Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
cashinmattress

Leeds Plans To Reclassify Houses To Help 'bedroom Tax' Victims

Recommended Posts

link

Leeds City Council is planning to "redesignate" more than 850 council houses to defend the city's most vulnerable victims of the government's vicious bedroom tax.

The Labour-controlled council hopes to offset the worst effects of the bedroom tax, which financially penalises tenants deemed to have more room than they need.

The council said it is "looking at the possibility of redesignating the number of bedrooms in a wide range of council homes across the city so as to reduce the amount of people who may lose out on their housing benefit."

Councillor Peter Gruen said council officers were looking at knocking a room off of 865 of the council's 58,500 properties.

Officers were looking at properties currently most affected by under-occupancy that fall into low demand when finding new tenants, he said.

"These properties also present a feasible option for redesignation due to the current layouts."

If successful, "the households affected will not have to find additional funds and will not find themselves in a place of hardship.

"The council will benefit from this scheme through the savings that could have been associated with the additional resources such as legal costs and additional staff that come with chasing rent."

Protests against the tax are growing across Britain and in Leeds they have been organanised by campaign group Hands Off Our Homes.

It estimates that the cost of an eviction could be 20 times higher than rent arrears.

Fvck it. Just base housing benefit on gross area, not some subjective classification of the bloody space.

I'm really getting sick of the lack of parity in Britian.

Either you are at the top or bottom getting plenty of 'state freebies' while mugs like me support it. Fvck.

Edited by cashinmattress

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't see how this would be legal.

It won't matter how many rooms the council class it as having. If you have 3 bedrooms and you write "2" on the form you've committed fraud. I doubt it says "How many bedrooms does the council classify you as having".

If people try and cheat the system they'll just rush though the rest of the LHA changes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It estimates that the cost of an eviction could be 20 times higher than rent arrears.

Laffer curve for proles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It won't matter how many rooms the council class it as having. If you have 3 bedrooms and you write "2" on the form you've committed fraud. I doubt it says "How many bedrooms does the council classify you as having".

Can they call bedrooms dining rooms or something else to stop them being called bedrooms?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Happens all the time in London ... but the other way round IE when the dining room becomes a bedroom because you can fit a bed into it.

...you could turn a bedroom into a bathroom.....in many old Victorian houses that only had an outside loo this was done. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

lawmakers fiddling the law

rule of law is a very delicate thing...it can tolerate a few offenders....but as government itself begins to offend, then the rule of law will break down.

if its a bad law...get it changed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Officers were looking at properties currently most affected by under-occupancy that fall into low demand when finding new tenants, he said.

I suppose that is a point, if they have 3 bedders in an 'undesirable' area where no-one wants to live, can they then offer them to people looking for two bedders in other areas, of which they have none available ?

'Dear tenant, regarding your application, we have good news and bad news' - you have more interior space, because it's not advisable to go out!

If it's filling empty properties then OK, or is it a socialist council obstructing Govt. policy?

Edited by frankief

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
...you could turn a bedroom into a bathroom.....in many old Victorian houses that only had an outside loo this was done. ;)

You could even make it an en-suite, or a walk in wardrobe, however both options require changes to the property that would require the consent of the landlord.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It doesn't matter what your politics are - the bedroom tax could only have been dreamed up by retards or lunatics.

Dunno what's worse - New Labour's 'listen to the experts'-driven technocracy or the Tories' rule by ideology and bugger the reality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

link

Fvck it. Just base housing benefit on gross area, not some subjective classification of the bloody space.

Much better idea my house has 3 bedrooms but some of my neighbours have 2 - same size house though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

lawmakers fiddling the law

They don't fiddle the law, just interpret it differently. Which is why lawyers are well paid and never run out of work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just hope a journo gets hold of some overcrowded tenants in Leeds to make this much more fun :)

They will get into stickier shit than they imagine redefining bedrooms not as bedrooms.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bedroom tax is a complete joke.

Hence reclassification of 'bedrooms' is the most sensible solution to avoid the tax.

