Oooh, look. Half a million more people claiming housing benefit under coalition.

Originally Posted by nomadking

Did you read the previous post to yours? The trends in increases started UNDER LABOUR.

doesn't make it any less of a problem nor any less shamefull

Originally Posted by nomadking

Because that and MANY other LIES are forever being perpetuated. That is what I am against more than which party is responsible.

The Tories/Liberal Democrats have been in office 5 years now. Time is running out on giving them a free pass because of problems that started under Labour.

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by Damien

The Tories/Liberal Democrats have been in office 5 years now. Time is running out on giving them a free pass because of problems that started under Labour.

And what should/can be done about a move from home ownership to renting?

A DWP spokesman said: “The housing benefit bill was spiralling out of control in the years up to 2010, increasing by 50% in a decade and forecast to rise further. Housing benefit spend has now actually fallen and our actions will have saved the taxpayer up to £6bn by the end of this parliament.”

Originally Posted by nomadking

And what should/can be done about a move from home ownership to renting?

Increasing the supply so that the demand doesn't make home ownership unaffordable and put upward pressure on rent prices. This Government has been the same as the last Government in implementing policies designed to send house prices ever upwards.

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by Damien

Increasing the supply so that the demand doesn't make home ownership unaffordable and put upward pressure on rent prices. This Government has been the same as the last Government in implementing policies designed to send house prices ever upwards.

Home ownership was already unaffordable. People took a chance to make easy money by getting on the "housing ladder". Rent levels DO NOT affect the number of housing benefit claimants.

Originally Posted by nomadking

Home ownership was already unaffordable. People took a chance to make easy money by getting on the "housing ladder". Rent levels DO NOT affect the number of housing benefit claimants.

Well they can by making more people unable to afford their rent. Also home ownership wasn't always unaffordable. It may never have been easy but it wasn't unaffordable. If you saved, budgeted, and worked then most could afford it. Now house prices are increasing far quicker than inflation or wages pricing more and more people out of the market. The amount of people for whom home ownership is now simply impossible, not simply difficult, is rising rather than falling.

This was Labour's fault. It is now also the Conservatives/Liberals fault too. The difference is that last lot were voted out five years ago as voters lost confidence in them and now the reasonability for Governance and the issues we face is at the door of the current lot.

If people lose confidence in them then they'll be voted out too.

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by Damien

Well they can by making more people unable to afford their rent. Also home ownership wasn't always unaffordable. It may never have been easy but it wasn't unaffordable. If you saved, budgeted, and worked then most could afford it. Now house prices are increasing far quicker than inflation or wages pricing more and more people out of the market. The amount of people for whom home ownership is now simply impossible, not simply difficult, is rising rather than falling.

This was Labour's fault. It is now also the Conservatives/Liberals fault too. The difference is that last lot were voted out five years ago as voters lost confidence in them and now the reasonability for Governance and the issues we face is at the door of the current lot.

If people lose confidence in them then they'll be voted out too.

Being able to afford the rent has NOTHING WHATSOEVER TO DO with eligibility for Housing Benefit. When are people finally going to get that FACT.

As you said in the past people budgeted and saved. They no longer want to do that. Where did they live while they budgeted and saved for a deposit?

The situation started at least 2 years BEFORE 2011, eg 2008. As the report states, the situation seems to be improving.

[Ramrod]

Originally Posted by Damien

The Tories/Liberal Democrats have been in office 5 years now. Time is running out on giving them a free pass because of problems that started under Labour.

I disagree. The tories inherited the mess left by labour and a recession. It's going to take more than 5 years to dig us out from that pile of poo.

[RichardCoulter]

Originally Posted by Ramrod

True

---------- Post added at 19:40 ---------- Previous post was at 19:38 ----------

So if you had a flat that you were letting out and your tennant fell behind in their rent, you would be ok with that?
H
---------- Post added at 19:43 ---------- Previous post was at 19:40 ----------

How has the govt allowed rents to rise?

The Tories removed rent controls. This means that any landlord can charge whatever any tenant is willing (or has) to pay to secure a home.

Originally Posted by nomadking

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).
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.

By 'rent levels' I assumed that you meant the contractual rent, as opposed to the LRR or LHA. The contractual rent is still needed, indeed the software that is used won't assess a claim without it!

Originally Posted by nomadking

Did you read the previous post to yours? The trends in increases started UNDER LABOUR.

But the present Government said that they would be turning this around and reducing expenditure on benefits (including Housing Benefit). Instead they have managed to cause suffering to many vulnerable people AND increase the benefits bill AND are borrowing more money to pay for it. They are borrowing more in total than Labour and the actual portion of government debt apportioned to 'the defecit' has decreased mainly as a result of lower interest rates.

[Gary L]

Originally Posted by Ramrod

I disagree. The tories inherited the mess left by labour and a recession. It's going to take more than 5 years to dig us out from that pile of poo.

Labour will probably be in for 10 years starting May. surely that will be long enough.

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

The Tories removed rent controls. This means that any landlord can charge whatever any tenant is willing (or has) to pay to secure a home.



By 'rent levels' I assumed that you meant the contractual rent, as opposed to the LRR or LHA. The contractual rent is still needed, indeed the software that is used won't assess a claim without it!



