Yeah, they can justify it as much as they like, but making personal profit out of expenses funded by the tax-payer should be a criminal offence ..... :mad:

Bankers and politicians ..... :yuk:

No that is incorrect, if there isn't a smaller property available you will have to pay the extra regardless. What about people who are in their 70s/80s/90s who have lived in their council homes all their lives, and might in some cases be living in a 3 bedroom property on their own? are they just supposed to up sticks at that time of life from a place that holds all their memories?

It only affects people of working age.

Not that that makes it any better..but pensioners arent affected by this.

In fairness to the Govt Cherie, those born before either September or October 1951 are exempt from the 'bedroom tax'.
However I have come across from others where people in their 70s and 80s have been approached by the housing organisation running council stock,being asked have they considered moving to a smaller property.
Somaybe some subtle persuasion will be attempted in time as to those pensioners.

However as you say why should people given secure tenancies, given an income they were told they had to have to live on after becoming genuinely sick or disabled or fallen on really hard times.
Then be told to claim housing benefit as a full entitlement because of their low income but later to have some jumped up Govt come along and remove those lawfully agreed entitlements stating they have to then pay any extra out of what they were told they had to have to live on.

That is what is totally wrong with this policy and also the fact that there are in no way the smaller properties available to move them to and as you say will likely have to pay the extra anyway while in the house they occupy now.
It is wrong, it will save very little and it should be scrapped completely.

Oh I see! I could see this working in a booming economy but bringing it in during a recession is just so harsh. Where are the jobs going to appear from to get people back to work?

Many people hit by this are already working. But according to the government it is their fault that their employers pay them a pittance...so they must be punished. Same as its the fault of the unemployed that they are unemployed :rolleyes:

My usual, I totally agree with you Vicky.

It amazes me that so many others cannot see how heartless and wrong this Govt's attitude is to these issues.

but apart from the monetary impact there is also the issue of people having to move from areas and communities that they know well to a different area altogether. Moving may add to the journey time to work and increase their travel costs so moving may not make any financial sense and they could still be worse off.

People have kinda been programmed to believe that anyone receiving benefits is a workshy layabout. I think this is why some people agree with all that the government is doing to them.

Rather than listening to the bull**** on the news and in the rags..I prefer a 'putting myself in their shoes' approach. Anyone could lose their job or become disabled tomorrow. Imagine having to survive on £71 per week while (now) having to pay part of your council tax, and £20/£30 rent on top of that too. And people saying its your own fault you have to find 20/30 quid..because you shouldnt have a 'spare' bedroom..even though there is nowhere for you to move to. Or the room isnt even spare

eg.

-Disabled people with rooms adapted for their disability are still classed as having a spare room
-Parents who have shared custody
-Couples sleeping in seperate rooms for medical reasons

Hello cherie :hug: They don't care is the short answer to your point, the attitude as the conservatives take root once more in power is less 'on your bike' and more 'foff and die'.

The family living next door to my parents just lost their mother she was a lovely lady in her 80's who had lived there for about 40 years with her son and daughter who still live there.

They were contacted by Derbyshire county council before she was even given a send off to be informed that they have to leave their home by a certain date because their mothers name was the one listed to the property and they have no right to be there anymore.

The normal policy has always been that the Tenancy can pass to next of kin who occupy the residence. This family has being told that is no longer the case since the property is now too large for the family.

The arseholes cant even let them bury their own mother before they try and evict them to free up a property.
They are seeking legal advice and have been advised to contest the decision which apparently is related to changes in rules related to the bedroom tax and size of property's.

Utter wankers with no concern for anyone. The extra stress they are putting this family through at what is a hard time is sickening.

Anybody that cant see the problems this is going to cause is either stupid or heartless the stories of it sending people over the edge are going to be frighteningly common i fear.

Wow... that is shocking, will they continue to cohabit or will they have to find them 2 1 bed properties? I might look into my tenancy and put my daughter on it if I can.

Who knows Kizzy its bloody heartbreaking they were so close to their mum and now this i fear for both of them. :(
Even if they get to stay they are bastards for even doing this to them for the sake of trying to reclaim their dead mothers bedroom.
It is definately worth looking into as i notice "next of kin" has now being changed to " a husband, wife or civil partner" in the rights of succession rules.

http://england.shelter.org.uk/get_ad...omeone_dies%3F

Joint tenancy sounds a good thing to do. (bearing in mind the money grubbers would soon get onto charging the bedroom tax for the still warm bed)
"If you have a joint tenancy with another person and the other tenant dies, you will be the 'surviving tenant', and you will automatically take over the tenancy."

Exactly,my thoughts Ninastar,don't believe that 's what drove her to that at all.

I think when you have someone who has near been stripped of a lot of status and then finds the law stripping them of further status, not because they have done anything legally wrong but only because they are sick,disabled,vulnerable or even just on a low income then that action against them would also remover much of their dignity.

Many people don't like admitting they cannot cope, they don't ask for help, they fear a no or sort yourself out attitude.

I don't say the Govt caused this suicide obviously but I do 100% believe in part this Govt policy caused so much anxiety and panic and fear of shame too that it was the final push to make this poor woman take such a desperate measure.
That policy and for that effect I do strongly believe this Govts. bedroom charge/tax was in a very great part a contributory factor in being the final push to this tragedy.

With regards to the money offered for each bedroom, it obviously varies from place to place. Here is it £1,000 a bedroom with removal costs, and that is not assured, there is nothing to say everyone who take up the offer of moving will get it. Also that money won't go far in replacing carpets etc; in moving. The upheaval itself away from possibly family and friends, and also the trauma of the move itself especially for the disabled has to be considered, plus the fact as has been pointed out, there are not going to be the properties available for all who require the smaller properties so they have to carry on paying the bedroom tax.

