New tax forced Chippenham couple to downsize home

The Wiltshire Gazette and Herald: Alan and Samantha Jones say they have been forced to move out of their home Alan and Samantha Jones say they have been forced to move out of their home

Chippenham couple Alan and Samantha Jones have been forced to move out of the area because of the new bedroom tax.

Because of the new underoccupancy charge, introduced on April 1, if a tenant has a spare bedroom their housing benefit will be cut by 14 per cent every week and they will have to pay the extra money to cover the rent themselves.

It means Mr and Mrs Jackson, who are entitled to housing benefit from Wiltshire Council, would have to pay an extra £30 a week to stay in their two-bedroom home in Charter Road.

Instead the couple, who are technically under- occupying, have decided to exchange houses and move to Melksham.

Mr Jackson, 51, worked for 32 years, most recently at Tesco. Now he is a full-time carer for his wife, 34, who suffers from depression, anxiety and is deaf in one ear.

Mrs Jackson receives £270 disability living allowance a month, but the couple’s bills are paid through £257 of income support a fortnight and Mr Jackson’s allowance as a carer, which is £53 a week.

At the moment, due to the cold weather, Mr Jackson is paying £60 a fortnight for heating and he said this cost, along with the bedroom tax, had been the final straw.

He said: “When it’s really cold, it’s just too much to cope with. “That and losing benefits because we aren’t using one bedroom under these new rules, means we can’t afford to live here.

“It’s not been easy to find a one-bed home. We would have been on a waiting list for ages if we hadn’t found a lady to exchange with on HomeSwapper. “It’s been quite stressful because we knew we would be hit hard in April, so felt under pressure.

“We’ve been lucky. At the end of the day if you want to save the money you have to move areas because there isn’t enough housing. Friends who have kids in school need to be near and can’t move like we have. I feel sorry for them.”

Mr and Mrs Jackson plan to move to Melksham on April 6. They hope that by renting a smaller one-bedroom property they will save themselves the cost of bedroom tax and their heating bill will be cheaper.

Mr Jackson said: “I’m just glad we’ve managed to find somewhere, but I’m worried about having to start again and how it might affect Samantha’s health.

“It annoys me when you hear things like ‘scrounger’ and generalisations about people on benefits. I worked hard for 32 years of my life.”

Comments (24)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

7:31am Fri 29 Mar 13

glm737 says...

'worked hard for 32 years'. Although now you are milking the system and using the age old scam of 'carer' to get money. My heart bleeds.

Ever likely your missus suffers 'anxiety & depression' if you are worried about which benefit you can claim next.

When was the last time she worked?

Scroungers the pair of you and makes me ashamed to be British.
'worked hard for 32 years'. Although now you are milking the system and using the age old scam of 'carer' to get money. My heart bleeds. Ever likely your missus suffers 'anxiety & depression' if you are worried about which benefit you can claim next. When was the last time she worked? Scroungers the pair of you and makes me ashamed to be British. glm737
  • Score: 0

8:51am Fri 29 Mar 13

notscot says...

So - just where ARE the thousands of smaller properties that low-income families are going to need because they can't afford the new taxes?
Oh - of course - in the PRIVATE sector.
Where they will NEVER have security of tenure and will be at risk of rent hikes regularly. But of course - if it costs THAT much, they'll be able to apply for housing benefit. And it's likely to cost the Govt. more than the cost of the new bedroom tax. But that's the maths we put up with for "good ideas", yes?
So - just where ARE the thousands of smaller properties that low-income families are going to need because they can't afford the new taxes? Oh - of course - in the PRIVATE sector. Where they will NEVER have security of tenure and will be at risk of rent hikes regularly. But of course - if it costs THAT much, they'll be able to apply for housing benefit. And it's likely to cost the Govt. more than the cost of the new bedroom tax. But that's the maths we put up with for "good ideas", yes? notscot
  • Score: 0

12:12pm Sat 30 Mar 13

tllytill says...

