Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
SarahBell

1 In 35 At Risk

Recommended Posts

Why are the mixing them up? Why not publish repo and eviction figures separately?

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2013/oct/12/homes-repossession-shelter-universal-credit

As many as one in 35 homes in some areas of England are at risk of being repossessed, according to the homelessness charity Shelter – the equivalent of one house on every street.

They get a bit confused though

The figures relate to possession claims, which are applications made to a court by lenders and landlords to repossess a house, the first step to get a possession order.

Under the universal credit system, which starts this month in around a quarter of Britain, the right for newly unemployed people to claim housing benefit for 13 weeks will be removed. This means a family paying a typical rent on a three-bedroom home would need to find an extra £100 a month or more as soon as they became unemployed, or risk losing their home.

"It's right we create a welfare system that's fair but government changes to the safety net are leaving ordinary families exposed."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why are the mixing them up? Why not publish repo and eviction figures separately?

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2013/oct/12/homes-repossession-shelter-universal-credit

As many as one in 35 homes in some areas of England are at risk of being repossessed, according to the homelessness charity Shelter – the equivalent of one house on every street.

They get a bit confused though

The figures relate to possession claims, which are applications made to a court by lenders and landlords to repossess a house, the first step to get a possession order.

Under the universal credit system, which starts this month in around a quarter of Britain, the right for newly unemployed people to claim housing benefit for 13 weeks will be removed. This means a family paying a typical rent on a three-bedroom home would need to find an extra £100 a month or more as soon as they became unemployed, or risk losing their home.

"It's right we create a welfare system that's fair but government changes to the safety net are leaving ordinary families exposed."

I take it the 13 weeks housing benefit is for rented accommodation only? And if it's a mortgage only the interest is paid after 13 weeks?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I take it the 13 weeks housing benefit is for rented accommodation only? And if it's a mortgage only the interest is paid after 13 weeks?

Little point in anyone unemployed and on Jobseeker's allowance taking temporary work up unti xmas then. Come December 26th, they'll be unemployed. back on JSA and homeless within 2 months because they no longer get HB.

I expect there's some hardship scheme somewhere, but it shows that the government's 'making work pay' is totally screwed up. Most work advertised seems to be temporary or part time, and the poor would effectively be punished afterwards for taking it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would probably be better to refuse and get sanctioned than take a part-time temporary job, then you could march into the job centre with family in tow and declare you haven't eaten for 3 days and are about to be evicted, I expect a crisis loan / hardship payment would swiftly follow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would probably be better to refuse and get sanctioned than take a part-time temporary job, then you could march into the job centre with family in tow and declare you haven't eaten for 3 days and are about to be evicted, I expect a crisis loan / hardship payment would swiftly follow.

Edit: actually it appears the 13 week wait for HB is just bringing it into line with the SMI (support for mortgage interest) 13 week waiting period. Which I suppose is fair

They pay the rent to your landlord be it a bank or BTL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I expect there's some hardship scheme somewhere, but it shows that the government's 'making work pay' is totally screwed up. Most work advertised seems to be temporary or part time, and the poor would effectively be punished afterwards for taking it.

Exactly- it makes no sense to take on any kind of short term or in insecure employment like zero hours because the collateral costs in terms of your position in the safety net are so high.

I am convinced that we will soon reach the point where a placement on a workfare scheme will offer more to the people at the bottom than a life of short term temp work on a zero hours contract- and since those on workfare will be working for their money even the stigma will be blunted.

Given the choice between a secure income from workfare and an insecure and only marginally higher income from a zero hours contract job it's seems to me that many will take that state sponsored employment as the less stressful option.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Add to that not being able to claim for the first seven days (why did they do that?) and being paid monthly in arrears many, many jobs become too risky to take. After a 6 month spell of unemployment it easily takes that again to get back on your feet, sorting out unpaid bills, arrears replacing worn out necessities...

This could make a 3 month contract to risky to take unless very well paid!

Edited by Tonkers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Little point in anyone unemployed and on Jobseeker's allowance taking temporary work up unti xmas then. Come December 26th, they'll be unemployed. back on JSA and homeless within 2 months because they no longer get HB.

