Bedroom tax may hit 14,000 East Lancashire families

First published in News Lancashire Telegraph: Photograph of the Author by , Deputy news editor

UP to 14,000 families across Lancashire could be hit by the Government’s controversial Bedroom Tax to the tune of £7.5million a year, it was revealed today.

Social housing tenants — whose benefits will be cut if they are deemed by Whitehall to have a spare bedroom — are being urged to seek urgent advice from their landlords.

The Government has introduced the Bedroom Tax as part of a raft of controversial changes to the benefits system.

From next April, working-age people will have their housing benefit cut if the Government considers them to have a ‘spare’ bedroom in their housing association or council home.

They’ll lose 14 per cent of the benefit for one ‘spare’ bedroom and 25 per cent for two or more ‘spare’ bedrooms. Nationally, housing association tenants are expected to lose £16 a week on average.

Judith Winterbourne, of Symphony Housing Group, which includes Con-tour Homes, Hyndburn Homes and Ribble Valley Homes, said: “There’s no getting away from the fact that the Bedroom Tax is going to be introduced in just a few months.

“The Government tries to portray those on benefits as people who want something for nothing.

“But there are tenants who have worked all their lives, have been made redundant through no fault of their own, and now have to rely on housing benefit. They will be penalised.

“They have lived in the same house, brought up their children there, paid their rent on time, and some are now going to be forced to move out.”

They are suffering because of something that is not of their making.

“The Bedroom Tax will impact on so many people — those on low incomes, the disabled, and people with severe health problems.

“Some rely on benefit to survive and it’s going to be cut.”

The Government’s criteria allows one bedroom for each person or couple in a household, but children under 16 of the same gender are expected to share, and children under 10 are expected to share, regardless of gender.

Nigel Fenton, general manager at Hyndburn Homes, added: “If you’re a tenant, you need to find out if you’re affected now so you can make the best decision for you and your family.

“There are lots of people waiting to provide you with information and support, but you need to contact your housing association. They might be able to help you increase your income, look for training or employment, or look at alternative options available to you.

“We believe there are still people who are not facing up to this, and it’s likely to be those people who are already struggling with multiple debts.”

Comments (42)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

4:26pm Mon 10 Dec 12

mys says...

This government disgusts me with all the cuts there doing, people have worked bloody hard to get treated like s--t through no fault of there own, he's making sure he's filled his own pockets before he loses at the next election, shame on you David Cameron shame on you!!!
This government disgusts me with all the cuts there doing, people have worked bloody hard to get treated like s--t through no fault of there own, he's making sure he's filled his own pockets before he loses at the next election, shame on you David Cameron shame on you!!! mys
  • Score: 0

4:32pm Mon 10 Dec 12

jimpy0 says...

This government may have brought this in, but many's beloved Liebour party have not categorically stated they will reverse it, add to that changes to community charge and many will be £30+ a week worse off. The bill to many wouldnt be so big if pensioners were NOT exempt or benefits were capped for ALL.
This government may have brought this in, but many's beloved Liebour party have not categorically stated they will reverse it, add to that changes to community charge and many will be £30+ a week worse off. The bill to many wouldnt be so big if pensioners were NOT exempt or benefits were capped for ALL. jimpy0
  • Score: 0

4:36pm Mon 10 Dec 12

frank says...

how about bringing in a bedroom tax for all his tory mates with their mansions?
no thought not.

got to rob the poor to give the money to his rich banker mates of his hasn't he?

1% rise in benefits for those too ill to work, 9% rise in fuel bills.

when are the rich going to pay their share???????
how about bringing in a bedroom tax for all his tory mates with their mansions? no thought not. got to rob the poor to give the money to his rich banker mates of his hasn't he? 1% rise in benefits for those too ill to work, 9% rise in fuel bills. when are the rich going to pay their share??????? frank
  • Score: 0

4:46pm Mon 10 Dec 12

inventorian says...

It's all targeted on making the poor pay for the rich bankers who caused the mess, they were bailed out with taxpayers money and Labour stand by knowing they don't have to do a thing. All the cuts do is help them gain support come the next election but the price is those thrown into poverty or destitution, when you look at the amount paid out in benefits & compare it to the amount lost in tax avoidance by the rich theres a massive difference. Many of those hit are the sick, disabled & terminally ill who have worked and paid National Insurance in the belief they'd get help if they fell on hard times, many of the sick, disabled & terminally ill are being put into WRAG which means they are considerably worse off & won't get the support they need to survive never mind work. There is little help for the sick & disabled to get into work they can cope with & it's one area they will probably cut funding too. The growth we see this year is in poverty, destitution and suicides, it's the same old story from the same old Tories.
It's all targeted on making the poor pay for the rich bankers who caused the mess, they were bailed out with taxpayers money and Labour stand by knowing they don't have to do a thing. All the cuts do is help them gain support come the next election but the price is those thrown into poverty or destitution, when you look at the amount paid out in benefits & compare it to the amount lost in tax avoidance by the rich theres a massive difference. Many of those hit are the sick, disabled & terminally ill who have worked and paid National Insurance in the belief they'd get help if they fell on hard times, many of the sick, disabled & terminally ill are being put into WRAG which means they are considerably worse off & won't get the support they need to survive never mind work. There is little help for the sick & disabled to get into work they can cope with & it's one area they will probably cut funding too. The growth we see this year is in poverty, destitution and suicides, it's the same old story from the same old Tories. inventorian
  • Score: 0

4:56pm Mon 10 Dec 12

Venomp says...

Blame the people who voted for this rubbish party
Blame the people who voted for this rubbish party Venomp
  • Score: 0

5:04pm Mon 10 Dec 12

woolywords says...

Has anyone considered this scenario...

After a break-up, the parent seeks to maintain the parental resposibility by renting an home where the child or children may spend either odd nights or complete weekends with them.

After all, we do want children to have the positive influence of two parents, don't we?

Just a thought..
Has anyone considered this scenario... After a break-up, the parent seeks to maintain the parental resposibility by renting an home where the child or children may spend either odd nights or complete weekends with them. After all, we do want children to have the positive influence of two parents, don't we? Just a thought.. woolywords
  • Score: 0

5:07pm Mon 10 Dec 12

chris283 says...

sounds about right there will be more homeless on the street this xmas bloody disgusting
sounds about right there will be more homeless on the street this xmas bloody disgusting chris283
  • Score: 0

5:10pm Mon 10 Dec 12

pm1960 says...