My own opinion is this........how come people, such as my daughter, who is a hard working girl, can only afford to buy a one bedroomed property. This is fine BUT why should she pay also from her tax to support people who dont work to have the luxery of an un needed second bedroom? Totally unfair. Also, as for the 'carer'.........dont we all at some time suffer from depression and anxiety? To overcome this, i suggest ....go to work!!! I received carers allowance for 4 months whilst i had to cut my hours at work to care for my dying father. Thats what it should be used for, not to sit at home and rake all benefits. I think benifits should only be claimed if that person is doing so many hours community work. I hope you enjoy your new one bedroomed home. Maybe there will be some jobs going nearer to you...........
My own opinion is this........how come people, such as my daughter, who is a hard working girl, can only afford to buy a one bedroomed property. This is fine BUT why should she pay also from her tax to support people who dont work to have the luxery of an un needed second bedroom? Totally unfair. Also, as for the 'carer'.........dont we all at some time suffer from depression and anxiety? To overcome this, i suggest ....go to work!!! I received carers allowance for 4 months whilst i had to cut my hours at work to care for my dying father. Thats what it should be used for, not to sit at home and rake all benefits. I think benifits should only be claimed if that person is doing so many hours community work. I hope you enjoy your new one bedroomed home. Maybe there will be some jobs going nearer to you........... tllytill
  • Score: 0

2:41pm Sat 30 Mar 13

Fed up of Calne says...

So where is the story here? This surely highlights why this ruling came in? The couple have a 2 bed property when only needing 1 bedroom, so are now moving to one they (really we!) can more ably afford. Spending £30 a week on heating is ridiculous. They must have it on all of the time! Perhaps go out to work during the day like the rest of us and you won't feel you have to have the heating on all day. Being deaf in one ear does not require a full time carer. System being milked again.
So where is the story here? This surely highlights why this ruling came in? The couple have a 2 bed property when only needing 1 bedroom, so are now moving to one they (really we!) can more ably afford. Spending £30 a week on heating is ridiculous. They must have it on all of the time! Perhaps go out to work during the day like the rest of us and you won't feel you have to have the heating on all day. Being deaf in one ear does not require a full time carer. System being milked again. Fed up of Calne
  • Score: 0

3:34pm Sat 30 Mar 13

freddie_W says...

The welfare state has got out of control seems to me that you don't have to be that disabled to live on benefits the couple in the article are a good example. Mass immigration is the primary cause of the housing shortage immigrant parasites and their large families will benefit at the expense of small British families. Another construct from the cultural Marxists who hide behind the banner of fairness equality and diversity.
The welfare state has got out of control seems to me that you don't have to be that disabled to live on benefits the couple in the article are a good example. Mass immigration is the primary cause of the housing shortage immigrant parasites and their large families will benefit at the expense of small British families. Another construct from the cultural Marxists who hide behind the banner of fairness equality and diversity. freddie_W
  • Score: 0

5:32pm Sat 30 Mar 13

fedup of chipp says...

after the council have paid housing/council tax benefit this this couple are still left with approx. £900 per month to pay there bills, lucky them, I work on average 55hrs per week if at the end of the month I am left with £300to pay my bills I have had a good month, and by the way they have forgotten to mention as they are on benefit they will also get the cold weather payment, scroungers the pair of them. both of you get a job work hard and that will keep you nice and warm.
after the council have paid housing/council tax benefit this this couple are still left with approx. £900 per month to pay there bills, lucky them, I work on average 55hrs per week if at the end of the month I am left with £300to pay my bills I have had a good month, and by the way they have forgotten to mention as they are on benefit they will also get the cold weather payment, scroungers the pair of them. both of you get a job work hard and that will keep you nice and warm. fedup of chipp
  • Score: 0

6:40pm Sat 30 Mar 13

Spectator67 says...

