UK - The bedroom tax - The dead and living victims!

Many of us here in the uk have been affected by this cruel system, for some it got so bad they've commited suicide! I myself had to go to court to keep hold of my home, so I know what its like to be threatened with being forcibly made homeless!

Today its been revealed that people who've been living in their home for more that 17 years should not have been affected by this cruel system.
I am one of those people! But I'm still here, but what about those that have died because of this! What about the elderly forced to move away from their families, what about the sick who needed a spare room for their medical equipment but were forced to move to smaller homes?

People have died! People have been made homeless! Peoples lives have been turned upside down!

I want to know is whats going to happen to those who enforced this cruel system without even bothering to check the rules and regulations? What will happen to those people who took us to court without bothering to check that it was even legal to do so? What will happen to those who caused people to commit suicide?

I want to see ALL of these people hauled up before a judge to explain why they never bothered to check that what they were doing was even legal!!
I want to see them punished for causing the deaths of INNOCENT VICTIMS!!!

Grrrrr I'm friggin angry! I WANT BLOOD!

Emerging story can be read here

VoidHawk
Grrrrr I'm friggin angry! I WANT BLOOD!

But on the other hand, you get given a free house bigger than you really need,
so you've got that going for you.

alfa1

VoidHawk
Grrrrr I'm friggin angry! I WANT BLOOD!

But on the other hand, you get given a free house bigger than you really need,
so you've got that going for you.

Its NOT FREE, where'd you get that from?
Bigger than I need? I agree it is, and two years before this cruel law was introduced I placed myself on the transfer list in the hope of swapping for something smaller, and I'm STILL here!

reply to post by VoidHawk


That doesn't sound good. Sorry for those who have suffered or died... died?

The bedroom tax affects 660,000 housing benefit claimants living in social housing.

Could you give us an abbreviated version of how this works across the pond? How does someone qualify for this benefit, how much do you pay for rent, etc? Thanks, just trying to get a better understanding. I've read about this tax before and it didn't sound very compassionate.

I have no idea why .... but from the age of becoming independent and responsible for

myself, I could not see any reason in paying rent till I died, and living where I could

afford, without the choice of area or quality in my immediate surroundings and being

relatively dependent on the whims of another (landlord or social housing)

whether the rent went up OR (As in this case whether I had an extra bedroom or two)


My theory was .... that what ever happened and however hard it was, (and many

times it was a struggle) I would always have a roof over my head, the ability

to keep warm (with blankets if I couldn't afford heating) I could eat cheaply and if I

was ever that hard up that I couldn't afford the basics - family or friends

would always find me a sandwich!


You pay a mortgage for 25/30 years then you are rent free for your old age, not

needing to pay rent now makes my pension go further. Of choice I do have a

spare room that maybe I could very easily do without, to which I rightly feel

entitled ... it was bought and paid for with my blood sweat and tears.

One day (and it may not be too far away) I will sell my home/house and down size

out of necessity but it will be my choice because I have planned for it.

At that time it will also be my fourth move ....

# First was a small two bedroomed flat...

# Second a three bedroomed semi ...

# Third (now) a two bedroomed bungalow

# And finally a one bedroomed studio type flat ( leading to the cemetery ... LOL.)

Bassago
reply to post by VoidHawk

 

That doesn't sound good. Sorry for those who have suffered or died... died?

The bedroom tax affects 660,000 housing benefit claimants living in social housing.

Could you give us an abbreviated version of how this works across the pond? How does someone qualify for this benefit, how much do you pay for rent, etc? Thanks, just trying to get a better understanding. I've read about this tax before and it didn't sound very compassionate.

Died! Yes, many have commited suicide over this, something thats played down by the msm.

I know some people around the world dont quite "get" the way it works in the uk so I'll try to explain.

After ww2 the british people started rebuilding the uk. It was decided that everyone ought to be entitled to a decent home with decent living conditions. Across the uk we built millions of good quality homes. These homes were owned by the local authority and rented out to those that needed them. Rent charges were low because this wasnt about profit.

We also built the National Health Service, and this gave EVERYONE access to FREE health care, it didn't matter who you were or what was wrong with you, everyone could go to a doctor/hospital and get free medical treatment.
We also built the Department of Health and Social Security. This system ensured that the unemployed, the elderly, the sick and disabled received a small income that enabled them to survive, and it ensured they could pay their rent.
All children were entitled to a free bottle of milk every day and parents received a payment known as Family allowance, this was based on how many children you had.