Venomp wrote:
Blame the people who voted for this rubbish party
Correct ! Many of the folk losing out by these policies didn't bother to vote last time or voted Lie-Dem.
*
The Tories are gambling that these folk won't bother voting again.
*
30% never vote, - a lot of whom are shafted by these changes.
[quote][p][bold]Venomp[/bold] wrote: Blame the people who voted for this rubbish party[/p][/quote]Correct ! Many of the folk losing out by these policies didn't bother to vote last time or voted Lie-Dem. * The Tories are gambling that these folk won't bother voting again. * 30% never vote, - a lot of whom are shafted by these changes. pm1960
  • Score: 0

5:23pm Mon 10 Dec 12

Excluded again says...

woolywords wrote:
Has anyone considered this scenario...

After a break-up, the parent seeks to maintain the parental resposibility by renting an home where the child or children may spend either odd nights or complete weekends with them.

After all, we do want children to have the positive influence of two parents, don't we?

Just a thought..
That scenario has been considered by the government. It was raised during this proposal going through Parliament. The Tory/Liberal government decided that this was a consequence of the bedroom tax that they were quite happy with.
[quote][p][bold]woolywords[/bold] wrote: Has anyone considered this scenario... After a break-up, the parent seeks to maintain the parental resposibility by renting an home where the child or children may spend either odd nights or complete weekends with them. After all, we do want children to have the positive influence of two parents, don't we? Just a thought..[/p][/quote]That scenario has been considered by the government. It was raised during this proposal going through Parliament. The Tory/Liberal government decided that this was a consequence of the bedroom tax that they were quite happy with. Excluded again
  • Score: 0

5:32pm Mon 10 Dec 12

midas says...

frank wrote:
how about bringing in a bedroom tax for all his tory mates with their mansions? no thought not. got to rob the poor to give the money to his rich banker mates of his hasn't he? 1% rise in benefits for those too ill to work, 9% rise in fuel bills. when are the rich going to pay their share???????
The government aren't paying the rent though are they? Its not "robbing the poor" that would mean he is taking something off the poor that is their property. What is being done is that people (whose rent is being paid for them) are no longer going to be paid to live in houses that are bigger than they need.
.
If they want to live in a house with empty rooms then they can, though it may mean getting a job. If they want to live in a house for free then they need to live in a house that is suitable for the size of their family.
[quote][p][bold]frank[/bold] wrote: how about bringing in a bedroom tax for all his tory mates with their mansions? no thought not. got to rob the poor to give the money to his rich banker mates of his hasn't he? 1% rise in benefits for those too ill to work, 9% rise in fuel bills. when are the rich going to pay their share???????[/p][/quote]The government aren't paying the rent though are they? Its not "robbing the poor" that would mean he is taking something off the poor that is their property. What is being done is that people (whose rent is being paid for them) are no longer going to be paid to live in houses that are bigger than they need. . If they want to live in a house with empty rooms then they can, though it may mean getting a job. If they want to live in a house for free then they need to live in a house that is suitable for the size of their family. midas
  • Score: 0

5:56pm Mon 10 Dec 12

Noiticer says...

No Mansion Tax announced by George Osborne last week yet this pernicious charge will hit the less well off in society again. When are the people going to say 'Enough is enough!' ?
No Mansion Tax announced by George Osborne last week yet this pernicious charge will hit the less well off in society again. When are the people going to say 'Enough is enough!' ? Noiticer
  • Score: 0

6:17pm Mon 10 Dec 12

mavrick says...

It would seem attitudes to people on benefits is changing. The cold hard reality of the coalition cuts are biting. It has finally sunk in that not everybody on benefits wants something for nothing. Those who still think the coalition is right should remember they too could lose their job or be struck with illness. This is the true evil of the Tories, I don't see their rich friends suffering much. This coalition has got it's priorities wrong.
It would seem attitudes to people on benefits is changing. The cold hard reality of the coalition cuts are biting. It has finally sunk in that not everybody on benefits wants something for nothing. Those who still think the coalition is right should remember they too could lose their job or be struck with illness. This is the true evil of the Tories, I don't see their rich friends suffering much. This coalition has got it's priorities wrong. mavrick
  • Score: 0

6:31pm Mon 10 Dec 12

LittleMissKc says...

My rent is £425 a month and they only pay me £360, I have to save £65 from my benefits to be able to pay my rent. If I had to find £115 each month, it wouldn't be possible on top of paying off my christmas loans .. No wonder people are topping themselves! It makes me sick. I have a little girl who needs a roof over her head, how will we manage?
My rent is £425 a month and they only pay me £360, I have to save £65 from my benefits to be able to pay my rent. If I had to find £115 each month, it wouldn't be possible on top of paying off my christmas loans .. No wonder people are topping themselves! It makes me sick. I have a little girl who needs a roof over her head, how will we manage? LittleMissKc
  • Score: 0

6:31pm Mon 10 Dec 12

LittleMissKc says...

My rent is £425 a month and they only pay me £360, I have to save £65 from my benefits to be able to pay my rent. If I had to find £115 each month, it wouldn't be possible on top of paying off my christmas loans .. No wonder people are topping themselves! It makes me sick. I have a little girl who needs a roof over her head, how will we manage?
My rent is £425 a month and they only pay me £360, I have to save £65 from my benefits to be able to pay my rent. If I had to find £115 each month, it wouldn't be possible on top of paying off my christmas loans .. No wonder people are topping themselves! It makes me sick. I have a little girl who needs a roof over her head, how will we manage? LittleMissKc
  • Score: 0

6:57pm Mon 10 Dec 12

Good call says...

Taking this and the real terms benefits cut announced in the autumn statement into consideration, don't be surprised if we see rioting returning to our streets next year.
Taking this and the real terms benefits cut announced in the autumn statement into consideration, don't be surprised if we see rioting returning to our streets next year. Good call
  • Score: 0

7:17pm Mon 10 Dec 12

Info-warrior says...