Not all councils are happy to implicate it, and one of my sisters told me where she is, there are some three bedroomed flats that where one bedroom is so small, the council not consider that as 3 bedroomed property so have taken it upon themselves to declare them 2 bedroomed to help those in the properties re the bedroom tax.

I feel sure in time a loophole of some kind will be found that the tax is wrong and it will be done away with. I respect the debates of all for and againsts this goverment policy on this site. At the end of day imo this is a greedy government who are down on the most needy and going the wrong way about a lot of their Policies. A Goverment that is happy to take from the poor and needy without any compassion, yet want a substancial payrise at the same time. The bedroom tax is the tip of the iceberg and as time goes on I can see a stand being made against this Government by many. IMO, there is no way whatsoever they will be our next Goverment, although a lot of damage will have been done.

A lot of blame can be laid at previous Governements feet, and in a lot of instances rightly so, but it doesn't mean each subsequent Goverment need carry on such mistakes, and if you keep going back to previous Goverments mistakes, it pretty much started around the Thatcher era, another Tory Government.

There, I have said my piece and will leave it at that. Just needed that little rant :D

Rant away Suze,really strong and good points.

I also cannot see this Govt being the next Govt either and I also really believe as this policy hits more and more,with more heard about the injustice and heartlessness of it that this will in fact be one of the major nails in this Govts. coffin.
I have said that since I started learning more as to it and hearing for myself from people affected by it.

Like the Woman of 55 I spoke to a few months ago, she has 2 Grandchildren a girl and a boy, she has had to move to a one bedroomed flat which also only has a sitting room, not of any great size itself either.
Her Grandchildren used to love going to stay with her in the Summer holidays and other school holiday periods too and she loved having them too.

Now they cannot because where she lives is not large enough to have children staying for any length of time not to say also unhealthy too.
Another impact this will have on people who have done not a thing wrong other than be in need of help and on very low incomes.

Disgusting and heartless!

RIP Stephanie :(

It's just like that idiot woman who killed herself after that AUstralian radio prank pretending to be the Queen and people blamed the radio DJ's. Gimme a break.

A bit harsh Lostalex but I respect your right to say it.

However in both cases we likely don't know what other pressures these women were under, the problem is that when someone is probably under great stress and worry that it just takes that final thing to happen that can be the tipping point over the final edge.

For me, maybe that Nurse was terrified of what may happen to her job, seeing that the Royal Family were involved.
Then this poor woman in the news today, clearly it seems she must have felt stuck in a downward spiral oif worry over money and how she may cope, once she realised the crippling financial loss she was to sustain because of this bedroom tax/charge,then for her that was clearly switch off time,she couldn't take anymore sadly.

WE are all different, some people cope with pressure,worry and stress okay but others don't and that makes them vulnerable,needing to be built up not brought down,in my opinion anyway.

Whether it was the only thing or the straw that broke the camels back, the fact is in both cases the deceased named the issues as the deciding factor in their final words. The problem to them was so large they saw no way over, past or through it, we cannot judge and suggest their fears were trivial.. that would be wrong.

I agree with everything you said. I'm just saying you can't blame a LAW (or a radio prank) for someone committing suicide, and for her to blame her choice to commit suicide on that is just ridiculous and makes no sense. Clearly the woman had serious psychological problems and needed help. If someone is THAT fragile, the family and friends should have stepped in LONG before it came to this.

That may well be correct,however often people depressed or under great stress don't ask for help, they should but they don't fearing a negative reaction.

Sadly too, where money is concerned people feel shame when they cannot cope and get into financial difficulties but they do their best to hide it rather than admit they have such a problem.

That is why this policy should have been far better planned and made with a lot more fairness and understanding to it too, rather than just bulldozered in across the board with little and even no idea as to how heavily or badly it would hit those affected by it.

That is the Govts fault, and if this policy was the final thing that pushed this Lady into thinking she could take no more then it was at the very least a contributory factor to the tragedy that then occurred.

She was likely going to be under the threat of losing the home she knew and likely felt safe in, she had very low income too,so knew no way could she get around that.
She would likely feel a failure and also expect great shame to come from her plight of trying to cope with such a loss of income.
An entitlement she was given, suddenly drastically cut, no appeal as to it either,all that is the Govt's fault,no one elses.

Yes she took her own life but all the more reason for those in power and the architects of this policy to re-think the policy, so no one else feels they have no way out as to coping with this heartless and discrimatory charge they have to pay, from the income they were originally told they had to have in law to live on.

I think her family could have helped her, maybe they could have paid the extra money that she was losing. After all she did raise them.

And maybe she could have been persuaded to move in with one of them, she was depressed, so maybe it wasn't the best thing that she was living alone.

It can be lot of money to find GypsyGoth though, I know of a Lady who is in a 3 bedroomed house and she has to pay an extra £23 each week.
Few people have those funds available to help and also while it is on paper a fair idea to move in with family, she was still losing her home that she knew and which she was tenant of.

Once you move in with others, even family, it is not 'your' home anymore it is theirs, it is likely to cause more depression and lower self esteem in the long run.

This policiy has only hit from April, maybe she hadn't realised the massive loss to her income it would bring, maybe she tried to hide her financial problems.

I fail to see the need for this policy at all, all that is needed is new houses being built,which in turn would cut unemployent and give a massive boost to the construction industry.
Far better than setting out to distress and penalise people simply for being in need and having a very low income.