Housing Benefit Scandal, self created?

[best sheff]

The Tories are now capping housing benefit to £400.00 a week. "Yes I did say £400.00 a week" In the budget it was annouced that the bill for housing benefit is costing the country more then the police force and I forget the other example.

 

The point of this tread is that it was the Tories themselves that created the housing benefit problem? Council houses where sold-off to owners. But many very clever people, (jammy sods) had the foresight to-buy-to-rent. So now we have ex-council houses owned by what they term, 'Private Landlords' who rake millions, through charging almost double weekly rent rates, than the original council would have charged for them if still owned them.

 

So in my rather un-educated point of view, the Government initially saved millions on first selling these council houses, but are now many years down the line having to subsidise families' with the vast amount of rent that these private landlords charge. So in theory the Government are still paying for these council houses once sold-off to save the economy millions, but are now just lining the private landlords pockets at the expense of the economy. In other words, "this policy as come back to bite them in the arse"?

 

But the madding fact about this is that the Tories don't mention this at all, in fact quite the opposite. They like to blame the low-paid and the unemployed, who in reality don't stand a chance of paying the private landlords' rates.

 

I know this tread won't go anywhere and probaly be ridiculed. Also I'll probably have a few suggestive names thrown at me. But this is my limited (I do stress, 'limited) understanding of the vast problem of housing benefit.

 

I am open to criticism and opinions, just be kind and don't tell me where to go.

[boyfriday]

The Tories are now capping housing benefit to £400.00 a week. "Yes I did say £400.00 a week" In the budget it was annouced that the bill for housing benefit is costing the country more then the police force and I forget the other example.

 

The point of this tread is that it was the Tories themselves that created the housing benefit problem? Council houses where sold-off to owners. But many very clever people, (jammy sods) had the foresight to-buy-to-rent. So now we have ex-council houses owned by what they term, 'Private Landlords' who rake millions, through charging almost double weekly rent rates, than the original council would have charged for them if still owned them.

 

So in my rather un-educated point of view, the Government initially saved millions on first selling these council houses, but are now many years down the line having to subsidise families' with the vast amount of rent that these private landlords charge. So in theory the Government are still paying for these council houses once sold-off to save the economy millions, but are now just lining the private landlords pockets at the expense of the economy. In other words, "this policy as come back to bite them in the arse"?

 

But the madding fact about this is that the Tories don't mention this at all, in fact quite the opposite. They like to blame the low-paid and the unemployed, who in reality don't stand a chance of paying the private landlords' rates.

 

I know this tread won't go anywhere and probaly be ridiculed. Also I'll probably have a few suggestive names thrown at me. But this is my limited (I do stress, 'limited) understanding of the vast problem of housing benefit.

 

I am open to criticism and opinions, just be kind and don't tell me where to go.

 

 

I've not seen the story, but if it's right the cap will be a national one. £400 p/w wouldn't be an extravagant family property in the South East at all.

[Vague_Boy]

The point of this tread is that it was the Tories themselves that created the housing benefit problem?

 

The last government had 13 years to reverse Right to Buy and start building more council houses. They did nothing.

 

Oh there's was something about low-cost housing from Two-Jags fatty Prescott but that went horribly awry when they forgot to factor in the cost of the land. The low-cost houses ended up selling for £175,000! What a farce.

 

Go on http://www.theyworkforyou.com/ and see how many Labour and Tory MPs have properties that they rent out. Former socialist firebrand Michael Meacher has 5 rental properties!

 

Perhaps our current crop of politicians had something of a vested interest in both the housing and BTL bubbles?

 

 

They like to blame the low-paid and the unemployed, who in reality don't stand a chance of paying the private landlords' rates.

 

Why are rents so high? Because property prices are too high. And under whose watch did the house price boom occur?

 

Raising interest rates would have cooled the speculative bubble, except that the great genius Prudence McRuin didn't think it was a bubble (link).

 

All that "free money" people think they've gotten from their houses, it's going to have to come from somewhere y'know.

[willman]

Apart from local councils buying "corporate" sale private homes on estate - or repo's to you and me. Then sticking in council tennants at a higher rate than a council property probably.

[Wildcat]

It was under Thatcher and Major that my Mum's house went from a few thousand to a few hundred thousand.

[Wildcat]

I've not seen the story, but if it's right the cap will be a national one. £400 p/w wouldn't be an extravagant family property in the South East at all.

 

There is more to it than that. The bigger issue is the capping of LHA from a50% average value to a 30% one next year. There are also a range of other amendments that make it much worse than simply focussing on the £400 for a family figure.

[Grandad.Malky]

 

And under whose watch did the house price boom occur?

 

.

 

Yes the 80’s were tough for house owners weren’t they.

[willman]

It was under Thatcher and Major that my Mum's house went from a few thousand to a few hundred thousand.

 

It was under labour mine went from 30 to 180. Under maggie it went from 21 to 30 in 10 years.

[Grandad.Malky]

It was under labour mine went from 30 to 180. Under maggie it went from 21 to 30 in 10 years.

 

There is nothing in it

 

Halifax has been looking back over the past 50 years to find that the average cost of a UK home has increased by 237% (in real terms) since 1959.

 

The typical yearly rate of return of 2.7% exceeded the average rise in real earnings over the period, although house prices recorded their biggest increase in the 2000s when they put on 62%, marginally ahead of the 61% increase in the 1980s.

 

The worst performing decade for UK house prices was the 1990s when prices fell by 22% in real terms; however, over the past 40 years all regions of the UK have experienced house price increases ahead of average earnings.

[chem1st]

Instead of HB, claim LHA, pocket £15 per week or have your landlord up the rent.

If the LHA is not sufficient, claim DHP's to bring the LHA up to HB level.

If your a council, switch from HB to LHA, pay the extra administration costs and for the system changeover.

If your a working tenant, pay more, if on a low income, pay more, or claim HB/LHA/DHP's.

Either way, pay more, unless a landlord, if a landlord, charge more, receive more.

 

Consider in Sheffield alone enough people bid weekly for social housing to fill 20 'parkhills'.

 

100 parkhills are needed to clear the list. FTR parkhill was sold off to private developers, and partially bailed out! A single parkhill = £3million plus per year rent and £3million in JSA to be spent in the local economy (supermarket/British gas/water companies and on the bbc), that is assuming the worst case scenario of all tenants being on lower rate JSA and lower rate LHA, living on their own and not working.