LittleMissKc wrote:
My rent is £425 a month and they only pay me £360, I have to save £65 from my benefits to be able to pay my rent. If I had to find £115 each month, it wouldn't be possible on top of paying off my christmas loans .. No wonder people are topping themselves! It makes me sick. I have a little girl who needs a roof over her head, how will we manage?
Its a mess LittleMissKc and there's lots of people just like you with all the same worries and thoughts of other ways out and this is what they want you thinking like but its NOT THE ANSWER. Creating wealth and poverty also promotes divisions within society just like other tools that are used religion, racism, war. to name but a few are all used to fragment humanity you must see through the lies and deceit that are being told to you on a daily basis.

As for the bedroom tax this is one of many many ways to find out who is playing the system and who is'nt and this is how it works. They squeeze and squeeze the poorest to the point that they're thinking like those LittleMissKc speaks of. Then its just a matter of sitting back and seeing who is managing not to slip behind with their bills and still managing to pay the top up on their rent. Those who aren't are obviously playing the system in some way because the government are no longer paying each individual enough to get by on....therefore eventually if your NOT in debt your wrong.
[quote][p][bold]LittleMissKc[/bold] wrote: My rent is £425 a month and they only pay me £360, I have to save £65 from my benefits to be able to pay my rent. If I had to find £115 each month, it wouldn't be possible on top of paying off my christmas loans .. No wonder people are topping themselves! It makes me sick. I have a little girl who needs a roof over her head, how will we manage?[/p][/quote]Its a mess LittleMissKc and there's lots of people just like you with all the same worries and thoughts of other ways out and this is what they want you thinking like but its NOT THE ANSWER. Creating wealth and poverty also promotes divisions within society just like other tools that are used religion, racism, war. to name but a few are all used to fragment humanity you must see through the lies and deceit that are being told to you on a daily basis. As for the bedroom tax this is one of many many ways to find out who is playing the system and who is'nt and this is how it works. They squeeze and squeeze the poorest to the point that they're thinking like those LittleMissKc speaks of. Then its just a matter of sitting back and seeing who is managing not to slip behind with their bills and still managing to pay the top up on their rent. Those who aren't are obviously playing the system in some way because the government are no longer paying each individual enough to get by on....therefore eventually if your NOT in debt your wrong. Info-warrior
  • Score: 0

7:21pm Mon 10 Dec 12

mys says...

jimpy0 wrote:
This government may have brought this in, but many's beloved Liebour party have not categorically stated they will reverse it, add to that changes to community charge and many will be £30+ a week worse off. The bill to many wouldnt be so big if pensioners were NOT exempt or benefits were capped for ALL.
Why shouldn't pensioners be exempt ? They've paid into the system all there life, if they have more money than allowed then yes maybe pay a little but there struggling as much as anyone else,my mum paid into a private pension so when she retired shed be ok, ha ha not, they deducted of what the government says is enough to live off, so all them yrs she paid into the government funds she gets nowt back only peanuts !!!
[quote][p][bold]jimpy0[/bold] wrote: This government may have brought this in, but many's beloved Liebour party have not categorically stated they will reverse it, add to that changes to community charge and many will be £30+ a week worse off. The bill to many wouldnt be so big if pensioners were NOT exempt or benefits were capped for ALL.[/p][/quote]Why shouldn't pensioners be exempt ? They've paid into the system all there life, if they have more money than allowed then yes maybe pay a little but there struggling as much as anyone else,my mum paid into a private pension so when she retired shed be ok, ha ha not, they deducted of what the government says is enough to live off, so all them yrs she paid into the government funds she gets nowt back only peanuts !!! mys
  • Score: 0

7:32pm Mon 10 Dec 12

Info-warrior says...

Good call wrote:
Taking this and the real terms benefits cut announced in the autumn statement into consideration, don't be surprised if we see rioting returning to our streets next year.
You forgot the pending spike in food prices that will certainly cause riots regardless of the sentences these spivs deal out. This is what becomes of so many being allowed via the Vatican in somes cases to escape Albert Pierrepoint noose in bthe Nuremburg trails..
[quote][p][bold]Good call[/bold] wrote: Taking this and the real terms benefits cut announced in the autumn statement into consideration, don't be surprised if we see rioting returning to our streets next year.[/p][/quote]You forgot the pending spike in food prices that will certainly cause riots regardless of the sentences these spivs deal out. This is what becomes of so many being allowed via the Vatican in somes cases to escape Albert Pierrepoint noose in bthe Nuremburg trails.. Info-warrior
  • Score: 0

7:47pm Mon 10 Dec 12

piece of the wreck says...

LittleMissKc wrote:
My rent is £425 a month and they only pay me £360, I have to save £65 from my benefits to be able to pay my rent. If I had to find £115 each month, it wouldn't be possible on top of paying off my christmas loans .. No wonder people are topping themselves! It makes me sick. I have a little girl who needs a roof over her head, how will we manage?
To be fair if you are paying £425 for a 2 bed place you're paying too much. It is a sad reality that, because certain people have robbed and abused the system, the honest folk also have to lose out when changes are then made to prevent abuse. The other thing is, why should I work my backside off for my 3 bed house (where my 2 youngest share a room) while paying tax which is then used to house a family of 2 in a 3 bedroom house?
[quote][p][bold]LittleMissKc[/bold] wrote: My rent is £425 a month and they only pay me £360, I have to save £65 from my benefits to be able to pay my rent. If I had to find £115 each month, it wouldn't be possible on top of paying off my christmas loans .. No wonder people are topping themselves! It makes me sick. I have a little girl who needs a roof over her head, how will we manage?[/p][/quote]To be fair if you are paying £425 for a 2 bed place you're paying too much. It is a sad reality that, because certain people have robbed and abused the system, the honest folk also have to lose out when changes are then made to prevent abuse. The other thing is, why should I work my backside off for my 3 bed house (where my 2 youngest share a room) while paying tax which is then used to house a family of 2 in a 3 bedroom house? piece of the wreck
  • Score: 0

8:07pm Mon 10 Dec 12

hunter3062 says...

jobs the question is apart from the call centre jobs where are all these jobs the govt tell people to get? more made redundant each week. training where is that found? my son decided to return to college to retrain for 20 hrs a week and has now had his benefit stopped because they consider he is not doing enough to find work..and a word to all you working and berating those claiming benefits your claim is just around the corner..be warned.
jobs the question is apart from the call centre jobs where are all these jobs the govt tell people to get? more made redundant each week. training where is that found? my son decided to return to college to retrain for 20 hrs a week and has now had his benefit stopped because they consider he is not doing enough to find work..and a word to all you working and berating those claiming benefits your claim is just around the corner..be warned. hunter3062
  • Score: 0

8:14pm Mon 10 Dec 12

Mothernature says...

