'Bedroom tax' will affect hundreds in Wycombe (From Bucks Free Press)

Mind you, if some of the council tenants downsize, where will all their friends go and sleep, half of them have all and sundry living with them anyway, and these ARE benefits people, i'm sorry, but you can tell them a mile off.
There are a handful of honest tenants btw.

I rented a hotel once for months and months on business - at the end of that I didn't own part of the room or tell the hotel how to run its business!

Perfectly sensible recommendations by the govt - if the tenants don't like it then move

Why should we pay our taxes such that you can enjoy endless empty space ?

I could do with a free extra bedroom to accomodate my step-daughter who stays on weekends (as two 12 year olds cannot share without fighting) but I am not entitled to one - maybe working is where I am going wrong......

Why don't honest people shop the cheats?

I bet we all know at least one...

...food for thought!

I have a friend who is living in a two bedroomed flat with her husband and three young teenage children, it is very crowded. This does seem like an ideal solution for them to move to a bigger property with the extra space where their three girls can perhaps get some quiet time. They are all past infant school so need quiet time to study. A two bedroomed nicely kept ground floor flat might suit someone currently living in a house with three bedrooms 2 unused. It makes perfect sense for Red Kite to set up some kind of match making for this to be facilitated. Unfortunately though it does seem that most homes under occupied are occupied by elderly couples or elderly single people and the bedroom tax doesn't affect people of pensionable age. Red Kite need to find an innovative and sensitive way of encouraging downsizing to free up their family home sized stock.

Barbara B wrote:
I have a friend who is living in a two bedroomed flat with her husband and three young teenage children, it is very crowded. This does seem like an ideal solution for them to move to a bigger property with the extra space where their three girls can perhaps get some quiet time. They are all past infant school so need quiet time to study. A two bedroomed nicely kept ground floor flat might suit someone currently living in a house with three bedrooms 2 unused. It makes perfect sense for Red Kite to set up some kind of match making for this to be facilitated. Unfortunately though it does seem that most homes under occupied are occupied by elderly couples or elderly single people and the bedroom tax doesn't affect people of pensionable age. Red Kite need to find an innovative and sensitive way of encouraging downsizing to free up their family home sized stock.

Moral of that story is don't have children you can't afford to house.

Did you know an ex-councillor (W of town ) now has 11 (that's eleven) bedrooms in his council house.
.
It is rumoured (roomoured ?) that he was on the planning committee , did eventually buy the property and left the council when the locals stopped voting for him.
.
But it might be rumours started by his political opponents. You know we are all in it together - so we are told all the time.

The whole council house or housing association thing makes me sick, I work bloody hard to earn a reasonable wage and yet me my wife an toddler live in a tiny two bedroom house and pay an exorbitant mortgage for the priveledge. Why should I have to subsidise people who either don't work at all or don't earn as much to live in a place bigger and more comfortable than mine. It's ridiculous. What's the point of working I'd be better off unemployed or doing a job that pays much less.

Additionally, no one who lives in subsidised housing should have any right to stay there. There situation should be reevaluated every year and if they can afford to eat and pay rent they should have to go back into the private housing market. Social housing should be there as a safety net only. It makes my blood boil when I see people in social housing with expensive cars in there driveway and the smell of weed pouring out there windows.

J B Blackett wrote:
Did you know an ex-councillor (W of town ) now has 11 (that's eleven) bedrooms in his council house.
.
It is rumoured (roomoured ?) that he was on the planning committee , did eventually buy the property and left the council when the locals stopped voting for him.
.
But it might be rumours started by his political opponents. You know we are all in it together - so we are told all the time.

I'm not sure of the relevance of your report it appears to contradict has he ( mystery ex councillor) got a Council house or his own house? Neither am I sure of the relevance of your comment other than mischief making. The welfare reform is a very scary subject and will affect some of the most vulnerable members of our communities. It would be nice if some constructive comments could be added.

It would be nice if some of the people in subsidised housing got a bit constructive and took some responsibility for themselves rather than having the rest of us pay their way.

All the housing association people down my street can afford to smoke, subscribe to sky tv and live a far more comfortable life than I can. About time something was done about these scrounging scumbags.

Jill_Peterson wrote:
All the housing association people down my street can afford to smoke, subscribe to sky tv and live a far more comfortable life than I can. About time something was done about these scrounging scumbags.

Oh dear! I take it if you have lots of social housing tenants down your street you have either taken up the right to buy or you have bought from someone else that took up that right. If you have taken up that right what were you before? Scrounging scum too or something else? It really doesn't help when people make such sweeping generalisations about social housing tenants. many of them are elderly people and for whatever reason have rented their property for many many years it is totally disrespectful of you referring to them as scrounging scum, don't you think? Anyway the content of the main article expresses the affect that the welfare reform bill will have on many many people and constructive comment would be much better. Many economists state that most of us are only one or two pay checks away from poverty, through either illness or redundancy etc. It might be worth thinking about that before we make derogatory remarks about people we know nothing about!

acjy1985 wrote:

Barbara B wrote:
I have a friend who is living in a two bedroomed flat with her husband and three young teenage children, it is very crowded. This does seem like an ideal solution for them to move to a bigger property with the extra space where their three girls can perhaps get some quiet time. They are all past infant school so need quiet time to study. A two bedroomed nicely kept ground floor flat might suit someone currently living in a house with three bedrooms 2 unused. It makes perfect sense for Red Kite to set up some kind of match making for this to be facilitated. Unfortunately though it does seem that most homes under occupied are occupied by elderly couples or elderly single people and the bedroom tax doesn't affect people of pensionable age. Red Kite need to find an innovative and sensitive way of encouraging downsizing to free up their family home sized stock.

