Landlords should have their benefits cut. Abolish housing benefit

[chem1st]

And in the intervening two years what would you do? And how would you pay for the 4 million homes, assuming that is even enough? And where would you put them? And how would you ensure that you aren't building a new batch of sink-hole estates that no-one actually wants to live in? Would you put the houses where there are jobs but little to no affordable housing (which pretty much means the already over-crowded southeast) or where there is a population that rents but no jobs to ever get them out of the rental trap? What about villages where locals are frequently priced out of the housing market? How would you stop people moving into these houses then using the right to buy to take them out of the pool of social housing?

 

Any repossessed house is seized from the bank by the state and used temporarily to function as social housing. Factories are constructed and house building begins, houses can be stacked and stored on site and also exported via boat.

Houses are built mainly in the industrial north near ports.

 

Money isn't an issue, sterling can be printed or metals laid down as collateral for a stamp script..

 

Social housing doesn't have to be free, just affordable.

 

Some £20 a week rent.

 

Right to buy removed/ houses sold at profit and replaced.

[Flowersfade]

They can't afford to, so the rent must be reduced.

 

The landlord might not be able to pay his mortgage, who gives a flying F.

 

Bankrupt them and while were at it, increase the length of bankruptcy back up to 7 years rather than the paltry 12 months it is now.

 

Let the bank sell the property at a loss and bear the brunt of the loss as punishment for immoral lending.

 

Bloody hell calm down, Landlords work hard for their money just the same as anyone else if they want to let it's their prerogative.Who the hell are you say they deserve to become bankrupt?.If people saved up and were reasonable with their expenditure there would be no need for first time buyers and others to be priced out of the market etc.Personally in my property I would never allow anyone on dsa etc to rent we learnt the hard way.

[Flowersfade]

You reckon

 

I've had the same landlord for 15 years. As L/Ls go he's a decent sort. I had no problem moving in when I was unemployed and claiming H/B.

 

He won't take benefit claimants now. It's too much hassle. He prefers people who will pay regularly.

 

I don't think benefit claimants are at all a "cash cow"

 

Exactly my aunt had a problem where the tenants messed up the house caused thousands worth of damage and a big legal bill to evict the tramps.They claimed housing benefit and never paid the landlord.

[ricgem2002]

dont forget the scare stories in papers like the daily mail about immigrants getting paid stupidly large amounts for both housing and dole lol

so the stories like this are not true then http://www.newsoftheworld.co.uk/notw/news/43731/Pictures-from-inside-the-luxury-pound12-million-mansion-in-west-London-rented-by-Afghan-mum-of-seven-Toorpakai-Saiedi-on-benefits.html

[discodown]

HMOs have become far more profitable, and a large chunk of the population (under 35s), are being set up to live in them.

You're scaremongering again. HIMO's are for under 25's and not under 35's. They may never be for under 35's.

 

so the stories like this are not true then http://www.newsoftheworld.co.uk/notw/news/43731/Pictures-from-inside-the-luxury-pound12-million-mansion-in-west-London-rented-by-Afghan-mum-of-seven-Toorpakai-Saiedi-on-benefits.html

They are but they are few and far between and have you noticed they only ever happen in London? In Sheffield where LHA rates are set at a far more realistic level you never hear of stories like this. They also shouldn't ever happen again now LHA caps have been set.

 

While everyone is blowing their top and chem1st has got people biting admirably well its worth reminding people actually how housing benefit actually works when you rent in the private sector. You can't just demand that the council pays your rent. There are caps and you will be paid depending on how many bedrooms your household needs. If you were to claim this month here are the rates http://www.sheffield.gov.uk/in-your-area/benefits/local-housing-allowance just click on "what are the current rates", they change most months. These rates apply to everyone and are dependent on your income so you aren't even guaranteed to get the full amount. Or rather your greedy, unscrupulous landlord isn't guaranteed to get the full amount.

 

While its all well and good saying that JSA should rise and HB should be abolished to give people choice about how they allocate their money chem1st has forgotten one thing.

 

There is a a fair portion of people on HB who lead what is delicately termed "chaotic lifestyles". By this it means prisoners, substance abusers, people on licenses, victims of abuse, people who need support, the very young, the very old, the borderline mentally ill and so on. People who are not necessarily good at managing their money and therefore who the state deems it easier to take away the burden of them paying their own rent so the state does it for them. That is one of the purposes of housing benefit. It removes temptation for substance abusers. It takes away the level of responsibility for the elderly. It helps the very young to establish themselves if they have to leave home before 18. Now i'm not saying the state is saintlike and altruistic in this but it does make a degree of sense.

[evildrneil]

Any repossessed house is seized from the bank by the state and used temporarily to function as social housing.

 

And what gives the state the right to do that? The bank or building society quite lawfully and legally owns the house that they have paid for until the mortgage on that property is repayed. Are you advocating theft?

 

Factories are constructed and house building begins, houses can be stacked and stored on site and also exported via boat.

 

So you're advocating a pre-fab approach like that tried after the war? That's short term at best and limits the size of the house that you can build. The typical UK pre-fab didn't have a great take up due to it being too small for a family but too big for a single person. You're also going to be producing houses with a limited life as they are not as robust as a traditional brick and mortar construction. Pre-fab houses still require services and foundations to be produced so you're going to be paying a sizeable chunk of the cost of a traditional house for something that doesn't have the flexibility, durability or energy efficiency of that house.

 

Houses are built mainly in the industrial north near ports.

 

So you can have one if you live near a port? How are you going to mass transport these things from ports to where they are actually wanted? Unless you are looking at units the size of a shipping container (i.e. too small for a family) they are going to be a nightmare to move around.

 

Money isn't an issue, sterling can be printed or metals laid down as collateral for a stamp script..