It's hardly fair to pick on the social housing tenants who don't have a job, even worse to pick on those who are working in minimum wage jobs and need their earnings topped up. Worst of all is picking on the disabled, sick, foster carers and parents without care. Wonder how much of an outcry there would be if homeowners who are currently unemployed for what ever reason, had their mortgage interest relief payments reduced because they have spare bedrooms. Pound to a penny there would be uproar. The majority of tenants pay their rent from their hard earned wages but never own their rented home.
It's hardly fair to pick on the social housing tenants who don't have a job, even worse to pick on those who are working in minimum wage jobs and need their earnings topped up. Worst of all is picking on the disabled, sick, foster carers and parents without care. Wonder how much of an outcry there would be if homeowners who are currently unemployed for what ever reason, had their mortgage interest relief payments reduced because they have spare bedrooms. Pound to a penny there would be uproar. The majority of tenants pay their rent from their hard earned wages but never own their rented home. Mothernature
  • Score: 0

8:26pm Mon 10 Dec 12

LittleMissKc says...

It's pathetic, I could lose my home after losing £50 of my benefits, and why? Because of a third bedroom you couldn't fit a cot in?
It's pathetic, I could lose my home after losing £50 of my benefits, and why? Because of a third bedroom you couldn't fit a cot in? LittleMissKc
  • Score: 0

8:35pm Mon 10 Dec 12

Mothernature says...

LittleMissKc wrote:
My rent is £425 a month and they only pay me £360, I have to save £65 from my benefits to be able to pay my rent. If I had to find £115 each month, it wouldn't be possible on top of paying off my christmas loans .. No wonder people are topping themselves! It makes me sick. I have a little girl who needs a roof over her head, how will we manage?
If you are in Social Housing, why isn't your full rent being paid? Sounds like you are in Private Rented housing. For you & your daughter, a 2 bedroomed property is all the Local Housing Allowance would pay for. East Lancs area is £90.00 a week or £390.00 a month.
[quote][p][bold]LittleMissKc[/bold] wrote: My rent is £425 a month and they only pay me £360, I have to save £65 from my benefits to be able to pay my rent. If I had to find £115 each month, it wouldn't be possible on top of paying off my christmas loans .. No wonder people are topping themselves! It makes me sick. I have a little girl who needs a roof over her head, how will we manage?[/p][/quote]If you are in Social Housing, why isn't your full rent being paid? Sounds like you are in Private Rented housing. For you & your daughter, a 2 bedroomed property is all the Local Housing Allowance would pay for. East Lancs area is £90.00 a week or £390.00 a month. Mothernature
  • Score: 0

9:04pm Mon 10 Dec 12

George White Bread says...

chris283 wrote:
sounds about right there will be more homeless on the street this xmas bloody disgusting
I'm sure you can flip them a burger or two.
[quote][p][bold]chris283[/bold] wrote: sounds about right there will be more homeless on the street this xmas bloody disgusting[/p][/quote]I'm sure you can flip them a burger or two. George White Bread
  • Score: 0

9:33pm Mon 10 Dec 12

DEO VOLENTE says...

Yes the times they are a changing! The reality is that people who under occupy will have to pay their way. If they cant they will have to move into a smaller property. Simple really, why should tax payers continue to fund those unwilling to work who want to live in properties that are beyond their means? In addition this is only the beginning. The expansion the European Union with free movement of goods and people will result in high demand for family accomodation. Its sink or swim time and it is suprising how people can react positively when faced with tough choices. As for the argument that there are no jobs, it is not true but some people choose benefits for an easy option and see them as a divine right. As for people who genuinely need benefits they will still get them. I do agree that there is an argument in relation to rich individuals and companies being taxed at a higher rate. Notwithsatnding the latter point we simply cannot support the idle poor and the idle rich any longer. Fasten your seatbelts this is going to be a bumpy ride.

Deus Vobiscum
Yes the times they are a changing! The reality is that people who under occupy will have to pay their way. If they cant they will have to move into a smaller property. Simple really, why should tax payers continue to fund those unwilling to work who want to live in properties that are beyond their means? In addition this is only the beginning. The expansion the European Union with free movement of goods and people will result in high demand for family accomodation. Its sink or swim time and it is suprising how people can react positively when faced with tough choices. As for the argument that there are no jobs, it is not true but some people choose benefits for an easy option and see them as a divine right. As for people who genuinely need benefits they will still get them. I do agree that there is an argument in relation to rich individuals and companies being taxed at a higher rate. Notwithsatnding the latter point we simply cannot support the idle poor and the idle rich any longer. Fasten your seatbelts this is going to be a bumpy ride. Deus Vobiscum DEO VOLENTE
  • Score: 0

9:46pm Mon 10 Dec 12

Mothernature says...

DEO VOLENTE wrote:
Yes the times they are a changing! The reality is that people who under occupy will have to pay their way. If they cant they will have to move into a smaller property. Simple really, why should tax payers continue to fund those unwilling to work who want to live in properties that are beyond their means? In addition this is only the beginning. The expansion the European Union with free movement of goods and people will result in high demand for family accomodation. Its sink or swim time and it is suprising how people can react positively when faced with tough choices. As for the argument that there are no jobs, it is not true but some people choose benefits for an easy option and see them as a divine right. As for people who genuinely need benefits they will still get them. I do agree that there is an argument in relation to rich individuals and companies being taxed at a higher rate. Notwithsatnding the latter point we simply cannot support the idle poor and the idle rich any longer. Fasten your seatbelts this is going to be a bumpy ride. Deus Vobiscum
Pray tell, where are the 1 bedroomed social housing properties to downsize to? There are very few in this area and the majority of those are for people 55 and over. My rent for a 2 bedroomed terraced house is cheaper (by 25p) than a privately rented 1 bedroomed property.
[quote][p][bold]DEO VOLENTE[/bold] wrote: Yes the times they are a changing! The reality is that people who under occupy will have to pay their way. If they cant they will have to move into a smaller property. Simple really, why should tax payers continue to fund those unwilling to work who want to live in properties that are beyond their means? In addition this is only the beginning. The expansion the European Union with free movement of goods and people will result in high demand for family accomodation. Its sink or swim time and it is suprising how people can react positively when faced with tough choices. As for the argument that there are no jobs, it is not true but some people choose benefits for an easy option and see them as a divine right. As for people who genuinely need benefits they will still get them. I do agree that there is an argument in relation to rich individuals and companies being taxed at a higher rate. Notwithsatnding the latter point we simply cannot support the idle poor and the idle rich any longer. Fasten your seatbelts this is going to be a bumpy ride. Deus Vobiscum[/p][/quote]Pray tell, where are the 1 bedroomed social housing properties to downsize to? There are very few in this area and the majority of those are for people 55 and over. My rent for a 2 bedroomed terraced house is cheaper (by 25p) than a privately rented 1 bedroomed property. Mothernature
  • Score: 0

11:15pm Mon 10 Dec 12

Newmummy123 says...

