Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
council dweller

Simple Question: When The 'universal Credit' Starts, Will

Recommended Posts

Currently, someone on a low wage can get their rent paid by housing benefit whereas an owner occupier without a mortgage would oviously not be able to claim anything for their housing costs.

With the coming of Universal Benefit, would both owner and renter receive the same amount?

If so this would mean that the renter would have to pay their rent from this 'credit' but the owner would have extra pie money....

Thank you for your kindness in advance!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Currently, someone on a low wage can get their rent paid by housing benefit whereas an owner occupier without a mortgage would oviously not be able to claim anything for their housing costs.

With the coming of Universal Benefit, would both owner and renter receive the same amount?

If so this would mean that the renter would have to pay their rent from this 'credit' but the owner would have extra pie money....

Thank you for your kindness in advance!

Good point -- and it throws up the question as to why would anyone who owns a house need the dole in the first place?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The CB c***-up should tell you the answer to this question. They are fundamentally incapable of getting the simplest thing right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People on benefits can already get assistance with mortgage interest.

The devil is in the detail, we don't know whether this new universal benefit will include housing benefits. The sensible approach would be to pay benefits to pay a mortgage to keep that person in their home if it is cheaper than them selling and then renting and claiming LHA.

However common sense doesn't apply to governments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks cinnamon and kzb.

The media have kicked up stink about Child Benefits and the awful unfairness of it all but will let this one pass them by.

Seems to me that it's a game of musical chairs, the music is starting again, we all shuffle around, the music stops and the usual suspects will be sitting down in most cases. People will adjust to take advantage, lower their incomes etc. Perhaps IDS and Osborn will sometimes wonder why they ever started!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good point -- and it throws up the question as to why would anyone who owns a house need the dole in the first place?

...nobody really owns a house until the mortgage is paid off....false sense of security to think otherwise.... :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People on benefits can already get assistance with mortgage interest.

The devil is in the detail, we don't know whether this new universal benefit will include housing benefits. The sensible approach would be to pay benefits to pay a mortgage to keep that person in their home if it is cheaper than them selling and then renting and claiming LHA.

However common sense doesn't apply to governments.

Weren't they talking about cutting 50 benefits down to 2 and that these would be 'Universal'....sounded like one for the unemployed and one for those working (paid through PAYE)? UC and HB would cost a fortune.It could be that things are being toned down as we speak and we'll end up with a real abortion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd have no problem at all in mortgage holders getting the same amount as Housing Benefit recipients. 30th percentile rent for houses in that area, wasn't it?

What has always really got my goat is that if you have a house and lose your job, you get to keep it with the mortgage interest paid, but if you have savings, you have to spend it and can't get ****** all unless your savings are practically insignificant. Forcing you onto the housing Big Dipper.

Edited by dazednconfused

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Article from 'Inside Housing' Looks like we'll see and end to HB.

Please read the comments, these people, mainly in the housing world hint at what might be coming.

http://www.insidehousing.co.uk/news/housing-management/single-payment-set-to-replace-housing-benefit/6511913.article?PageNo=2&SortOrder=dateadded&PageSize=10#Scene_1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Currently, someone on a low wage can get their rent paid by housing benefit whereas an owner occupier without a mortgage would oviously not be able to claim anything for their housing costs.

With the coming of Universal Benefit, would both owner and renter receive the same amount?

If so this would mean that the renter would have to pay their rent from this 'credit' but the owner would have extra pie money....

Thank you for your kindness in advance!

The hint is in the word "universal", I suspect. Besides, all that money sitting locked up in a depreciating house is an opportunity cost, so the house owner should receive the same as a renter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...nobody really owns a house until the mortgage is paid off....false sense of security to think otherwise.... :rolleyes:

Ok, let's say they salted away £50k and owe the rest to the bank. Why should they keep it when any other asset is up for grabs for everyone else? IIRC, the limit for other mortals is £8k.