The majority of smaller homes are currently occupied by families living in overcrowded conditions. A huge majority of three bedroom social housing are occupied by older couples or single people who needed them at some point but no longer have children living at home. I think it is fair that people living in social housing should downsize when they no longer need extra rooms or pay for the luxury.
Simple really, downsize or pay your own rent.
The majority of smaller homes are currently occupied by families living in overcrowded conditions. A huge majority of three bedroom social housing are occupied by older couples or single people who needed them at some point but no longer have children living at home. I think it is fair that people living in social housing should downsize when they no longer need extra rooms or pay for the luxury. Simple really, downsize or pay your own rent. Spectator67
  • Score: 0

7:04pm Sat 30 Mar 13

notscot says...

Spectator67 wrote:
The majority of smaller homes are currently occupied by families living in overcrowded conditions. A huge majority of three bedroom social housing are occupied by older couples or single people who needed them at some point but no longer have children living at home. I think it is fair that people living in social housing should downsize when they no longer need extra rooms or pay for the luxury.
Simple really, downsize or pay your own rent.
Think most would be ok with downsizing - but there aren't any 1-bed places to go to!!
And they won't be asisting anyone to find - or move to - a 1 or 2-bed place.
Simply another way to take money from the law-abiding poor.
(Cos they can't afford lawyers to help them to avoid paying taxes.)
Mr average pays again!!
[quote][p][bold]Spectator67[/bold] wrote: The majority of smaller homes are currently occupied by families living in overcrowded conditions. A huge majority of three bedroom social housing are occupied by older couples or single people who needed them at some point but no longer have children living at home. I think it is fair that people living in social housing should downsize when they no longer need extra rooms or pay for the luxury. Simple really, downsize or pay your own rent.[/p][/quote]Think most would be ok with downsizing - but there aren't any 1-bed places to go to!! And they won't be asisting anyone to find - or move to - a 1 or 2-bed place. Simply another way to take money from the law-abiding poor. (Cos they can't afford lawyers to help them to avoid paying taxes.) Mr average pays again!! notscot
  • Score: 0

11:11pm Sat 30 Mar 13

tllytill says...

p.s.......just seen plenty jobs going at morrisons.......this wld pay your rent
p.s.......just seen plenty jobs going at morrisons.......this wld pay your rent tllytill
  • Score: 0

12:22am Sun 31 Mar 13

garybarry says...

It's not as simple as Mr. Average pays again, is it?

It's not that difficult a concept to grasp. If you are in a social house and have a spare bedroom, why not be happy to pay for it?

The rules are weird and help those who have come here to milk the system in front of people like me who has paid his 30 odd percent for 35 years ongoing. OK I don't need it, but one day I might - no chance there then, despite the fact that I've done my bit. Be thankful guys you have a social house and the support that goes with it. Even if it means you have to downsize. We're all in this together - do your bit and live with what we have to put up with. Be happy, you're better off than you think, and maybe possibly deserve...
It's not as simple as Mr. Average pays again, is it? It's not that difficult a concept to grasp. If you are in a social house and have a spare bedroom, why not be happy to pay for it? The rules are weird and help those who have come here to milk the system in front of people like me who has paid his 30 odd percent for 35 years ongoing. OK I don't need it, but one day I might - no chance there then, despite the fact that I've done my bit. Be thankful guys you have a social house and the support that goes with it. Even if it means you have to downsize. We're all in this together - do your bit and live with what we have to put up with. Be happy, you're better off than you think, and maybe possibly deserve... garybarry
  • Score: 0

12:26am Sun 31 Mar 13

tllytill says...

garybarry...........
...............i agree.............es
pecially with your last sentance.....maybe possibly deserve
garybarry........... ...............i agree.............es pecially with your last sentance.....maybe possibly deserve tllytill
  • Score: 0

8:48am Sun 31 Mar 13

notscot says...

garybarry wrote:
It's not as simple as Mr. Average pays again, is it?

It's not that difficult a concept to grasp. If you are in a social house and have a spare bedroom, why not be happy to pay for it?