Whats wrong with the way they have it now? It's all right government saying "oh well we've gave u fair warning now move" .....there's very few decent smaller houses around AND eg my 3 bed is £20 pcm less than my old 2bed....y would any1 want to pay MORE for LESS!!!
Whats wrong with the way they have it now? It's all right government saying "oh well we've gave u fair warning now move" .....there's very few decent smaller houses around AND eg my 3 bed is £20 pcm less than my old 2bed....y would any1 want to pay MORE for LESS!!! Newmummy123
  • Score: 0

6:01am Tue 11 Dec 12

piece of the wreck says...

Isn't the point of this that it's all about social housing? That's different from someone renting from a private landlord. The issue is the availability and cost of social housing, not whether or not a family of two chooses to pay an additional £60 a month on top of their housing allowance for a 3 bedroom privately rented flat.

Let's say a family of 2 are being provided with a 3 bedroom house (social housing), and another family of 6 (parents, 2 boys and 2 girls all under 16) are currently being provided with a 5 bedroom house at a cost of £1500pm from a private registered landlord because there are no 5 bedroom houses in the area (social housing). Said family of 2 moves into a 2 bedroom house (social housing) thus freeing up the 3 bedroom house for aforementioned family of 6, which will no longer have the right to a 5 bedroom house under the new legislation. Social housing is already state subsidised, getting the family of 6 out of private accommodation back in to social housing is the real issue, and those who choose not to move will have their benefits reduced as an 'incentive'.
Isn't the point of this that it's all about social housing? That's different from someone renting from a private landlord. The issue is the availability and cost of social housing, not whether or not a family of two chooses to pay an additional £60 a month on top of their housing allowance for a 3 bedroom privately rented flat. Let's say a family of 2 are being provided with a 3 bedroom house (social housing), and another family of 6 (parents, 2 boys and 2 girls all under 16) are currently being provided with a 5 bedroom house at a cost of £1500pm from a private registered landlord because there are no 5 bedroom houses in the area (social housing). Said family of 2 moves into a 2 bedroom house (social housing) thus freeing up the 3 bedroom house for aforementioned family of 6, which will no longer have the right to a 5 bedroom house under the new legislation. Social housing is already state subsidised, getting the family of 6 out of private accommodation back in to social housing is the real issue, and those who choose not to move will have their benefits reduced as an 'incentive'. piece of the wreck
  • Score: 0

6:24am Tue 11 Dec 12

Excluded again says...

DEO VOLENTE wrote:
Yes the times they are a changing! The reality is that people who under occupy will have to pay their way. If they cant they will have to move into a smaller property. Simple really, why should tax payers continue to fund those unwilling to work who want to live in properties that are beyond their means? In addition this is only the beginning. The expansion the European Union with free movement of goods and people will result in high demand for family accomodation. Its sink or swim time and it is suprising how people can react positively when faced with tough choices. As for the argument that there are no jobs, it is not true but some people choose benefits for an easy option and see them as a divine right. As for people who genuinely need benefits they will still get them. I do agree that there is an argument in relation to rich individuals and companies being taxed at a higher rate. Notwithsatnding the latter point we simply cannot support the idle poor and the idle rich any longer. Fasten your seatbelts this is going to be a bumpy ride.

Deus Vobiscum
The majority of people who claim housing benefit are working but in low paid jobs.

Are people in low paid jobs 'unwilling to work'? Are they the 'idle poor' as Deo Volente says?
[quote][p][bold]DEO VOLENTE[/bold] wrote: Yes the times they are a changing! The reality is that people who under occupy will have to pay their way. If they cant they will have to move into a smaller property. Simple really, why should tax payers continue to fund those unwilling to work who want to live in properties that are beyond their means? In addition this is only the beginning. The expansion the European Union with free movement of goods and people will result in high demand for family accomodation. Its sink or swim time and it is suprising how people can react positively when faced with tough choices. As for the argument that there are no jobs, it is not true but some people choose benefits for an easy option and see them as a divine right. As for people who genuinely need benefits they will still get them. I do agree that there is an argument in relation to rich individuals and companies being taxed at a higher rate. Notwithsatnding the latter point we simply cannot support the idle poor and the idle rich any longer. Fasten your seatbelts this is going to be a bumpy ride. Deus Vobiscum[/p][/quote]The majority of people who claim housing benefit are working but in low paid jobs. Are people in low paid jobs 'unwilling to work'? Are they the 'idle poor' as Deo Volente says? Excluded again
  • Score: 0

10:05am Tue 11 Dec 12

Real Lancs Assembly says...