To put it in a nutshell, we built a system that ensured there was no more homelesness, no more poverty, and free health care for everyone. We were a civilised country!
It was all paid for through national insurance stamps. Anyone in employment paid part the cost of the stamp, the rest of the cost was paid by the employer. Because the entire system was NOT based on making a profit the cost of the stamp was very small. The employee had the cost of the stamp automaticaly taken from their wages, and the employer didn't mind the small amount that they contributed because it meant they had a healthy work force. The system worked very well for many decades.

Then along came The Milk Snatcher, aka Thatcher!
Children lost their free bottle of milk, Councils were prevented from using the money they collected as rent to maintain the housing stock, and Social security payments were severely being reduced and people were living in poverty again.

When the housing stock was in serious need of repair (because the government wouldnt allow the coucils to spend the rent money) we saw the emergence of The Housing Associations. These companies were able to buy up the housing stock for pennies on the pound (thats why the government prevented the spending of the rent money).
They repaired the houses and rocketed the rent charges. Something else they did was to take away the tennants SECURE tennancy agreement and replace it with an Assured agreement. The difference? A secure agreement meant the tennant had the right to live in their home for life! the assured agreements removed that right.

I know some of this will seem quite alien to people in other countries, but its the way we lived in the uk. We all paid a little and we all recieved a home, social security, and free health care, isn't that what we should expect in a civilised country?

Since the days of milk snatcher, every successive government has continued to attack the systems we set up to protect the poor, and this latest government has again attacked the very poorest with the introduction of the bedroom tax. What this means is, If you have a spare bedroom in your home then those living on benefit will have their benefit reduced. Its reduced so much that the tennant cannot afford the payment for the spare room and so they go into arrears. Because they lost their Secure Tennancy this means they can be evicted, and they are! Their home will be allocated to a familly vetted by the housing association and most likely want to buy it. Big bucks is earnt by everyone, and the poor tennant is on the street.

Every person who continues to vote for the scumbags responsible for this, is imo, just as guilty as those in power. You people really need to wake up because you are the next victims!

eletheia

I could eat cheaply and if I was ever that hard up that I couldn't afford the basics - family or friends would always find me a sandwich!

What if their in the same starving boat as you?
Please take off your blinkers!
Please read my post above this one for your answers.

Just for those who feel they need to complain about people on bennefits.

We still have the bennefit that used to be called Fammily Allowance, today its called Chilld Bennefit.
Go ask any govenment official, any company executive, any milionaire, this question.. Do you claim child bennefit?

Yes they do, even priministers have been claiming it! A bennefit meant to help the poor, and its claimed by the very wealthiest in our society, and its those same people who shout "bennefit scroungers"

reply to post by VoidHawk




Then we would have to share the sandwich ....

It is necessary to cut one's coat according to the cloth ...

I have been out of work and when there were NO benefits! so I am not without

experience

I have fed my kids and gone without saying I had eaten earlier

I've had to put cardboard in my only pair of shoes to go for an interview

Watch closely when they interview these people claiming to be so hard up there's

always a cigarette around .... that's like setting light to a fiver!

When I was working and driving through private housing estates and council estates,

which estates do you think had the most large sky dishes outside almost every house??

Well it wasn't the private estates.

I really dont quiet understand the mentality of some in this country.

Thanks to year of use getting in debt (both bankers, the government and individuals) we are facing some tough economic times. Now not as tough as say Ireland or Greece but tough. So some taxs have to be raised and some cats have to be made.

I dont have a problem with be bed room tax.

if you get a favorable rent for having a council home on top of all the benefits you get but you have two extra rooms then i think you should get taxed. Our current system of social welfare is at breaking point and something needs to change. That means those on benefits also need to take a little bit of the pinch like the rest of us.

I hate to sound so harsh and perhaps snooty.

But you have had a pretty good deal for quite some time on the back of taxes others have had to pay out. Where as I had to work really hard, get a good job, save every penny and buy my own home. No Bedroom Tax for me but i still have to pay out loads of tax every month so you can sit in a house that is bigger than mine.

you having to pay a little more or get a little less, just like the rest of us.... boo hoo

eletheia
reply to post by VoidHawk

 

Then we would have to share the sandwich ....

You choose to ignore that there may not be a sandwich.

eletheiaI have fed my kids and gone without saying I had eaten earlier

So what kept you alive? three days without food and we start to become ill. Like many, you claim to know what its like but you clearly dont, as evidenced by saying you went without to feed your children. So how long did you go without? Did you go without food for six months while trying to find work?

eletheia
When I was working and driving through private housing estates and council estates,

which estates do you think had the most large sky dishes outside almost every house??