There's a point instead. First of all you make some money. You'll never be worse off than being unemployed. It is a myths that if you take a job you lose all benefits. They'll be cut according to your earnings. And it's better to have something on your than an employment gap.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If, as implied, you're punished in during the initial period of unemployment/no income, and cushioned in the long term, then the system is completely back-to-front.

However, I'd be interested if someone could show or explain the exact mechanisms in place, and how they support or contradict the above. I wouldn't put it past the current government - they really are incompetent tossers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IMO how it should work and how it does work are two different realities, I don't believe for one minuite that families get the same treatment as single people when starting a new claim, It should be the same rules for everybody.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Odd that the article didn't reference this,

Latest figures from the Council of Mortgage Lenders show the numbers of home repossessions haven fallen 8 per cent over the past 12 months and are at their lowest level for six years.

Sure, many people are potentially at risk of repossession if their circumstances should change, but the fact is home repossessions are actually falling.

British newspapers, from both the left and the right, are such a crap source of information.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There's a point instead. First of all you make some money. You'll never be worse off than being unemployed. It is a myths that if you take a job you lose all benefits. They'll be cut according to your earnings. And it's better to have something on your than an employment gap.

The problem is that the system was not set up to deal with people moving in and out of work over short time spans- it's a nightmare to do this because making or re-establishing a claim is being made more and more difficult by the kinds of ad hoc rule changes being discussed on this thread.

As a result you could take a few days work and end up worse off because it then takes two weeks to get back on the benefits system- two weeks for which you have no income.

What I thought Universal Credit was supposed to achieve was the sort of seamless scenario you describe, where your benefits are tapered in more or less 'real time' as you take on more work, and could just as easily be reinstated when you lose hours or your temporary job ends.

But now IDS is talking about a manual system rather than using an IT solution this seems very unlikely to happen.

The joke is that we often hear the Tories in particular call for more 'flexible' labor- but for that to work you would require an equally flexible tax and benefits system- which they have not achieved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By flexible labour they mean a dilution of workers hard fought employment rights, a certain lobby group sits with MP's and lobbies for continual watering down of employment rights, "we have to remain competitive" is another line they like to trot out, 48hr working week opt out,

Shares in return for rights, 90 day statutory notice period cut to 45 days, compromise agreements & employees having to pay tribunal costs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I take it the 13 weeks housing benefit is for rented accommodation only? And if it's a mortgage only the interest is paid after 13 weeks?

The 13 week wait if for mortgage interest only -

http://www.turn2us.org.uk/information__resources/benefits/housing_costs/homeowner_housing_costs_help.aspx?page=16612

13 weeks with no HB would trigger the 2 months rent arrears and possible eviction for tenants,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 13 week wait if for mortgage interest only -

http://www.turn2us.org.uk/information__resources/benefits/housing_costs/homeowner_housing_costs_help.aspx?page=16612

13 weeks with no HB would trigger the 2 months rent arrears and possible eviction for tenants,

Re-reading the aticle, I'm more confused now.

It says "the right for newly unemployed people to claim housing benefit for 13 weeks will be removed."

Which interpreted as " the right for newly unemployed people to claim housing benefit for will not be available for the first 13 weeks".

But the more I think about it, the more I realise that the sentence in the article is meaningless nonsense.

HB is presently availabe from the moment you sign on (I believe). Is it the case that under UC, the right to receive HB after signing on would be delayed 13 weeks?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Under the universal credit system, which starts this month in around a quarter of Britain, the right for newly unemployed people to claim housing benefit for 13 weeks will be removed. This means a family paying a typical rent on a three-bedroom home would need to find an extra £100 a month or more as soon as they became unemployed, or risk losing their home.

"It's right we create a welfare system that's fair but government changes to the safety net are leaving ordinary families exposed."

http://www.turn2us.org.uk/information__resources/benefits/universal_credit/housing_costs/uc_tenants.aspx

Nothing about 13 weeks wait there is there?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   204 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

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.