Maybe if this country started making things again people could find themselves work, also what about over regulation, ie many jobs today require a license for this and a ticket for that, theres jobs ive done in the past i cant do today because i dont have the relevant qualifications, it wasnt long back i saw a job on the bins but only if you had a man-handling certificate, ive used a bobcat skid-loader in the past, i cant today because i need a cpcs license which would mean a 300 pound a day course for 3 days, and wasnt it Thatcher who encouraged the benefits system as she destroyed British Industry, i left school in the early 80s and Lancashire as never seen any boom, the only place that as ever prospered is the South East. So the way i see it, yeah there are people who play the system but the system as been in place for so long thats all they know, now they are targeting the same people they have left to rot for generations and expect everything to be hunky dory, and if there are any so-called jobs about to be created they will not last long, i expect a lot of Romanians and Bulgarians will be coming over in a couple of years and thats if all the Greeks and Spanish havnt got here first to take any jobs that become available. So give the poor of England a break. Why not target greedy landlords, why not regenerate all the boarded up lines of terraces, we are heading to a suituation where we are going to have thousands of people homeless with thousands of empty houses, its unbelievable.
Maybe if this country started making things again people could find themselves work, also what about over regulation, ie many jobs today require a license for this and a ticket for that, theres jobs ive done in the past i cant do today because i dont have the relevant qualifications, it wasnt long back i saw a job on the bins but only if you had a man-handling certificate, ive used a bobcat skid-loader in the past, i cant today because i need a cpcs license which would mean a 300 pound a day course for 3 days, and wasnt it Thatcher who encouraged the benefits system as she destroyed British Industry, i left school in the early 80s and Lancashire as never seen any boom, the only place that as ever prospered is the South East. So the way i see it, yeah there are people who play the system but the system as been in place for so long thats all they know, now they are targeting the same people they have left to rot for generations and expect everything to be hunky dory, and if there are any so-called jobs about to be created they will not last long, i expect a lot of Romanians and Bulgarians will be coming over in a couple of years and thats if all the Greeks and Spanish havnt got here first to take any jobs that become available. So give the poor of England a break. Why not target greedy landlords, why not regenerate all the boarded up lines of terraces, we are heading to a suituation where we are going to have thousands of people homeless with thousands of empty houses, its unbelievable. Real Lancs Assembly
  • Score: 0

11:45am Tue 11 Dec 12

AndyW says...

This will unfortunately affect many genuine families, however I'm hoping that it will also give a kick up the backside to the lazy and workshy.

Far too many people in this country can't be bothered to go out and get a job (and there are plenty everywhere, if you're willing to work), they would rather sit on their backsides and claim their free money every week.

If this spurs those people on to go out, get a job and pay their way in life like the majority of us have to, then that would be a plus.
This will unfortunately affect many genuine families, however I'm hoping that it will also give a kick up the backside to the lazy and workshy. Far too many people in this country can't be bothered to go out and get a job (and there are plenty everywhere, if you're willing to work), they would rather sit on their backsides and claim their free money every week. If this spurs those people on to go out, get a job and pay their way in life like the majority of us have to, then that would be a plus. AndyW
  • Score: 0

12:59pm Tue 11 Dec 12

cookyy2k says...

You lefties are hilerious. I work hard and struggle to pay £750 a month rent and everyone is complaining about £16 a week for a spare bedroom.

If people can't afford to live somewhere they can go live somewhere they can afford, This isn't an "I'm entitled to this extra bedroom" this is a "your extra bedroom is a luxury you have to pay for".

I am fed up of paying almost the same as my rent in income tax, national insurance and council tax just so people can live off me in their houses bigger than I can afford and bigger than they need.
You lefties are hilerious. I work hard and struggle to pay £750 a month rent and everyone is complaining about £16 a week for a spare bedroom. If people can't afford to live somewhere they can go live somewhere they can afford, This isn't an "I'm entitled to this extra bedroom" this is a "your extra bedroom is a luxury you have to pay for". I am fed up of paying almost the same as my rent in income tax, national insurance and council tax just so people can live off me in their houses bigger than I can afford and bigger than they need. cookyy2k
  • Score: 0

3:04pm Tue 11 Dec 12

Whats the Matta says...

This will be a trial on the backs of the poor. If there's no reaction it will grow into an all round spare room tax for anybody renting a property too large for their needs.

They have to make more room for the influx of all non-UK origin migrants based in the EU and those about to join.

As a result they will keep many charities, undertakers, coroners, and all other related profiteers of this scheme in business.

They're coming for anybody who doesn't fit in, including those who pay their full whack.

I predict riots on a scale not seen before in post-war Britain. The government will then sit back and wait for the reactionary screams of the squeaks who will be calling for the troops on our streets. They will be begging for a new law, a new order, a new level of 'security enslavement system' never ever seen in any lifetime.
This will be a trial on the backs of the poor. If there's no reaction it will grow into an all round spare room tax for anybody renting a property too large for their needs. They have to make more room for the influx of all non-UK origin migrants based in the EU and those about to join. As a result they will keep many charities, undertakers, coroners, and all other related profiteers of this scheme in business. They're coming for anybody who doesn't fit in, including those who pay their full whack. I predict riots on a scale not seen before in post-war Britain. The government will then sit back and wait for the reactionary screams of the squeaks who will be calling for the troops on our streets. They will be begging for a new law, a new order, a new level of 'security enslavement system' never ever seen in any lifetime. Whats the Matta
  • Score: 0

6:29pm Tue 11 Dec 12

lmhjones says...

DEO VOLENTE wrote:
Yes the times they are a changing! The reality is that people who under occupy will have to pay their way. If they cant they will have to move into a smaller property. Simple really, why should tax payers continue to fund those unwilling to work who want to live in properties that are beyond their means? In addition this is only the beginning. The expansion the European Union with free movement of goods and people will result in high demand for family accomodation. Its sink or swim time and it is suprising how people can react positively when faced with tough choices. As for the argument that there are no jobs, it is not true but some people choose benefits for an easy option and see them as a divine right. As for people who genuinely need benefits they will still get them. I do agree that there is an argument in relation to rich individuals and companies being taxed at a higher rate. Notwithsatnding the latter point we simply cannot support the idle poor and the idle rich any longer. Fasten your seatbelts this is going to be a bumpy ride.

Deus Vobiscum
good oh deo volente please could you tell me as a full time carer of a disabled adult where i could find a smaller property which could be refurbished for the needs of the disabled person i care for. many thanks in anticipation. oh by the way if you could possibly see your way to suggesting a way for disabled people to have the care they need 24/7 to enable carers to return to salaried work instead of being paid the glorious sum of £58 a week for caring for at least 35 hours i would be terribly grateful. facta non verba?
[quote][p][bold]DEO VOLENTE[/bold] wrote: Yes the times they are a changing! The reality is that people who under occupy will have to pay their way. If they cant they will have to move into a smaller property. Simple really, why should tax payers continue to fund those unwilling to work who want to live in properties that are beyond their means? In addition this is only the beginning. The expansion the European Union with free movement of goods and people will result in high demand for family accomodation. Its sink or swim time and it is suprising how people can react positively when faced with tough choices. As for the argument that there are no jobs, it is not true but some people choose benefits for an easy option and see them as a divine right. As for people who genuinely need benefits they will still get them. I do agree that there is an argument in relation to rich individuals and companies being taxed at a higher rate. Notwithsatnding the latter point we simply cannot support the idle poor and the idle rich any longer. Fasten your seatbelts this is going to be a bumpy ride. Deus Vobiscum[/p][/quote]good oh deo volente please could you tell me as a full time carer of a disabled adult where i could find a smaller property which could be refurbished for the needs of the disabled person i care for. many thanks in anticipation. oh by the way if you could possibly see your way to suggesting a way for disabled people to have the care they need 24/7 to enable carers to return to salaried work instead of being paid the glorious sum of £58 a week for caring for at least 35 hours i would be terribly grateful. facta non verba? lmhjones
  • Score: 0

8:04pm Tue 11 Dec 12

Good call says...

cookyy2k wrote:
You lefties are hilerious. I work hard and struggle to pay £750 a month rent and everyone is complaining about £16 a week for a spare bedroom.