 

Of course money is an issue! If you start printing money then the currency becomes devalued and inflation goes crazy. You may have some (short term) affordable housing, unfortunately the people living in them - and everywhere else - can't afford food or power because you've screwed the economy to build them!

 

Social housing doesn't have to be free, just affordable.

 

Some £20 a week rent.

 

Which will probably not cover the upkeep of the houses, the ground rent, the building insurance etc. etc. etc. so you're not only going to be out of pocket and have screwed the economy to build these houses but you're also going to have to pay for upkeep out of your now worthless money.

 

Right to buy removed/ houses sold at profit and replaced.

 

Selling houses at a profit? Isn't that what you've been railing against?

[Cyclone]

Landlords should have their benefits cut.

They don't get any benefits.

I welcome the cuts made to housing benefit, but the cuts did not go far enough.

You moaned about them bitterly.

 

Housing benefit must be abolished completely.

Leaving the unemployed living where and paying how?

 

The unemployed have become cash-cows for the class of benefit spongers a.k.a. landlords. It's not fair on the unemployed, nor is it fair on real workers.

 

These people do nothing productive whatsoever. They buy a property with debt, and let it out to the unemployed using the housing benefit to pay the mortgage. Housing benefit profits only the banks and parasitic landlords.

If it were that easy then big companies (who can borrow at a better rate) would be doing it.

It's just business after all, it's no different from buying goods wholesale using debt and selling it to people who pay using their income support. You can't blame the landlords for seeing an investment opportunity and taking the risk that they chose to take.

 

Housing associations are just as bad. Many of the people working for them, especially those at the top are not needed. Their salaries are ridiculous and undeserved.

 

Quite frankly the whole system is a sham. And a very many people are abusing it for profit. If you removed their income and shot them in the head the world be a better place.

Making a profit by providing a required service or goods is not abuse, it's business.

 

Now, maybe its a bit OTT to go around executing them, but removal of their un-earned income should be top priority, abolish housing benefit ASAP.

 

Increase the dole, and decrease taxes for workers.

I can see that your grasp of money management is very strong. How do you propose that the country afford to spend more and tax less?

Let people choose how much they would spend on accommodation, don't force them to spend massive proportions of their income on housing.

Who is to provide this accommodation that someone is choosing their own rate to pay for? It sounds like complete nonsense.

 

Housing benefit = £1 per day per person alive in Britain (and less than half of the British work).

 

If you work, £60+ a month you pay in taxation for the housing benefit system, all it does is set a minimum rent level and guarantees parasites an income. It is a morally repulsive benefit.

You don't actually have a better solution though...

 

Housing benefit is a tax on workers which is used to make them pay more for property.

It props up the very bottom end of the rental market, I don't think it's effects go much further than that.

[Cyclone]

Your rent will not fall below the level of housing benefit.

 

The property is only worth what someone will pay.

Sort of, you're talking about the demand side of the equation.

It's fairly inelastic though, people won't refuse to pay and move out to live on the street. So the rent is whatever the market is charging. If people struggle to pay it and houses start going empty, landlords sell up and the number of properties available falls.

 

An unemployed man with 50 JSA and 100 HB pays 100 in rent.

 

Workers must pay 100 or more, as the unemployed are forced to spend how ever much HB is on the rent.

Most working people aren't renting housing with a cost as low as that of an unemployed person though.

 

Without HB he could decide how much to spend on rent. And he wouldn't want to pay more.

No, he can't just 'decide', not unless he wants to live in a cardboard box.

 

Landlords would not get as much money, as the HB system would not guarantee it. Your rent would fall.

The bottom end might fall, I doubt it would have much affect on the rest of the market.

[Vague_Boy]

These people do nothing productive whatsoever. They buy a property with debt, and let it out to the unemployed using the housing benefit to pay the mortgage.

 

It would be much better if, rather than subsidize the property portfolios of private landlords, the money was used to build much needed new social housing.

 

Social housing that was exempt from the Right to Buy legislation for say, 50 years, giving time for building costs to be fully covered.

 

The problem is of course, is that many MPs own BTL properties (funded by you, the taxpayer) and have a vested interest in propping up the market.

[chem1st]

And what gives the state the right to do that? The bank or building society quite lawfully and legally owns the house that they have paid for until the mortgage on that property is repayed. Are you advocating theft?

 

With RBS and others it would simply be repossession by the state. They steal via usury anyhow.

 

 

 

So you're advocating a pre-fab approach like that tried after the war? That's short term at best and limits the size of the house that you can build. The typical UK pre-fab didn't have a great take up due to it being too small for a family but too big for a single person. You're also going to be producing houses with a limited life as they are not as robust as a traditional brick and mortar construction. Pre-fab houses still require services and foundations to be produced so you're going to be paying a sizeable chunk of the cost of a traditional house for something that doesn't have the flexibility, durability or energy efficiency of that house.

 

 

 

So you can have one if you live near a port? How are you going to mass transport these things from ports to where they are actually wanted? Unless you are looking at units the size of a shipping container (i.e. too small for a family) they are going to be a nightmare to move around.

26m^2 containers, can be stacked, and joined to others. 3 of them would be bigger than the average UK new build home.

 

 

Of course money is an issue! If you start printing money then the currency becomes devalued and inflation goes crazy. You may have some (short term) affordable housing, unfortunately the people living in them - and everywhere else - can't afford food or power because you've screwed the economy to build them!

Stamp scrip is different. We all ready printing 20 billion a year to pay the hosing benefit bill.

 

 

 

Selling houses at a profit? Isn't that what you've been railing against?

If the state does it at a small profit to reinvest money into housing, its far different than debt based B2L using hb tenants to pay the rent.