But the present Government said that they would be turning this around and reducing expenditure on benefits (including Housing Benefit). Instead they have managed to cause suffering to many vulnerable people AND increase the benefits bill AND are borrowing more money to pay for it. They are borrowing more in total than Labour and the actual portion of government debt apportioned to 'the defecit' has decreased mainly as a result of lower interest rates.

The rent could be just £1/week and somebody could still NOT be eligible for Housing Benefit. The AMOUNT of rent has NO bearing on whether a claim is successful or not. Rents could double overnight and the number of people eligible to claim would NOT CHANGE. As far as Housing benefits are concerned, limits WERE imposed by Rent Officers.

Housing Benefits costs ARE GOING down.

A DWP spokesman said: “The housing benefit bill was spiralling out of control in the years up to 2010, increasing by 50% in a decade and forecast to rise further. Housing benefit spend has now actually fallen and our actions will have saved the taxpayer up to £6bn by the end of this parliament.”

Should all public borrowing have been stopped?
People complain enough about "austerity". Just imagine the cuts required to have zero borrowing. Public spending budgets for 2010/11 Would have been set by March 2010, ie UNDER LABOUR.

[RichardCoulter]

Originally Posted by nomadking

The rent could be just £1/week and somebody could still NOT be eligible for Housing Benefit. The AMOUNT of rent has NO bearing on whether a claim is successful or not. Rents could double overnight and the number of people eligible to claim would NOT CHANGE. As far as Housing benefits are concerned, limits WERE imposed by Rent Officers.

Housing Benefits costs ARE GOING down.
Should all public borrowing have been stopped?
People complain enough about "austerity". Just imagine the cuts required to have zero borrowing. Public spending budgets for 2010/11 Would have been set by March 2010, ie UNDER LABOUR.

I'm not interested in the political side of this debate, just facts and figures.

Housing Benefit expenditure has increased under this Government:

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2...eople-claiming

The actual amount of rent must be used when determining a HB claim. The actual amount of rents for properties is also relevant in deciding average rents etc as the Rent Officer and HB staff use this data for benefit restriction purposes.

My mention that Government borrowing has increased overall under this coalition was to counter the illusion that this Government likes to make regarding their borrowing and debt repayment records- this ties in with their false claim that, despite cuts that have hurt many people, the benefits bill has risen. They have failed on these electoral promises.

[Ramrod]

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

any landlord can charge whatever any tenant is willing (or has) to pay to secure a home.

That's an interesting way of looking at the world but the reality is that a landlord can only charge the market rate for the given location & quality of premises.
If the landlord charges much more than that he/she will find that they have no takers for their accommodation and it is left un-tenanted......costing them money every month.
If you look at rent levels, property purchase costs, tax & mortgage costs etc, you will find that there is very little wriggle room when it comes to what rent a landlord charges and their profit at the end of the month.
As landlords, we don't just think of a figure and charge it. We wouldn't stay in business very long

[RichardCoulter]

Originally Posted by Ramrod

That's an interesting way of looking at the world but the reality is that a landlord can only charge the market rate for the given location & quality of premises.
If the landlord charges much more than that he/she will find that they have no takers for their accommodation and it is left un-tenanted......costing them money every month.
If you look at rent levels, property purchase costs, tax & mortgage costs etc, you will find that there is very little wriggle room when it comes to what rent a landlord charges and their profit at the end of the month.
As landlords, we don't just think of a figure and charge it. We wouldn't stay in business very long

This was the ideology behind the Tory idea to remove rent controls ie the market will decide.

The problem is that they then went back on their initial promise that they would even be prepared to let the HB bill increase if (when) rents levels increased.

Slowly but surely, using various methods such as restricting the maximum amount payable to "a reasonable market rent" decided by the Rent Officer, the use of Local References Rents etc, the amount of HB for privately rented properties has been eroded.

This means that tenants either have to renegotiate a lower rent with the landlord or pay the shortfall out of monies intended for day to day living expenses and pushing them below the poverty line.

In reality, like you say, if landlords know that nobody else wants the accommodation or is willing to pay any more than HB will pay, then it's better to accept the lower rent than have it empty.

However, this often leaves benefit claimants with the dregs that nobody else wants.

The other problem is that if the market rents reach such a level beyond which HB will pay, you have what some regard as 'population cleansing' as people are forced out of certain areas.

Many Londoners who were born & bred there for generations (particularly those who find that they happen to be in an up and coming area) are being forced out by people who can afford the extortionate rents.

As this continues, there will be whole areas devoid of any poor people and whole areas where nothing but poverty exists.

I don't think that this is any good for society as a whole, particularly with all the hot air that polticians spout on about "The Big Society", " Social inclusion" etc.

The other problem is that if the market rents reach such a level beyond which HB will pay, you have what some regard as 'population cleansing' as people are forced out of certain areas.

but isn't the same true for those in employment?

My niece can't afford to rent in certain (quite a lot, actually) parts of London, and she has a reasonably paid job, so she has 40-50 minute tube journeys at the beginning and end of each day, but I don't hear anyone calling for support for people like her and her peer group....