If people can't afford to live somewhere they can go live somewhere they can afford, This isn't an "I'm entitled to this extra bedroom" this is a "your extra bedroom is a luxury you have to pay for".

I am fed up of paying almost the same as my rent in income tax, national insurance and council tax just so people can live off me in their houses bigger than I can afford and bigger than they need.
1.How the hell are we "lefties" for opposing the bedroom tax.
2. Housing benefit goes to many different groups, including low income workers.
3.The left-right wing political paradigm is there to shut down debate and distract people from real issues
.
[quote][p][bold]cookyy2k[/bold] wrote: You lefties are hilerious. I work hard and struggle to pay £750 a month rent and everyone is complaining about £16 a week for a spare bedroom. If people can't afford to live somewhere they can go live somewhere they can afford, This isn't an "I'm entitled to this extra bedroom" this is a "your extra bedroom is a luxury you have to pay for". I am fed up of paying almost the same as my rent in income tax, national insurance and council tax just so people can live off me in their houses bigger than I can afford and bigger than they need.[/p][/quote]1.How the hell are we "lefties" for opposing the bedroom tax. 2. Housing benefit goes to many different groups, including low income workers. 3.The left-right wing political paradigm is there to shut down debate and distract people from real issues . Good call
  • Score: 0

9:18pm Tue 11 Dec 12

Notts rover says...

Cookyy2k I couldn't agree more with you. Although I do find it worrying how much of a minority we are in.

The country is broke and too many of the electoral roll feel that it is okay to maintain the status quo in terms of the welfare state and that the money fairies will pay for an unaffordable benefit system.

I've worked hard for the last 15 years and haven't even been able to think of raising a family or renting/buying a place I can call my own. I find it very frustrating to see people who don't work provided with housing and a wide range of benefits and enjoy a lifestyle superior to my own.

As for blaming the rich and the bankers for this mess I feel it is as much to do with the unsustainable benefits and welfare system as anything. Asking the rich to pay more whilst they already pay half their income to the state I feel what is truely unfair. It should be noted that the top 10% of earners contribute over 55% of the total government income from tax; can we really afford to bite the hand that feeds us.
Cookyy2k I couldn't agree more with you. Although I do find it worrying how much of a minority we are in. The country is broke and too many of the electoral roll feel that it is okay to maintain the status quo in terms of the welfare state and that the money fairies will pay for an unaffordable benefit system. I've worked hard for the last 15 years and haven't even been able to think of raising a family or renting/buying a place I can call my own. I find it very frustrating to see people who don't work provided with housing and a wide range of benefits and enjoy a lifestyle superior to my own. As for blaming the rich and the bankers for this mess I feel it is as much to do with the unsustainable benefits and welfare system as anything. Asking the rich to pay more whilst they already pay half their income to the state I feel what is truely unfair. It should be noted that the top 10% of earners contribute over 55% of the total government income from tax; can we really afford to bite the hand that feeds us. Notts rover
  • Score: 0

11:29pm Tue 11 Dec 12

Good call says...

Notts rover wrote:
Cookyy2k I couldn't agree more with you. Although I do find it worrying how much of a minority we are in.

The country is broke and too many of the electoral roll feel that it is okay to maintain the status quo in terms of the welfare state and that the money fairies will pay for an unaffordable benefit system.

I've worked hard for the last 15 years and haven't even been able to think of raising a family or renting/buying a place I can call my own. I find it very frustrating to see people who don't work provided with housing and a wide range of benefits and enjoy a lifestyle superior to my own.

As for blaming the rich and the bankers for this mess I feel it is as much to do with the unsustainable benefits and welfare system as anything. Asking the rich to pay more whilst they already pay half their income to the state I feel what is truely unfair. It should be noted that the top 10% of earners contribute over 55% of the total government income from tax; can we really afford to bite the hand that feeds us.
Err, no people on benefits have not caused the economic mess,the SCUMBAG GLOBALIST BANKSTERS HAVE.Here are two questions
1.What is "money" backed up by
2.Who is the world in "debt" to
If you want to know about the fraud in the banking system and the collapsing global economy, start watching Max Keiser on Russia Today and on youtube.Also,watchso
me of Gerald Celente's interviews on Youtube.
[quote][p][bold]Notts rover[/bold] wrote: Cookyy2k I couldn't agree more with you. Although I do find it worrying how much of a minority we are in. The country is broke and too many of the electoral roll feel that it is okay to maintain the status quo in terms of the welfare state and that the money fairies will pay for an unaffordable benefit system. I've worked hard for the last 15 years and haven't even been able to think of raising a family or renting/buying a place I can call my own. I find it very frustrating to see people who don't work provided with housing and a wide range of benefits and enjoy a lifestyle superior to my own. As for blaming the rich and the bankers for this mess I feel it is as much to do with the unsustainable benefits and welfare system as anything. Asking the rich to pay more whilst they already pay half their income to the state I feel what is truely unfair. It should be noted that the top 10% of earners contribute over 55% of the total government income from tax; can we really afford to bite the hand that feeds us.[/p][/quote]Err, no people on benefits have not caused the economic mess,the SCUMBAG GLOBALIST BANKSTERS HAVE.Here are two questions 1.What is "money" backed up by 2.Who is the world in "debt" to If you want to know about the fraud in the banking system and the collapsing global economy, start watching Max Keiser on Russia Today and on youtube.Also,watchso me of Gerald Celente's interviews on Youtube. Good call
  • Score: 0

9:27am Wed 12 Dec 12

Notts rover says...

