it right to implement it at the beginning of time ?

 

The point is that pre 2013 councils were quite happy to give you a property for one person either a bedsit, 1 bed flat, or even a 2 bed flat, then now 2013/2014 thats all wrong and its our fault for moving into a property beyond our needs, the council didn't care pre 2013 just so long as you could afford the rent.

 

so again, just when was it right to implement it

Edited April 9, 2014 by Leadhammer

[rollwithit]

What a lot of people don't realise that if they want something, sometimes they have to pay a little extra for it.