Well it wasn't the private estates.

So, did you stop and knock on every door and say "Excuse me, have you bought this house from the council/association after they through out the tennant?" Did you do that? Because if you didn't your just spouting corporate garbage designed to create divisions!

reply to post by VoidHawk



I am really so tired of hearing that old chestnut "Thatcher the milk snatcher"


The 'free' third of a pint of milk for school children was introduced to supplement the

calcium intake of children along with 'free' concentrated orange juice from the clinic

to supplement their intake of vitamin 'c' at the time of food rationing - You do

remember food rationing don't you?


Rations per person per week

1 egg ...

4 oz bacon ...

4 oz margarine ...

2 oz butter ...

2 oz tea ...

1 oz cheese ...

8 oz sugar ...

6 oz sweets LOL

Some 24 points per person which could be exchanged for tinned goods, jams, biscuits,

cereals, dried eggs, dried fruit etc.

Meat was a joint OR the equivalent in chops ribs sausages etc.


Makes the overflowing trollies in supermarkets these days seem positively excessively

voracious!


By the early 70's when the school milk was stopped the necessity for it had become

somewhat obsolete in the need to supplement the vitamins and dietary

requirements of children, indeed that was probably when obesity started to

creep in!! Anyway as I remember most kids didn't or wouldn't take the milk ... but

seemingly when it was stopped, it suddenly became a depravation!!! LOL.....

VoidHawk

Bassago
reply to post by VoidHawk

 

That doesn't sound good. Sorry for those who have suffered or died... died?

The bedroom tax affects 660,000 housing benefit claimants living in social housing.

Could you give us an abbreviated version of how this works across the pond? How does someone qualify for this benefit, how much do you pay for rent, etc? Thanks, just trying to get a better understanding. I've read about this tax before and it didn't sound very compassionate.

Died! Yes, many have commited suicide over this, something thats played down by the msm.

I know some people around the world dont quite "get" the way it works in the uk so I'll try to explain.

After ww2 the british people started rebuilding the uk. It was decided that everyone ought to be entitled to a decent home with decent living conditions. Across the uk we built millions of good quality homes. These homes were owned by the local authority and rented out to those that needed them. Rent charges were low because this wasnt about profit.

We also built the National Health Service, and this gave EVERYONE access to FREE health care, it didn't matter who you were or what was wrong with you, everyone could go to a doctor/hospital and get free medical treatment.
We also built the Department of Health and Social Security. This system ensured that the unemployed, the elderly, the sick and disabled received a small income that enabled them to survive, and it ensured they could pay their rent.
All children were entitled to a free bottle of milk every day and parents received a payment known as Family allowance, this was based on how many children you had.

To put it in a nutshell, we built a system that ensured there was no more homelesness, no more poverty, and free health care for everyone. We were a civilised country!
It was all paid for through national insurance stamps. Anyone in employment paid part the cost of the stamp, the rest of the cost was paid by the employer. Because the entire system was NOT based on making a profit the cost of the stamp was very small. The employee had the cost of the stamp automaticaly taken from their wages, and the employer didn't mind the small amount that they contributed because it meant they had a healthy work force. The system worked very well for many decades.

Then along came The Milk Snatcher, aka Thatcher!
Children lost their free bottle of milk, Councils were prevented from using the money they collected as rent to maintain the housing stock, and Social security payments were severely being reduced and people were living in poverty again.

When the housing stock was in serious need of repair (because the government wouldnt allow the coucils to spend the rent money) we saw the emergence of The Housing Associations. These companies were able to buy up the housing stock for pennies on the pound (thats why the government prevented the spending of the rent money).
They repaired the houses and rocketed the rent charges. Something else they did was to take away the tennants SECURE tennancy agreement and replace it with an Assured agreement. The difference? A secure agreement meant the tennant had the right to live in their home for life! the assured agreements removed that right.

I know some of this will seem quite alien to people in other countries, but its the way we lived in the uk. We all paid a little and we all recieved a home, social security, and free health care, isn't that what we should expect in a civilised country?

Since the days of milk snatcher, every successive government has continued to attack the systems we set up to protect the poor, and this latest government has again attacked the very poorest with the introduction of the bedroom tax. What this means is, If you have a spare bedroom in your home then those living on benefit will have their benefit reduced. Its reduced so much that the tennant cannot afford the payment for the spare room and so they go into arrears. Because they lost their Secure Tennancy this means they can be evicted, and they are! Their home will be allocated to a familly vetted by the housing association and most likely want to buy it. Big bucks is earnt by everyone, and the poor tennant is on the street.

