Ross Miller
- Location: London Road, Dover
- Registered: 17 Sep 2008
- Posts: 3,707
26 October 2010
19:1676771Howard £400 a week seems a hell of a lot to me - that is more than I pay on my mortgage on a 4/5 bed house in London Road
"Dream as if you'll live forever. Live as if you'll die today." - James Dean
"Being deeply loved by someone gives you strength,
While loving someone deeply gives you courage" - Laozi
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
26 October 2010
20:1276779ross
most of the high rents relate to london and major cities, where landlords know that if the benefits agency do not cough up then there are a lot highly paid professionals willing to play that.
i said originally that it is ridiculous for the taxpayer to foot the bill for such rents, sadly the alternative seems to be dumping people in places that no-one else would pay rent for.
Guest 675- Registered: 30 Jun 2008
- Posts: 1,610
27 October 2010
09:5676822New guidelines for social housing will mean pushing the rents up to 80% of local average prices. In London this could mean weekly rents on a two bedroom flat going from £95 to £250. If the aim is to make massive cuts in public spending how is this increase going to a) encourage people back to work, and b) reduce the spending on housing benefit?
Politics, it seems to me, for years, or all too long, has been concerned with right or left instead of right or wrong.
Richard Armour
27 October 2010
09:5976824Ross Miller- Location: London Road, Dover
- Registered: 17 Sep 2008
- Posts: 3,707
27 October 2010
10:4276825Chris - housing benefit is nothing to do with getting or not getting work as it is also payable to people on low incomes. It will reduce housing benefit, particularly in major conurbations, though it will have the effect of forcing many people to move out of the centre of cities to the poorer suburbs because of the upper caps on benefit levels.
Bob you are right that this is an extreme example of the need for reform, but also we need to stop the council house for life and the council house as an inheritable asset. There needs to be regular checks on whether people still qualify for social, particularly council, housing and also the property should revert to the landlord on the death of the tenant(s); so as to ensure the most needy receive the housing they require.
"Dream as if you'll live forever. Live as if you'll die today." - James Dean
"Being deeply loved by someone gives you strength,
While loving someone deeply gives you courage" - Laozi
Unregistered User
27 October 2010
11:3976827Totally agree , Ross.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
27 October 2010
12:0476829looks like there may be some back tracking, whilst the limits will remain, it is now thought that councils will be given additional funds
to help those who fall outside the limit.
Guest 675- Registered: 30 Jun 2008
- Posts: 1,610
27 October 2010
12:1776833Bob, your example does raise the question of why the landlord was allowed to charge five times the local rate and why the council payed it without questioning it. The woman in the article is an example of a minority and is just the sort of rare point the press drag out to make a weak point on otherwise more complex issues. It is a bit like dragging out Fred West as an example of fostering.
Ross, while I do agree in the need for reform there is the danger that blanket legislation will harm the most vulnerable and yet still provide loopholes for those determined to beat the system. Half the battle of getting people back to work (apart from the obvious shrinking job market) is the perception that they will be better off. An unemployed couple with a child in a local school suddenly facing a rent hike of 150%, knowing that benefits are being capped and the nightmare of the paperwork involved in getting support benefit, are not going to see an advantage in changing their status. Simple checks on continued eligibility for social housing would also need to take in availability of local accommodation, costs of same, effects on employment/ schooling/health care of moving and other factors. The list of adverse effects possible with councils automatically reclaiming property on the death of the named 'householder' would go on forever.
Politics, it seems to me, for years, or all too long, has been concerned with right or left instead of right or wrong.
Richard Armour
Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
27 October 2010
14:4076863can see some dangers here Ross, and I fully understand the need to free up council houses, but hope the cobbled together govt srticks by it's committment to allow existing tennants to stay with thngs as they are and only new comers wull be affected.
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
27 October 2010
15:0076872Roger, re post 16, surely rats and maggots are due to the living conditions of the tenant. A flat/house would not be let out with an infestation, and these types of infestations invariably occur as a result of food being left about by the tenant. I fail to see how this could be an issue for the landlord, unless of course the problem was there at the inception of the contact. Surely, it is the problem of the tenant who needs to clean up her act?
It bothers me that a house can quickly become rundown because of bad tenants (and the law is in their favour, god help you if you want them out!) yet the landlord gets the blame. Landlords take all the financial risk, carry the burden of repairs and redecoration between tenancies, have to break up fights, rectify vandalism, yet are slated as being bad people. If the law made it easier to get rid of people as soon as they became a problem, the extent of 'dilapidation' would be much reduced.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
27 October 2010
16:0776892not my general experience of landlords lesley, i find most just out to collect rent from the benefits people and care little who they let to. when a tenant leaves they then moan about the state of the property despite never going to round to check.
if they had any thoughts about what was happening in the property they would leave their contact details with the neighbours they have inflicted their tenants on.
in the last few years we have had 2 houses boarded up by the police because of drug dealing, hopefully that hurt the landlords enough to be more choosy who they let to later. 6 months without rent may do the trick.
Jan Higgins
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,895
27 October 2010
16:2376898I tend to agree with Lesley on this one, not all landlords are bad it's the same with tenants, it is the bad ones that get talked about on both sides.
More needs to be done to MAKE those raking in the benefit money, with sub standard housing, bring the properties up to an acceptable condition. Why is some of the housing benefit not witheld until this is done or is that illegal.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to be neutral and polite but it is hard and getting even more difficult at times.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
27 October 2010
16:3476900Don't know what it's like now but from my experience in the 70s/80s an awful lot of 'social housing' in London turned out to be sub-let.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
27 October 2010
17:1576907not as bad now bob, more checks are made, one of the biggest frauds at present is where there are more than one working person living at an address, then claiming the 25% single discount.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
27 October 2010
19:1876928Have to agree with howard/chris on this one.
A lthough there are good and bad landlords the bad landlords are quite a large number.
The council tried to bring in a system of registerng all the landlords to try to get better conditions, but it wasn't compulsary therefore only the good landlords registered the bad ones stayed away.
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
27 October 2010
19:2076929Not all landlords are bad, but I can hardly believe the assertion that a flat/house would not be let out with an infestation!! There are lots of great landlords, but in my experience as both punter and inspector there are an awful lot of awful ones!!
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
27 October 2010
19:2476931believe me bern they do
iv seen the worst element of landlords here in Dover which im sure Roger and others will confirm
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
27 October 2010
19:5376936Yes, I know that, I was referring to #30.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
27 October 2010
20:0476941BERN;
I partly support that issue of bad tennants, but landlords also need sorting out,
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
27 October 2010
20:5976961Keith - your left wing bigotry against the private sector really shows on the landlord issue.