The rules are weird and help those who have come here to milk the system in front of people like me who has paid his 30 odd percent for 35 years ongoing. OK I don't need it, but one day I might - no chance there then, despite the fact that I've done my bit. Be thankful guys you have a social house and the support that goes with it. Even if it means you have to downsize. We're all in this together - do your bit and live with what we have to put up with. Be happy, you're better off than you think, and maybe possibly deserve...
I know that - if any British family tipped up in one of our European "sister" countries with a family in tow and my hand held out for benefits and a home - I'd be laughed at - then hiked back to the UK. And so it should be - but why doesn't that apply to the UK too? It really ins't selfish or insular to look after your own first. Treat ALL immigrants as other countries do - if you have a job, a home and a sponsor - and the skills we need - welome to the UK. If not - goodbye.
Our borders appear to be non-existant - and our govt. dithers between pretending something is being done - or that things aren't as bad as the opposition says.
We're in a mess and our politicians are pointing the finger at easy targets and manipulating the facts and figures to prevent us from getting the truth.
I've got no problem with asking people who live in social housing and who don't need the space they have to move to a smaller property.
There just AREN'T any affordable smaller homes to go to!
So where will they find the extra money? Most of them won't. A number of them will go into debt and face eviction.
They'll be forced to head for the - but only the for the low-end, short-term tenancies that offer no security.
The majority of those in social housing aren't social misfit layabouts who don't work. They're low-income households - and these people make up the majority of the workforce. But it's easier to care less about them if we believe that most of them are unemployed wasters, isn't it?
A bit like the health of the nation "concern" the govt. had - under the pretence of being healthier and greener, "encouraging" people to get out of their cars and walk to work - used to excuse the hikes in fuel and excise costs - when there's no affordablle, useful public transport capable of getting the nation to work.
Smoke and mirrors - and higher taxes, taken from those who can least afford it - because they are the easiest target, that's all this is about.
By all means be thankful for the social housing you live in. Just don't think too much about the state of a nation that has such a high proportion of low income families who struggle to keep a roof over their heads, your govt. doesn't want you to.
Now - why don't we look at the amount of housing given over to - and fully supported through taxes - to drug addicts, alcoholics and social misfits? Much as the govt. and media would like us to believe that they make up the majority of social housing tenants - they don't. But they still take up a massive amount of taxes. Shift the lot to bed-only hostels. and if THEY refuse to spend their benefits on bed-rent and supplied meals - make 'em homeless and remove their benefits. THOSE are the people I'd rather turn my back on. Where would we put the hostels? Loads of brown sites available.
And perhaps if less people were allowed to avoid paying taxes - we could build some 1 and 2 bed homes for the social housing sector - and ask people to downsize.....
[quote][p][bold]garybarry[/bold] wrote: It's not as simple as Mr. Average pays again, is it? It's not that difficult a concept to grasp. If you are in a social house and have a spare bedroom, why not be happy to pay for it? The rules are weird and help those who have come here to milk the system in front of people like me who has paid his 30 odd percent for 35 years ongoing. OK I don't need it, but one day I might - no chance there then, despite the fact that I've done my bit. Be thankful guys you have a social house and the support that goes with it. Even if it means you have to downsize. We're all in this together - do your bit and live with what we have to put up with. Be happy, you're better off than you think, and maybe possibly deserve...[/p][/quote]I know that - if any British family tipped up in one of our European "sister" countries with a family in tow and my hand held out for benefits and a home - I'd be laughed at - then hiked back to the UK. And so it should be - but why doesn't that apply to the UK too? It really ins't selfish or insular to look after your own first. Treat ALL immigrants as other countries do - if you have a job, a home and a sponsor - and the skills we need - welome to the UK. If not - goodbye. Our borders appear to be non-existant - and our govt. dithers between pretending something is being done - or that things aren't as bad as the opposition says. We're in a mess and our politicians are pointing the finger at easy targets and manipulating the facts and figures to prevent us from getting the truth. I've got no problem with asking people who live in social housing and who don't need the space they have to move to a smaller property. There just AREN'T any affordable smaller homes to go to! So where will they find the extra money? Most of them won't. A number of them will go into debt and face eviction. They'll be forced to head for the - but only the for the low-end, short-term tenancies that offer no security. The majority of those in social housing aren't social misfit layabouts who don't work. They're low-income households - and these people make up the majority of the workforce. But it's easier to care less about them if we believe that most of them are unemployed wasters, isn't it? A bit like the health of the nation "concern" the govt. had - under the pretence of being healthier and greener, "encouraging" people to get out of their cars and walk to work - used to excuse the hikes in fuel and excise costs - when there's no affordablle, useful public transport capable of getting the nation to work. Smoke and mirrors - and higher taxes, taken from those who can least afford it - because they are the easiest target, that's all this is about. By all means be thankful for the social housing you live in. Just don't think too much about the state of a nation that has such a high proportion of low income families who struggle to keep a roof over their heads, your govt. doesn't want you to. Now - why don't we look at the amount of housing given over to - and fully supported through taxes - to drug addicts, alcoholics and social misfits? Much as the govt. and media would like us to believe that they make up the majority of social housing tenants - they don't. But they still take up a massive amount of taxes. Shift the lot to bed-only hostels. and if THEY refuse to spend their benefits on bed-rent and supplied meals - make 'em homeless and remove their benefits. THOSE are the people I'd rather turn my back on. Where would we put the hostels? Loads of brown sites available. And perhaps if less people were allowed to avoid paying taxes - we could build some 1 and 2 bed homes for the social housing sector - and ask people to downsize..... notscot
  • Score: 0

