View Single Post
Old 16-03-2015, 19:19   #38
nomadking
cf.mega poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Northampton
Services: Virgin Media TV&BB 350Mb, V6 STB
Posts: 8,295
nomadking has a bronze arraynomadking has a bronze arraynomadking has a bronze array
nomadking has a bronze arraynomadking has a bronze arraynomadking has a bronze arraynomadking has a bronze arraynomadking has a bronze arraynomadking has a bronze arraynomadking has a bronze arraynomadking has a bronze arraynomadking has a bronze array
Re: Oooh, look. Half a million more people claiming housing benefit under coalition.

Eligibility for Housing Benefit whilst employed does NOT RELY on the rent levels. It is assessed against income using something called the "Applicable Amount". Those amounts are set at benefits levels and therefore many who are earning even more than that can be eligible.
List of applicable amounts for 2015/16.
Eg Single claimant aged not less than 25 £72.40
4 kids would add 4x£66.33=£265.32


From DWP report of 2009(ie under LABOUR).
Quote:
3.6 The implementation of the Local Housing Allowance has also been accompanied by
higher than expected costs
due to factors such as changes in the size of benefit areas,
removing the ability of rent officers to exclude exceptionally high rents from benefit
calculations and increased numbers of people claiming Housing Benefit. In some high
priced areas, particularly the most expensive parts of major cities, Housing Benefit
customers may be able to access much more expensive accommodation than working
households not eligible for benefit. Some areas have also benefited far more than others
from the ability to keep a £15 excess.
The local housing allowance rates set by LABOUR were too generous and have dropped(50% down to 30%) dramatically. That drop(and other policies) couldn't happen overnight in 2010 and would therefore have taken time to see any effect.

A major reason for the increase in numbers is due to moving from home ownership, where HB is NOT payable, to renting, where it is. Graphs in a report show that the rate of increases in HB expenditure and employed claimants are roughly the SAME as in 2008, ie UNDER LABOUR. The 2008/09 to 2009/10 figures show a big rise in HB expenditure. Who was to blame for that? The %age of employed claimants rose from 11% to around 15% between November 2008 and mid 2010. Who was to blame for that? Take a wild guess.
nomadking is offline   Reply With Quote