Is this fair?

[smart1]

10 yrs ago I was declared statutary homeless - I went to the local housing association, and they offered me a flat. Had I not accepted the first place they offered me, I would have been placed at the bottom of the list. It was a dump. I took it. In the past ten years, I have spent a fortune on making it resident friendly. It's a 2 bed lat, and I live alone. The government now plan to tax people who have an empty bedroom. Because I am on benefits I will have £11 a week deducted. My point is that I took what they offered me, there are no 1 bedroom flats on offer, so I have no redress, The government will take £11 a week from me, eveb though they haven't got a 1 bed place to offer me. Is that fair?

[funnygirl]

Not fair at all and to be honest this is the first I've heard of it.

It is all councils doing this????

[smart1]

I forgot to mention - my son is in the Army, and apart from barracks, this is his home.

[rowanwitch]

Not heard of this either... when i got my flat I was told as it was in an over 50s block the second bedroom didn't count (I was originally only able to apply for one bed properties)

[China Doll]

Sort of I guess... I mean that other room could be used. I can see how it doesn't seem fair on a personal level but I can also see the logic behind it.

[Jonathan-Joe]

It isn't a tax. There is a proposal that people living in properties larger than they need have benefits reduced.
http://www.telegraph....room-tax-reforms.html

[smart1]

Yes, I think so. Anyone in public housing who has an 'empty' bedroom. My neighbours have lived in their house for over 35yrs. They brought their kids up there, and they frequently have their grandkids to stay. But because the government have decided that older people need to 'move out' to make room for young families. their feelings are redundant. It really is not fair. I realise that young people need somewhere to live, but surely not at the expense of older people who may have lived in their home for decades, and have memories regadring that property?

[smart1]

JJ - because I have no redress, because I will not get a chance to state my case, because this will be a 'sweep' action, I feel this is a tax.

[smart1]

I wish I lived in your world CD. I mean that.

[hc4361]

Could you do a swap to a 1 bed flat?

[maggiebee]

This is the first I have heard about this but certainly think it is unfair. I have neighbours who have lived in their council semi for 45 years and have two spare bedrooms now that the children are grown. Why should they be forced to move? Is it something to do with benefits? What do they suggest you do - take in a lodger?

[TWR]

How can they charge you the extra when your son in using it? contact your local council & explain if no joy, your local MP.

[smart1]

hc - I could if the local authority had one to offer me. they don't.

[hc4361]

maggiebee, why should a couple occupy a three bed council house?
Council housing is heavily subsidised for those that actually need the accommodation and one couple does not need three bedrooms.
If they feel they must have 3 beds, let them move in to the private sector and pay proper rent.

[hc4361]

smart1, are you claiming single occupancy for the purpose of your council tax?

[sunny-dave]

It is only a proposal - currently thrown out by the House of Lords.

It looks likely to be re-introduced in the House of Commons, but probably will only apply to people with TWO spare rooms, or people with one spare room who are offerred suitable alternative housing, but choose to refuse it.

It all obviously only applies to people in receipt of housing benefit - if you pay your rent from your own income/pension/savings then you will be completely unaffected.

[rowanwitch]

I can see the logic in getting people to size down as their needs change after all they would expect to size up if it was needed. Maybe all new social tenecy agreements should have a clause where the property/tenants circumstances are reviewed for suitability and need. This would mean folk would go into the system knowing that while they would be offered alternatives and have security in one sense they would not be able to occupy space they didn't really need at the expense of families waiting for a home. Those in properties like that now should be allowed to stay or some other incentive provided to encourage them to downsize

[smart1]

It seems however I explain, the rule is gonna be in place. No negotiation. Honestly, I thought more people were aware of this. It's due to happen next year. Every quarter I get an 'inhouse' magazine from the housing association. They constantly remind me of this new rule. I don't have a link, but if you look on your local housing associations websites....

[Ankou]

Affected claimants will be faced with a choice:

Continue to live in accommodation which is assessed as larger than their household needs, and make up any shortfall from their other income, or from savings; or

Move to accommodation which better reflects the size and composition of their household.