So the army of people taking significantly more out of the system than they contribute has nothing to do with the government deficit?????

I knew the coalition was doomed when they failed to vote in the benefits cap of £35k per year gross. Although they should be applauded for increasing the income tax threshold in attempt to make it pay to work.
So the army of people taking significantly more out of the system than they contribute has nothing to do with the government deficit????? I knew the coalition was doomed when they failed to vote in the benefits cap of £35k per year gross. Although they should be applauded for increasing the income tax threshold in attempt to make it pay to work. Notts rover
  • Score: 0

12:43pm Wed 12 Dec 12

hoppyhol says...

LittleMissKc wrote:
My rent is £425 a month and they only pay me £360, I have to save £65 from my benefits to be able to pay my rent. If I had to find £115 each month, it wouldn't be possible on top of paying off my christmas loans .. No wonder people are topping themselves! It makes me sick. I have a little girl who needs a roof over her head, how will we manage?
Your being conned by your landlord then as you will receive £360 housing benefit every 4 weeks which equates to £390 pcm which means you should be paying £35 pcm towards your rent not £65 pcm.
[quote][p][bold]LittleMissKc[/bold] wrote: My rent is £425 a month and they only pay me £360, I have to save £65 from my benefits to be able to pay my rent. If I had to find £115 each month, it wouldn't be possible on top of paying off my christmas loans .. No wonder people are topping themselves! It makes me sick. I have a little girl who needs a roof over her head, how will we manage?[/p][/quote]Your being conned by your landlord then as you will receive £360 housing benefit every 4 weeks which equates to £390 pcm which means you should be paying £35 pcm towards your rent not £65 pcm. hoppyhol
  • Score: 0

3:34pm Wed 12 Dec 12

Mothernature says...

hoppyhol wrote:
LittleMissKc wrote: My rent is £425 a month and they only pay me £360, I have to save £65 from my benefits to be able to pay my rent. If I had to find £115 each month, it wouldn't be possible on top of paying off my christmas loans .. No wonder people are topping themselves! It makes me sick. I have a little girl who needs a roof over her head, how will we manage?
Your being conned by your landlord then as you will receive £360 housing benefit every 4 weeks which equates to £390 pcm which means you should be paying £35 pcm towards your rent not £65 pcm.
You're right about the figures hoppyhol but, if she is having to pay £65 per month it may not be the landlord conning her. It's possible she is paying back an overpayment of HB due to a change of circumstances. If this is the case, the overpayment is deducted from her HB and she would then have to make up the shortfall. The HB department at BwDC are renowned for not dealing quickly enough with claims. Either way she should have her entitlements to benefit checked. Also, if she is in private rented, the bedroom tax will not affect her. The tax is aimed at those in social/council housing.
[quote][p][bold]hoppyhol[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]LittleMissKc[/bold] wrote: My rent is £425 a month and they only pay me £360, I have to save £65 from my benefits to be able to pay my rent. If I had to find £115 each month, it wouldn't be possible on top of paying off my christmas loans .. No wonder people are topping themselves! It makes me sick. I have a little girl who needs a roof over her head, how will we manage?[/p][/quote]Your being conned by your landlord then as you will receive £360 housing benefit every 4 weeks which equates to £390 pcm which means you should be paying £35 pcm towards your rent not £65 pcm.[/p][/quote]You're right about the figures hoppyhol but, if she is having to pay £65 per month it may not be the landlord conning her. It's possible she is paying back an overpayment of HB due to a change of circumstances. If this is the case, the overpayment is deducted from her HB and she would then have to make up the shortfall. The HB department at BwDC are renowned for not dealing quickly enough with claims. Either way she should have her entitlements to benefit checked. Also, if she is in private rented, the bedroom tax will not affect her. The tax is aimed at those in social/council housing. Mothernature
  • Score: 0

1:12pm Thu 13 Dec 12

UKIP-Ron says...

Well for all those who object about this rich mans policy. Then vote UKIP next time the only party in the UK with sensible policies for the working families.
Have you heard of the rich using that island in the carrabian who pays zero taxes on their meg million savings.
True the Uk goverment know all about the 25000 who use that tax avoidance banking because they actualy pay the islanders who live there millions of pounds in aid A TV documentry was shown about it all last year. still going on at this date still no action from this rich mans govermeant. sod the poor up the rich.
Well for all those who object about this rich mans policy. Then vote UKIP next time the only party in the UK with sensible policies for the working families. Have you heard of the rich using that island in the carrabian who pays zero taxes on their meg million savings. True the Uk goverment know all about the 25000 who use that tax avoidance banking because they actualy pay the islanders who live there millions of pounds in aid A TV documentry was shown about it all last year. still going on at this date still no action from this rich mans govermeant. sod the poor up the rich. UKIP-Ron
  • Score: 0

3:19pm Thu 13 Dec 12

Notts rover says...

UKIP-Ron wrote:
Well for all those who object about this rich mans policy. Then vote UKIP next time the only party in the UK with sensible policies for the working families.
Have you heard of the rich using that island in the carrabian who pays zero taxes on their meg million savings.
True the Uk goverment know all about the 25000 who use that tax avoidance banking because they actualy pay the islanders who live there millions of pounds in aid A TV documentry was shown about it all last year. still going on at this date still no action from this rich mans govermeant. sod the poor up the rich.
UKIP Ron I think you are going off at a tangent from the discussion.

I think the title of the article of bedroom tax is inaccurate also. I am no expert on the policy but isn't it more of a benefit cut than taxation.
[quote][p][bold]UKIP-Ron[/bold] wrote: Well for all those who object about this rich mans policy. Then vote UKIP next time the only party in the UK with sensible policies for the working families. Have you heard of the rich using that island in the carrabian who pays zero taxes on their meg million savings. True the Uk goverment know all about the 25000 who use that tax avoidance banking because they actualy pay the islanders who live there millions of pounds in aid A TV documentry was shown about it all last year. still going on at this date still no action from this rich mans govermeant. sod the poor up the rich.[/p][/quote]UKIP Ron I think you are going off at a tangent from the discussion. I think the title of the article of bedroom tax is inaccurate also. I am no expert on the policy but isn't it more of a benefit cut than taxation. Notts rover
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree