Plain Talker Posted June 22, 2010 Share Posted June 22, 2010 Sorry if I've not grasped the difference. A quick question - if a person is living alone and on benefits in a family sized (3+ bedroomed) council house, which are they entitled to - LHA or HB. I'm still involved in housing (voluntarily) and I've not heard of an existing tenant in the above situation having to move because their rent isn't all covered. I thought that up to "just", the rents were covered by "fair-rent" legislation. Council rents (and Housing Association rents) are, by definition, considered "fair rents". A (private) landlord could apply to register his rent as a "fair rent". If the rent was accepted as being a "fair rent", then Housing Benefit would, generally cover all of it. (or the total sum of the proportion the tenant would be entitled to according to their low-earnings, if they were on a poor wage) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
discodown Posted June 22, 2010 Share Posted June 22, 2010 I thought that up to "just", the rents were covered by "fair-rent" legislation. Council rents (and Housing Association rents) are, by definition, considered "fair rents". A (private) landlord could apply to register his rent as a "fair rent". If the rent was accepted as being a "fair rent", then Housing Benefit would, generally cover all of it. (or the total sum of the proportion the tenant would be entitled to according to their low-earnings, if they were on a poor wage) LHA replaced fair rents Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Titanic99 Posted June 22, 2010 Author Share Posted June 22, 2010 What does your pedantry have to do with anything? Right now in Sheffield HA properties are covered by LHA. Can we at least agree on that? It certainly doesn't, have a look at the LHA document on the linked SCC website and you'll see this confirmed. http://www.sheffield.gov.uk/in-your-area/benefits/local-housing-allowance Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tezza86 Posted June 22, 2010 Share Posted June 22, 2010 No that is not the case, they intend limiting the level of Housing Benefit to a figure that is appropriate to the size of your household. Here is what they said. "It will also be cut for people of working age who are in larger homes than their family size warrants" So if they apply the same principles as with Local Housing Allowance a single person will be allocated the level for one-room, so if their rent is higher than that amount they will have to make the deficit up. I can't honestly see how they will implement this without making the poorer population even poorer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plain Talker Posted June 22, 2010 Share Posted June 22, 2010 I can't honestly see how they will implement this without making the poorer population even poorer. Hmm, so much for their "we'll protect the poor", eh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donuticus Posted June 22, 2010 Share Posted June 22, 2010 I can't honestly see how they will implement this without making the poorer population even poorer. LHA seems to be doing a fine job. They look around find the average rent for property type and then decide that is the maximum they will allot to someone. As someone has said the max in Sheffield for a single person over 25 is £92pw if you want somewhere more expensive then you have to pay the difference yourself. Seems that the Tories are just carring on this scheme. It depends how they work out the maximum amount they are willing to pay per room. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tezza86 Posted June 22, 2010 Share Posted June 22, 2010 By poorer I dont mean people that sit on their arses claiming benefits because they can't be arsed to work I mean the people that have a genuine reason for been unable to work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ms Macbeth Posted June 22, 2010 Share Posted June 22, 2010 Council property is covered by HB not LHA so a single person living in a 4 bed house would get their rent covered Thanks for the clarification. I just wanted to point out that rent would be paid by HB, yet, if a person in the same financial situation were in private housing they would either have to contribute part of the rent, or find somewhere cheaper as the LHA wouldn't pay for a property that is considered too big. Fair? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tezza86 Posted June 22, 2010 Share Posted June 22, 2010 LHA seems to be doing a fine job. They look around find the average rent for property type and then decide that is the maximum they will allot to someone. As someone has said the max in Sheffield for a single person over 25 is £92pw if you want somewhere more expensive then you have to pay the difference yourself. Seems that the Tories are just carring on this scheme. It depends how they work out the maximum amount they are willing to pay per room. Well if thats how they are going to work it then £92 pw is more than enough. I was talking about someone living in a home that has one extra room have it cut and having to make up the difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donuticus Posted June 22, 2010 Share Posted June 22, 2010 By poorer I dont mean people that sit on their arses claiming benefits because they can't be arsed to work I mean the people that have a genuine reason for been unable to work. It will only make a difference if they set the boundaries for payments too low. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.