4:34pm Sun 31 Mar 13

Arbs75 says...

Does anyone actually feel sorry for these 2 drains on society, why should the hardworking common man/women pay for these two to live in a house which is two big for them, I don't claim housing benefit or any other benefit for that matter, if I want to buy a bigger house then I know I am going to pay more if I have more bedrooms, surely the same should go for social housing, and on another matter if the twits in the hats didn't have a dog which we the common man/women are surely paying for then they may be able to pay the massive fuel bills which they obviously run up every day watching Jeremy Kyle sat on their arses, carers allowance for an earache as well, this gezzer must think we were all born yesterday if he thinks we'll buy his sob story
Does anyone actually feel sorry for these 2 drains on society, why should the hardworking common man/women pay for these two to live in a house which is two big for them, I don't claim housing benefit or any other benefit for that matter, if I want to buy a bigger house then I know I am going to pay more if I have more bedrooms, surely the same should go for social housing, and on another matter if the twits in the hats didn't have a dog which we the common man/women are surely paying for then they may be able to pay the massive fuel bills which they obviously run up every day watching Jeremy Kyle sat on their arses, carers allowance for an earache as well, this gezzer must think we were all born yesterday if he thinks we'll buy his sob story Arbs75
  • Score: 0

11:07pm Mon 1 Apr 13

Fed up of Calne says...

And can we stop calling this a 'tax'. It isn't. It is an end to a subsidy.
And can we stop calling this a 'tax'. It isn't. It is an end to a subsidy. Fed up of Calne
  • Score: 0

6:48am Tue 2 Apr 13

notscot says...

Fed up of Calne wrote:
And can we stop calling this a 'tax'. It isn't. It is an end to a subsidy.
An end to a subsidy? So why was the subsidy required - oh yes - because the cost of housing in the UK was too expensive for low-income families.
It still is.
Someone just took the descision to stick 2 fingers up at the low-paid - label them as scroungers in the media and encourage the sheeple to look down their noses at them, making it easier for govt. to let them struggle.
No - i'm not talking about the unusual couple in the article. I'm talking about the low-income tax-paying families who will never be high earners, who struggle to meet the high cost of living in the UK.
I'd rather see the wasters in our society cut off - not the ones who're trying. And perhaps a few tweaks to the tax laws - encourage some at the top end to pay their dues.
[quote][p][bold]Fed up of Calne[/bold] wrote: And can we stop calling this a 'tax'. It isn't. It is an end to a subsidy.[/p][/quote]An end to a subsidy? So why was the subsidy required - oh yes - because the cost of housing in the UK was too expensive for low-income families. It still is. Someone just took the descision to stick 2 fingers up at the low-paid - label them as scroungers in the media and encourage the sheeple to look down their noses at them, making it easier for govt. to let them struggle. No - i'm not talking about the unusual couple in the article. I'm talking about the low-income tax-paying families who will never be high earners, who struggle to meet the high cost of living in the UK. I'd rather see the wasters in our society cut off - not the ones who're trying. And perhaps a few tweaks to the tax laws - encourage some at the top end to pay their dues. notscot
  • Score: 0

