monkey69 Posted February 22, 2015 Share Posted February 22, 2015 Just remember as well that those like me on the work program DO WORK, is just we get the standard £73 a week for the 35 hours we work. Now isnt that a good deal for the companies that we work for?. Why employ a person on minimum wage which would cost them £238 a week. Instead we work our socks off and believe me we do otherwise we getsent back to the jobcentre then a Benefit sanction and have to go 15 days before we can apply for a hardship payment of £35 a week. (If were lucky) and there is absolutely no chance of being taken on after our time is up, it makes no economic sense for them to do so. So we spend our time being shipped from one position to another in a endless cycle. Until we fall foul of the job seeker agreement then our claim is labeled as doubtful then we have to appeal to a decision maker. Then we could face a whole 3 years unable to claim a single penny. No wonder people commit suicide. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anna B Posted February 22, 2015 Share Posted February 22, 2015 Just remember as well that those like me on the work program DO WORK, is just we get the standard £73 a week for the 35 hours we work. Now isnt that a good deal for the companies that we work for?. Why employ a person on minimum wage which would cost them £238 a week. Instead we work our socks off and believe me we do otherwise we getsent back to the jobcentre then a Benefit sanction and have to go 15 days before we can apply for a hardship payment of £35 a week. (If were lucky) and there is absolutely no chance of being taken on after our time is up, it makes no economic sense for them to do so. So we spend our time being shipped from one position to another in a endless cycle. Until we fall foul of the job seeker agreement then our claim is labeled as doubtful then we have to appeal to a decision maker. Then we could face a whole 3 years unable to claim a single penny. No wonder people commit suicide. That's disgusting. It's everything that's wrong with this uncaring government. And if it results in riots they'll wonder why... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 Seems to me that it'd be a lot easier just to raise the personal allowance to £15,000 or so. What is the point of taxing people then giving them some of it back? Sounds like you should vote lib dem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spilldig Posted February 24, 2015 Share Posted February 24, 2015 Sounds like you should vote lib dem. Nothing to do with who you vote for, it's just common sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ivan edake Posted February 24, 2015 Share Posted February 24, 2015 Isn't it true that with Universal Credit housing benefit is now going to be paid to the claimant instead of to the landlord?It was like this many years ago but so many people got into rent arrears that the sensible government at the time decided to pay it directly to the landlord.I can only see massive problems if a claimant gets a months pay and a months rent together,some will spend the lot and we shall get more evictions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spilldig Posted February 24, 2015 Share Posted February 24, 2015 Isn't it true that with Universal Credit housing benefit is now going to be paid to the claimant instead of to the landlord?It was like this many years ago but so many people got into rent arrears that the sensible government at the time decided to pay it directly to the landlord.I can only see massive problems if a claimant gets a months pay and a months rent together,some will spend the lot and we shall get more evictions. Indeed you are right. It was an absolute disaster last time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truman Posted February 24, 2015 Share Posted February 24, 2015 Isn't it true that with Universal Credit housing benefit is now going to be paid to the claimant instead of to the landlord?It was like this many years ago but so many people got into rent arrears that the sensible government at the time decided to pay it directly to the landlord.I can only see massive problems if a claimant gets a months pay and a months rent together,some will spend the lot and we shall get more evictions. I thought HB was already paid to the claimant? "Housing Benefit is normally paid to the claimant. However, under the current rules payments can be made directly to the landlord where: the claimant has rent arrears of 6 weeks or more (except where we consider it to be in the overriding interest of the claimant not to make direct payments); or an amount of Income Support/JSA (IB) payable to the claimant/partner is being paid direct to the landlord to meet rent arrears, or the claimant requests or consents to such an arrangement; or we consider it to be in the interest of the claimant; or benefit is owing to a claimant who has left a dwelling with rent arrears (the amount paid is limited to the amount of arrears)." From here http://www.nihe.gov.uk/index/advice/renting_privately/advice_landlords/benefits_and_claims_landlords.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truman Posted February 24, 2015 Share Posted February 24, 2015 I don't think they'll bother policing it like that. I think they'll simply put a time limit on 'top up' money, say it will only be paid for 6 months or something... Then they'll claim to have got more people into full time jobs, based on the drop in people claiming tax credits. Just like they've done with the unemployment figures. Don't you think they actually count the number of people in work Anna? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
speedway fan Posted February 24, 2015 Share Posted February 24, 2015 The only reason unemployment has gone down is 1) The government is massaging the figures, 2) claimants have got so fed up of being treated like dirt they have chucked off and are doing a bit of fiddle,and 3)when someone is sanctioned they are classed as employed.A genuine unemployed figure would be 5 or 6 million. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truman Posted February 24, 2015 Share Posted February 24, 2015 3)when someone is sanctioned they are classed as employed. Genuine question..is this your opinion or is it fact? If fact where do you get it from? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now