If you want to tax bedrooms, you need to define them. And you should have a progressive bedroom tax. One bedroom each, tax free.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bedroom tax is a complete joke.

Hence reclassification of 'bedrooms' is the most sensible solution to avoid the tax.

If you want to tax bedrooms, you need to define them. And you should have a progressive bedroom tax. One bedroom each, tax free.

So all the people who work, get no benefits and live in a room in a shared house need to keep paying tax to fund the dolites of the Uk to have spare rooms? Is that what your aim is?

Those in social housing should be housed according to the maximum permitted (Which under my rules would be a 3 bed house - if you breed more then tough go buy a house)

One way to do it would be to downsize people and when they get offered something "bedroom-number-suitable" and refuse they start to pay the bedroom tax.

That way if there's no smaller place on offer then they don't get charged it.

this would do a few things:

- encourage HA and councils to unmothball the thousands of empty properties there are around the UK

- It'd mean people got shuffled about and into suitable size housing for their needs. (Working UP and DOWN the bedroom scale)

There would be a few caveats

* the housing authority / group be fined for every empty property they have (more than 2 weeks)

* A slush fund for taking empty private properties and renting them out as council

* Capping and actually aiming to reduce local rents in the area for private tenants

* building masses of social housing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So all the people who work, get no benefits and live in a room in a shared house need to keep paying tax to fund the dolites of the Uk to have spare rooms? Is that what your aim is?

"Dolites" didn't create the financial crisis and create unemployment.

I've visited too local firms this week over potential consultancy and subcontract opportunities. Both stuffed to the gunnels with cheap "Eastern Europeans." In fact the start of one conversation with one MD was him bemoaning the loss of two foreign national "graduates."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If someone could explain the definition of tax with regards to bedrooms I'd be most obliged.

Yes, it means that somebody who pays the least or nothing into the system is going to get less out of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So all the people who work, get no benefits and live in a room in a shared house need to keep paying tax to fund the dolites of the Uk to have spare rooms? Is that what your aim is?

Yep, the overprivileged get to pontificate without having to suffer from the sharp end the indignity of paying tax on their hard-earned for people richer than themselves.

Those in social housing should be housed according to the maximum permitted (Which under my rules would be a 3 bed house - if you breed more then tough go buy a house)

No. Let them choose, within their means. Just don't give them more money for sprogging[1], or less money for working.

[1] Making some of the costs of child-rearing tax-deductible or even free[2] seems like a much more reasonable form of subsidy.

[2] Schools are still notionally free at the point of use, yesno?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If someone could explain the definition of tax with regards to bedrooms I'd be most obliged.

Certainly a good bit of propaganda by the left. I was listening to the Today programme yesterday and the lady against this benefit change literally managed to slip the words ''bedroom tax'' about three times into every sentence and it sounded bloody ridiculous.

Edited by crashmonitor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep, the overprivileged get to pontificate without having to suffer from the sharp end the indignity of paying tax on their hard-earned for people richer than themselves.

No. Let them choose, within their means. Just don't give them more money for sprogging[1], or less money for working.

[1] Making some of the costs of child-rearing tax-deductible or even free[2] seems like a much more reasonable form of subsidy.

[2] Schools are still notionally free at the point of use, yesno?

As long as your realise that once you have removed the underclasses "pay per sprog" scheme then middle class `entitlements` will surely follow. cool.gif

This so called "bedroom tax" isn't about saving money. On the contrary. Its about a fascist government that is hoping to gain popularity by demonising the 'Jeremy Kyle' class.

I've no doubt, it will really stack up votes in the key demographics, and plays to the lie that the ballooning welfare bill budget is all down to breeding "dolites."

Edited by Secure Tenant

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes they did because they voted for the governments that created it.

Reagan? How come?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah. It's not a tax.

The government sets the rent.

In quite a few places social rents are now overtaking private rents.

There is massive amounts of market manipulation in the housing market forcing rents and prices upwards.

It is just a much a tax, as council tax, for people without an income.

Until we have a 'right to build', then it will be a tax.

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...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 243 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.