5:20pm Tue 2 Apr 13

PeteAUK says...

It's very sad that this couple feel they have been forced to move due to the changes in legislation.

However in this particular case I don't have much sympathy because they're actually far better off than most people. They receive £996 per month (plus housing benefit, free prescriptions and one off benefits). Many people would love to have this left after they've paid their mortgage/rent (I know I would). £120 per month on heating is quite high (as you'd expect from two people being at home all day) but I wonder if this is the electricity bill and includes the television, lights and other appliances?

Depression and anxiety are both very real disabilities, but I fail to see why this lady needs a full time carer and if she does then surely she requires medical help to try and resolve the problems. Sadly all this article/couple has done is to highlight yet another instance of the UK benefit system rewarding people who are out of work.

I'm also getting fed up of seeing "bedroom tax". It's not a tax, it's a reduction of housing benefit, the government basically saying "we'll only pay for the rooms needed for the number of occupants". A tax would involve the occupants paying the government rather than the landlord.
It's very sad that this couple feel they have been forced to move due to the changes in legislation. However in this particular case I don't have much sympathy because they're actually far better off than most people. They receive £996 per month (plus housing benefit, free prescriptions and one off benefits). Many people would love to have this left after they've paid their mortgage/rent (I know I would). £120 per month on heating is quite high (as you'd expect from two people being at home all day) but I wonder if this is the electricity bill and includes the television, lights and other appliances? Depression and anxiety are both very real disabilities, but I fail to see why this lady needs a full time carer and if she does then surely she requires medical help to try and resolve the problems. Sadly all this article/couple has done is to highlight yet another instance of the UK benefit system rewarding people who are out of work. I'm also getting fed up of seeing "bedroom tax". It's not a tax, it's a reduction of housing benefit, the government basically saying "we'll only pay for the rooms needed for the number of occupants". A tax would involve the occupants paying the government rather than the landlord. PeteAUK
  • Score: 0

8:07am Wed 3 Apr 13

notscot says...

"I'm also getting fed up of seeing "bedroom tax". It's not a tax, it's a reduction of housing benefit, the government basically saying "we'll only pay for the rooms needed for the number of occupants". A tax would involve the occupants paying the government rather than the landlord.”
That would be grand - if there were an alternative. There isn't. And the Govt. KNOWS there isn't an alternative.
"Down-size to assist the system, or pay the increases". Oh yes, downsize to WHERE?
It's a form of tax - the Govt. forcing landlords to claw back cash from those who can't afford to fight it.
"I'm also getting fed up of seeing "bedroom tax". It's not a tax, it's a reduction of housing benefit, the government basically saying "we'll only pay for the rooms needed for the number of occupants". A tax would involve the occupants paying the government rather than the landlord.” That would be grand - if there were an alternative. There isn't. And the Govt. KNOWS there isn't an alternative. "Down-size to assist the system, or pay the increases". Oh yes, downsize to WHERE? It's a form of tax - the Govt. forcing landlords to claw back cash from those who can't afford to fight it. notscot
  • Score: 0

12:41pm Wed 3 Apr 13

lordbuckethead says...

"depression, anxiety and is deaf in one ear, so needs a full time carer"

are you serious?