Moral of that story is don't have children you can't afford to house.

Acjy1985. Not really some people start life blessed with good jobs, good income, nice home etc etc they have children knowing that they are comfortable and then.... circumstance change for them, sickness, job loss, over stretched financially, (many people in this situation) and they find themselves unable to maintain their home and have to go to their local authority for help they then become a tenant of a social housing landlord, thank goodness that facility is there to help them. So, moral of this tale is don't make assumptions about ALL tenants in social housing and be very sure that your own personal circumstances are secure because humble pie doesn't taste very nice! I have had my fare share due to my own intolerance of certain things so feel able to say that!

Whatever Barbara. The housing association have been buying up properties down my road over the last few years. The properties were never social housing and it used to be a nice street. I wholeheartedly agree with Acjy1985 and I can't help but think that you Barbara dost protest too much.

Whilst I think it is fair to say that no one wants to subsidise people that are capable to, but refuse to work (there is a difference to those that are unable to work or unable to find work and those that refuse to work), or those that are raping the benefits system. We shouldn't class all people receiving benefits as thieving scum, and I'd like to think that if something awful happened to me or a member of my family and we needed to rely on our benefits system, we would have that option. Of course I don't believe and have seen first hand that no one can rely on getting that help, or that help being is actually available to any of us, despite us having worked all our lives paying into that system. My blood boils as much as anyone elses when I see people blatantly sat on their backsides taking what they can and doing nothing for it and yet I see so many people around me working their fingers to the bone to earn a pittance with which they barely scrape by. Anyway I digress...

Personally I feel that if you have the luxury of spare rooms in your housing association or council pad, that you clearly should be made to downsize. I know of several families with more than 1 child stuffed into 1 or 2 bedroom places.

As for the comment, don't have children unless you can afford them, well, who has a crystal ball? The country is in an economic crisis, redudancy looms large for many people as firms struggle to survive these harsh times.

Wycid wrote:
Additionally, no one who lives in subsidised housing should have any right to stay there. There situation should be reevaluated every year and if they can afford to eat and pay rent they should have to go back into the private housing market. Social housing should be there as a safety net only. It makes my blood boil when I see people in social housing with expensive cars in there driveway and the smell of weed pouring out there windows.

I agree, there should be a system to reevaluate need regularly and the right to stay in a property should be on need not want basis.
I rent privately as I cannot afford to buy; every year I have to sign a new tenancy agreement, every year the rent goes up and last month I was given two months notice as the land lord wants to sell. I basically have no rights as a private renter. I'm not implying everyone should be given two months notice in social housing if they are not using the rooms but why do some have more rights than others just because the landlord is the council? Maybe I could get pregnant in the next month, declare myself homeless and knock on the council door and receive a subsidised accomodation to live in for as long as I choose regardless of my need.

But if this happens where am I going to put my pinball machine and snooker cue collection. :[ The government is so unfair on us non-workers..

Bounty8 wrote:

Wycid wrote:
Additionally, no one who lives in subsidised housing should have any right to stay there. There situation should be reevaluated every year and if they can afford to eat and pay rent they should have to go back into the private housing market. Social housing should be there as a safety net only. It makes my blood boil when I see people in social housing with expensive cars in there driveway and the smell of weed pouring out there windows.

I agree, there should be a system to reevaluate need regularly and the right to stay in a property should be on need not want basis.
I rent privately as I cannot afford to buy; every year I have to sign a new tenancy agreement, every year the rent goes up and last month I was given two months notice as the land lord wants to sell. I basically have no rights as a private renter. I'm not implying everyone should be given two months notice in social housing if they are not using the rooms but why do some have more rights than others just because the landlord is the council? Maybe I could get pregnant in the next month, declare myself homeless and knock on the council door and receive a subsidised accomodation to live in for as long as I choose regardless of my need.

Tenancy agreements are set by government not the tenant, when a social housing tenant signs for the keys they are given a tenancy that is fixed in law. Perhaps you shoul lobby the government, only a change in the law can change this agreement. The issue now is for social housing landlords to come up with a way to help those tenants that are under occupying a means both practically and sympathetically to help them move. Unfortunately it is likely that this will not be achievable in the short term. Empty properties are few and far between, builders are reluctant to build affordable homes and what does that mean anyway. Until a smart solution is found I fear we will have many more families struggling to make ends meet than we should have.