Advertisement
Bed tax could hit thousands of Oldham homes
Reporter: Lobby Correspondent
Date online: 01 February 2012
MORE than 3,700 families living in “oversized” social housing across Oldham are set to be hit by Government plans to tackle under-occupancy.
Ministers want to tackle the problem and reduce the housing benefit bill by stopping residents of council or housing association property from having an extra bedroom. Under the current rules, one spare bedroom is allowed.
Under the Welfare Reform Bill, returning to the Commons today, families will be forced to find the extra money to pay their rent if MPs give the plans the go-ahead.
In December, members of the House of Lords opposed the Government, backing a cross-party amendment to exempt families with just one additional bedroom where there are no alternative properties to downsize to.
Nearly 80 housing, family and disability organisations are calling on MPs to ensure the Government listens to the clear message sent by peers by allowing this compromise to stand.
Based on the Government’s figures, 1,884 families in Oldham East and Saddleworth and 1,838 in Oldham West and Royton are expected to be asked for an extra £10.22 a week — about £531 a year. Grandparents who share the care of grandchildren, families with two same-sex teenagers with their own bedrooms and disabled tenants who need an adapted room will see their incomes cut if the bill passes unamended.
The changes would come into force in April 2013.
Comments
While it is reasonable to encourage people under occupying social housing to down size but with inducements rather than threats.This is a measure which regards social housing tenants as livestock in hutches who can be moved around at will rather than people in homes, homes which in many cases can represent years of family building ans memories. If one can't do it to owner occupiers one should not be able to do it to tenants. This is the worst of Victorian values.
@JMTS. Why should housing stock not be allocated on the basis of need & to ensure there is as little waste as possible? How can you draw parallels with privately owned homes & subsidised social housing? If someone pays a mortgage they can have what they want.If they have social housing they get what they need. This not about moving people at will, it's about altering a terribly flawed system to save public money.
Just another way to fleece the public. Who makes the decision as to who has what and who has not? For a demcratic country, this borders on the old feudal system.....
Tax on bedrooms, will tax on windows follow, or number of TV's, bathrooms, dustbins - oops we have all been given four dustbins, yeah that is a strong possibility.
What a farce!
@ProDriver, You lack compassion and you lack respect fr those whose circumstances have not allowed them to become owner occupiers. Downsizing should be encouraged but because we are dealing with people it should not be enforced. Your ruthless Stalinism is not morally acceptable.
Well said, JMTS!
And which sector would actually benefit from this idea? The ones with large families receiving the most benefits by any chance? Another great idea to increase population. The more children you have, the more benefits you may claim and the larger the house you are entitled to courtesy of the tax payer. Can anyone else see a vicious circle here?
@wazzara, There use to be a window tax in the old days. It just goes to show how desperate the government is to squeeze as much as possible from the public in order to clear the national debt. It won't work, there will only be more rioting, thefts etc. More chaos in the UK
I think incentives rather that threats should be used to encorage people to downsize but it is wrong to see able bodied people living alone in rented social 3 bedroom homes when families are desperate for the space. Before attacking the council on this, dont forget its the government who are pushing this.
Getting people to downsize is all well and good, but the stock isn't there for them to downsize to. In addition, many people are in social housing that is to small for their family because there is nothing bigger available. So all that will happen in most cases is some people will move into a smaller home vacated by some people moving into their larger home - it will have zero impact on the large (and getting larger) waiting lists.
This is just another tax! We are all pawns in whatever goverment policies are relevant at the time. Eight years ago when i moved into my two bedroom property as a disabled person who regularly needs someone to use the spare room inorder to care for me there was no problem about under occupation for much of the time.Now it looks like i will have to pay the extra £10.22 a week inorder to enjoy my home which i have made comfortable and to my liking. I would be very upset if forced to move out!!
Have Your Say
my mother and father are 84 and live in a three bed roomed council house they have spent a lot of money over the years and the house is a credit to them. a couple of years ago they asked to swap for a smaller house.you should have seen the houses the council wanted to give them you would not let a dog sleep in them.and they offerd a few hundred quid to decorate them just enough to do a couple of rooms.so they refused to move .
By greenacres boy @ 01/02/2012 16:30:17