OK depression is terrible but does it physically stop you working? In fact doesn't working help with conditions like that?

try using the other ear?


here's a suggestion...

get out to work (or volunteer as there's 'no work' out there) and you won't need to have the heating on all day!
"depression, anxiety and is deaf in one ear, so needs a full time carer" are you serious? OK depression is terrible but does it physically stop you working? In fact doesn't working help with conditions like that? try using the other ear? here's a suggestion... get out to work (or volunteer as there's 'no work' out there) and you won't need to have the heating on all day! lordbuckethead
  • Score: 0

12:57pm Wed 3 Apr 13

judgeatnam says...

£1000 a month take home without doing an ounce of work? That is a lot more than somebody doing 40 hours a week on minimum wage!! No wonder people who do work are getting a bit fed up. I don't know these peoples circumstances but we all suffer anxiety and depression due to concerns about paying rent/mortgage/childc
are and all kinds of other day to day expenses. Hopefully these two will be back to work soon as they do not have any of these concerns as the smiles on their faces seem to confirm.
£1000 a month take home without doing an ounce of work? That is a lot more than somebody doing 40 hours a week on minimum wage!! No wonder people who do work are getting a bit fed up. I don't know these peoples circumstances but we all suffer anxiety and depression due to concerns about paying rent/mortgage/childc are and all kinds of other day to day expenses. Hopefully these two will be back to work soon as they do not have any of these concerns as the smiles on their faces seem to confirm. judgeatnam
  • Score: 0

4:33pm Wed 3 Apr 13

hendyphilhendy says...

So they have had to move home to a smaller place that is paid for by us taxpayers - and as a bonus their heating bill will inevitably go down.

Surely this is a positive and shows exactly why the rules are being imposed?
So they have had to move home to a smaller place that is paid for by us taxpayers - and as a bonus their heating bill will inevitably go down. Surely this is a positive and shows exactly why the rules are being imposed? hendyphilhendy
  • Score: 0

8:06pm Wed 3 Apr 13

notscot says...

hendyphilhendy wrote:
So they have had to move home to a smaller place that is paid for by us taxpayers - and as a bonus their heating bill will inevitably go down.

Surely this is a positive and shows exactly why the rules are being imposed?
Yes - absolutely nothing wrong with the basic idea - live within the space you need. Now - how many families (currently deemed to be under occupying) are there in Wiltshire? Several thousand. How many smaller homes are available? Oops.
[quote][p][bold]hendyphilhendy[/bold] wrote: So they have had to move home to a smaller place that is paid for by us taxpayers - and as a bonus their heating bill will inevitably go down. Surely this is a positive and shows exactly why the rules are being imposed?[/p][/quote]Yes - absolutely nothing wrong with the basic idea - live within the space you need. Now - how many families (currently deemed to be under occupying) are there in Wiltshire? Several thousand. How many smaller homes are available? Oops. notscot
  • Score: 0

9:30am Thu 4 Apr 13

At2 says...

£12688 total income a year to their bank account.

Housing benefit will be paying around £80-90 a week more than likely, totalling at £80pw - £4160.

Council tax will be paid for at the new rate of 80% more than likely, an average guess for a 1 bed property means council tax bill of £700~

Total cost per year £17548!!!!!
because of some "anxiety and depression" - made worse by sitting in the house all day everyday thinking how bad things are.

not to mention all the costs of getting things free on benefits, Prescriptions etc. Also paying no tax anymore or NI means others have to pick up even more cost.

This isn't even a bad example of why things needed to change years ago.
£12688 total income a year to their bank account. Housing benefit will be paying around £80-90 a week more than likely, totalling at £80pw - £4160. Council tax will be paid for at the new rate of 80% more than likely, an average guess for a 1 bed property means council tax bill of £700~ Total cost per year £17548!!!!! because of some "anxiety and depression" - made worse by sitting in the house all day everyday thinking how bad things are. not to mention all the costs of getting things free on benefits, Prescriptions etc. Also paying no tax anymore or NI means others have to pick up even more cost. This isn't even a bad example of why things needed to change years ago. At2
  • Score: 0

9:38am Thu 4 Apr 13

At2 says...