Every person who continues to vote for the scumbags responsible for this, is imo, just as guilty as those in power. You people really need to wake up because you are the next victims!

Thanks for the explanation Void.......good thread and the above post says it all.

Reminds me of home here in Canada, they are taking the pension age up to 67 fro 65 years old, but they give themselves perks unheard of.

Its now take take take and screw you all that is the norm.

Regards, Iwinder

"QUOTE" from Iwinder

I know some people around the world dont quite "get" the way it works in the uk so I'll try to explain.

After ww2 the british people started rebuilding the uk. It was decided that everyone ought to be entitled to a decent home with decent living conditions. Across the uk we built millions of good quality homes. These homes were owned by the local authority and rented out to those that needed them. Rent charges were low because this wasnt about profit.
We also built the National Health Service, and this gave EVERYONE access to FREE health care, it didn't matter who you were or what was wrong with you, everyone could go to a doctor/hospital and get free medical treatment.
To put it in a nutshell, we built a system that ensured there was no more homelesness, no more poverty, and free health care for everyone. We were a civilised country!
It was all paid for through national insurance stamps. Anyone in employment paid part the cost of the stamp, the rest of the cost was paid by the employer. Because the entire system was NOT based on making a profit the cost of the stamp was very small. The employee had the cost of the stamp automaticaly taken from their wages, and the employer didn't mind the small amount that they contributed because it meant they had a healthy work force. The system worked very well for many decades.

I know some of this will seem quite alien to people in other countries, but its the way we lived in the uk. We all paid a little and we all recieved a home, social security, and free health care, isn't that what we should expect in a civilised country?

Regards, Iwinder









REPLY TO IWINDER

And it worked till there were more people taking OUT of the system

and there were fewer people paying INTO the system


BOTTOM LINE >>>>

You can never take out more than you put in anywhere ....

eletheia

"QUOTE" from Iwinder

Actualy you were quoting me, not Iwinder!

And you're right about more and more taking out the system, but its not the poor! Its the extremely rich greedy scumbags at the top!
For example: The extremely rich, from PRIMINISTERS TO CORPORATE EXECUTIVES all claim the Child support benefit!
Thats right, those rich scumbags that your here trying to defend CLAIM BENEFITS.

Dont you think that anyone earning that kind of money and still claiming benefits IS a scumbag? Please answer that!

Wouldn't it be a good idea if we stopped benefits to anyone earning more than 30k a year and fed that money directly back to the disabled so they can have a little dignity and comfort?

VoidHawk

eletheia

"QUOTE" from Iwinder

Actualy you were quoting me, not Iwinder!

And you're right about more and more taking out the system, but its not the poor! Its the extremely rich greedy scumbags at the top!
For example: The extremely rich, from PRIMINISTERS TO CORPORATE EXECUTIVES all claim the Child support benefit!
Thats right, those rich scumbags that your here trying to defend CLAIM BENEFITS.

Dont you think that anyone earning that kind of money and still claiming benefits IS a scumbag? Please answer that!

Sorry about that, but you've put me right now lol...

I Have to agree with you the system sucks, but I suppose that happens when you

have a one size fits all system. There are many who seem to get short changed

and others who get away with stuff. Take my case, I get my full pension the way

it was worked out and a friend got a couple of £'s less than me per week as her

contributions into the system were less than mine. She made an application for

benefits, and she was awarded the full pension which brought her up to the same

as mine. For me that was fine BUT (now this is where it becomes unfair)

because she receives what is termed "benefit" she no longer has to pay council tax

(which I have to) So in that one move she now gets the same as me but is now

£1,000 per year better off than me ... Is that fair


Back to what you said about the 'child allowances' No I don't think it's fair and if

I was in that position I would give mine away in 'random acts of kindness' but it

is an entitlement ..... However although some of the rich will take it

and keep it I would like to think the majority wouldn't as it would only be

'loose change' to them! ....

VoidHawk
Wouldn't it be a good idea if we stopped benefits to anyone earning more than 30k a year and fed that money directly back to the disabled so they can have a little dignity and comfort?

Not just the disabled. Right now, there are more working people in receipt of benefits than there are non-working and retired.

For now, the retired are cushioned but Osborn has said pensioners should not consider themselves exempt from the next round of austerity cuts? He has said some benefits for pensioners are to be means tested meaning well off pensioners will be the first hit. Another thin end before the wedge is looted?