Those folks should be made to MEW or sell first.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd have no problem at all in mortgage holders getting the same amount as Housing Benefit recipients. 30th percentile rent for houses in that area, wasn't it?

What has always really got my goat is that if you have a house and lose your job, you get to keep it with the mortgage interest paid, but if you have savings, you have to spend it and can't get ****** all unless your savings are practically insignificant. Forcing you onto the housing Big Dipper.

Interesting that the 30th percentile thing was due to run only to around 2013, after which HB would increase by CPI.

2013 is roughly when they plan to start this new Universal Credit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, let's say they salted away £50k and owe the rest to the bank. Why should they keep it when any other asset is up for grabs for everyone else? IIRC, the limit for other mortals is £8k.

Those folks should be made to MEW or sell first.

The problem with this is housing is not like any other asset, we all need somewhere to live. This is part of why we have such a ******ed up system with house prices as they being treated as an investment and not an essential.

Plus if you force people to MEW, when the money runs out the government will end up paying out more either in mortgage assistance or in housing benefits as these people then have to rent. More debt is not the solution.

I would quite happily support a housing benefit that was paid either to a renter or home owner where the maximum was the same, in a lot of cases if the actual amount paid was the payments of rent or mortgage you would find that it is cheaper to keep the home owners in their own home.

At the moment the benefits are supporting BTL, I would much rather see benefits support the individual. I also would love to seethe massive tax evasion in the BTL market stamped upon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The hint is in the word "universal", I suspect. Besides, all that money sitting locked up in a depreciating house is an opportunity cost, so the house owner should receive the same as a renter.

Well yes, it's somekind of hint but that would also imply that UC would be non-means tested, none of this hiding money lark!

Any expats out there? Save yourself a good wad, change into the collapsed pound in 2 years time, buy a house outright, get yourself a part-time job + UB and kick back.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem with this is housing is not like any other asset, we all need somewhere to live. This is part of why we have such a ******ed up system with house prices as they being treated as an investment and not an essential.

Plus if you force people to MEW, when the money runs out the government will end up paying out more either in mortgage assistance or in housing benefits as these people then have to rent. More debt is not the solution.

I would quite happily support a housing benefit that was paid either to a renter or home owner where the maximum was the same, in a lot of cases if the actual amount paid was the payments of rent or mortgage you would find that it is cheaper to keep the home owners in their own home.

At the moment the benefits are supporting BTL, I would much rather see benefits support the individual. I also would love to seethe massive tax evasion in the BTL market stamped upon.

How so is a house not an asset like any other? Why should rich people get alms?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How so is a house not an asset like any other? Why should rich people get alms?

Other assets aren't an essential.

They shouldn't get alms. To reflect housing's special status I would heap tax on anyone using property for speculation, BTL tax evasion is already widespread and needs dealing with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem with this is housing is not like any other asset, we all need somewhere to live. This is part of why we have such a ******ed up system with house prices as they being treated as an investment and not an essential.

Plus if you force people to MEW, when the money runs out the government will end up paying out more either in mortgage assistance or in housing benefits as these people then have to rent. More debt is not the solution.

Housing equity should be treated as "savings" for the purpose of benefit assessment. If a home owner find them selves unemployed they have several options, they can MEW, they can sell and rent, sell and downsize. If they MEWed then once their equity fell below 8k then they would qualify HB at the same level as an equivalent renter (not rent for the house they are in e.g. a single person would get HB for equivalent rent of a 1 bed flat even if they lived in a 3 bed house).

There you go, a completely fair simple and equitable system.

Edited by goldbug9999

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rolling up all the present benefits into 1 universal Citizen's Dividend won't solve anything if the same funding mechanism is used (taxation levied on production with debt based top ups). This isn't because homeowners will also receive the dividend, it's because it hasn't addressed the root cause of financial instability which their monopoly over finite resources.

Achieving equality of outcome is impossible when the state treats homeowners more equally than renters, eventually the fruits of the CD will all start flowing one way: into the pockets of landlords.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 259 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.