notscot wrote:
"I'm also getting fed up of seeing "bedroom tax". It's not a tax, it's a reduction of housing benefit, the government basically saying "we'll only pay for the rooms needed for the number of occupants". A tax would involve the occupants paying the government rather than the landlord.”
That would be grand - if there were an alternative. There isn't. And the Govt. KNOWS there isn't an alternative.
"Down-size to assist the system, or pay the increases". Oh yes, downsize to WHERE?
It's a form of tax - the Govt. forcing landlords to claw back cash from those who can't afford to fight it.
if the tenant shows real effort to move, ie look in papers, bid on the homes 4 wiltshire system, signed up for homeswapper scheme. They can apply for discretionary housnig benefit payment to pay over a short term the shortfall in their Housnig Benefit reduction. This gives people more time to look for smaller acommodation, even if it is private.

The ones who wont qualify for this will be the ones who have been on Job seekers allowance for a year pretending to look for a job.
[quote][p][bold]notscot[/bold] wrote: "I'm also getting fed up of seeing "bedroom tax". It's not a tax, it's a reduction of housing benefit, the government basically saying "we'll only pay for the rooms needed for the number of occupants". A tax would involve the occupants paying the government rather than the landlord.” That would be grand - if there were an alternative. There isn't. And the Govt. KNOWS there isn't an alternative. "Down-size to assist the system, or pay the increases". Oh yes, downsize to WHERE? It's a form of tax - the Govt. forcing landlords to claw back cash from those who can't afford to fight it.[/p][/quote]if the tenant shows real effort to move, ie look in papers, bid on the homes 4 wiltshire system, signed up for homeswapper scheme. They can apply for discretionary housnig benefit payment to pay over a short term the shortfall in their Housnig Benefit reduction. This gives people more time to look for smaller acommodation, even if it is private. The ones who wont qualify for this will be the ones who have been on Job seekers allowance for a year pretending to look for a job. At2
  • Score: 0

11:49pm Thu 4 Apr 13

funk monkey says...

As said before a tax is something You Pay. Not something the state no longer pays to you. The last socialist govt was the usual tax and spend lot. Look at those that bothered to save for pensions etc. all sold down the river by good old Gordon. They created the welfare dependency to ensure they got the votes of those individuals who benefitted from it. As tax payers we are subsidising those that don't work for what ever reason, we also provide health care for them! When will it end? I am sick of all these leftie/ liberals who come out of the woodwork saying it is the poor that suffer. I am suffering as well because I am paying for it, as well as supporting the burgeoning public sector. Someone somewhere has to work to sell something somebody wants to generate income. Then tax is paid, there are getting fewer of us doing this, so where do you expect the money to come from to keep these people in the style too which they have become accustomed? Shock, horror, they may have to get off their backsides and do some work that might not be too pleasant and work up a bit of a sweat. This is what the rest of us do every day. It seems hard work and success are dirty words to left. They seem to strive to meet the lowest common denominator! Last one out turn off the light!
As said before a tax is something You Pay. Not something the state no longer pays to you. The last socialist govt was the usual tax and spend lot. Look at those that bothered to save for pensions etc. all sold down the river by good old Gordon. They created the welfare dependency to ensure they got the votes of those individuals who benefitted from it. As tax payers we are subsidising those that don't work for what ever reason, we also provide health care for them! When will it end? I am sick of all these leftie/ liberals who come out of the woodwork saying it is the poor that suffer. I am suffering as well because I am paying for it, as well as supporting the burgeoning public sector. Someone somewhere has to work to sell something somebody wants to generate income. Then tax is paid, there are getting fewer of us doing this, so where do you expect the money to come from to keep these people in the style too which they have become accustomed? Shock, horror, they may have to get off their backsides and do some work that might not be too pleasant and work up a bit of a sweat. This is what the rest of us do every day. It seems hard work and success are dirty words to left. They seem to strive to meet the lowest common denominator! Last one out turn off the light! funk monkey
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

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