Lowered Benefit cap could affect landlords from 8th May?

Lowered Benefit cap could affect landlords from 8th May?

11:04 AM, 13th April 2015, About 7 years ago 159

Text Size

If nothing is changed post election on the 8th of May the Benefit cap will be reduced from £500 to £440 pw in London with a lower cap in other regions of £396, 90% of the London figure.

As an example: A two parent household with three children receive £334 per week and then deduct the welfare benefit and child tax credit income to leave a maximum residual HB or LHA payable.  From the new cap figures this leaves a maximum of £62 per week in housing benefit outside the capital and £106 per week in London.

The question is will landlords risk renting their investments to benefit families who will only receive £275 per calendar month in HB or LHA towards the rent on a three-bed property? Or to a single parent with three children who will only receive £456 per month in HB to pay for a three-bed property in an area such as Liverpool with a typical three-bed private rent of £525 per month?

The last two years has seen some social landlords refuse to tenant a property with those under occupying due to the bedroom tax. Now landlords could face a greater financial risk, even on fully occupied properties, and so some may be forced to stop providing property to such households. Thus creating even greater pressure on council supplied social housing.

Mick Robertsbenefit cap


by Jay James

21:16 PM, 19th May 2015, About 7 years ago

If and when UK debts are called in, our situation will be much worse than that of Greece, because we have much more debt per person than Greece.

Greek austerity measures are currently very unpopular in Greece.
Imagine if their debts were called in, then Greece would be even worse off than curently.

Now think about if and when UK (public) debts are called in, as they would at some (perhaps far off) point if we do not reduce spending now.
It would be far worse than the shortage of resources that Greece currently have.
Far worse than making cuts now.

We are thus left with making uncomfortable and most likely harsh cuts.
Seeing as how benefits (inc pension benefits) are roughly one third of national expenditure, there are likley to be some inhumane cuts.
This may even include HB.

by John

21:29 PM, 19th May 2015, About 7 years ago

This problem is a 35 odd year old problem which has developed into a monster.

The solution is not to withdraw benefits quickly because these benefits are literally the same as crack. The country has allowed a system to develop over time and allow people to develop a particular lifestyle. This is down to the new era of mass globalisation and the failure of the politicians to put in place particular measures to redirect our own local workforce into productive output.

It was fine in the 80's when the numbers were much lower, but the actual number of people on the dole or sick is something like 8-10 million. We have a ludicrous situation whereby it is easier for the politicians to pull in romanians and polish to work while we pay our own work force to do nothing. All because we the population wouldn't like it if the nasty politicians actually carried out some tough measures.

Time has run out and so finally the politicians are being forced into sorting out the tricky problems and we the population have realised it needs to be done and is not nasty.

The big problem is making the necessary changes and doing it in a way so people can adapt to the new ways of operating. How can a 36 y/o mum with 3 kids realistically go out and get a job when she has no education because she left school at 16 in order to have kids. For the whole of her life she has been taught and told it is her right to have kids and have this and that, without doing a thing. This is the system she has been born into. It is crazy, but this is the reality.

We need to cut benefits, but it has to be done slowly and that means over the next 2 decades. I think the tories have it right when they will slowly reduce the benefits cap and stop any inflation increases. In 10 years time £23k will not support that big a family.

If we pulled the plug then it would be chaos. We can liken the debate to the banking one. Should we have let them go bust ? More than likely we would all be much better off in 2015, but getting here would have been pretty scary.

by Mick Roberts

7:46 AM, 20th May 2015, About 7 years ago

When some of my tenants don’t get support for whatever reason for a few weeks, WOW, Social services are within a few days away of taking kids.

Alan, I still don’t think u r getting it. If the rent paid by HB is £0, ZERO ZERO, where is there an area of lower rent?

There’s always gonna’ be so many in society that constantly need a helping hand.

by Robert Mellors

7:58 AM, 20th May 2015, About 7 years ago

Reply to the comment left by "Mick Roberts" at "20/05/2015 - 07:46":

and Social Services looking after kids costs 10 x what it costs to provide support to the family for them to look after their kids, so definitely no savings for the taxpayer if kids go into care.

by Jay James

9:51 AM, 20th May 2015, About 7 years ago

What can be done to lower the benefits bill?

by Jay James

10:18 AM, 20th May 2015, About 7 years ago

The current state of affairs is just plain ridiculous.
At some point we will go bust or people will get so fed up that inhumane cutting of (perhaps all) benefits will take place.

by Luke P

11:00 AM, 20th May 2015, About 7 years ago

Reply to the comment left by "john " at "19/05/2015 - 21:29":

I agree with John that this will have to be done slowly, but it is going to have to be done.

Why is it that the absolute last place the vast majority of benefit tenants look, that I come across anyway, is at themselves. In other countries, if they have nothing then that necessity breeds invention -they find niches in the marketplace to make/scrape a living, but here if your benefits were stopped, you just collapse into a heap on the floor and cry poverty until someone listens. Why is it that they won't take it upon themselves to be the masters of their own destiny. I can only think it's knowing the safety net IS always there.

Society is created (and paid for) by all of us. We have an agreement that to live in our society you must follow the rules and laws and if you don't you are removed from society (prison). You break the rules set down by society, you forfeit your right to live in society (i.e. you DON'T have a right to just do what you want). We all accept this, but some struggle with the concept of extending this.

I'm not necessarily trying to ruffle any feathers with the following suggestions, but to those that would object, why do you object to the concept of it, when you/we clearly all accept the premise above?

1). If we allow people to have children as and when they please and those parents go on to claim benefits for those children, then society should demand they are brought up as product, educated and decent members of the community otherwise you forfeit the right to have (at very least) any more children. Seeing as though this is not Victorian England then as a decent society we pay for the upbringing of the child that has already been born, but you cannot have more.

2). If you do not contribute to society (excluding the genuinely disabled), then you forfeit your rights within society. In fact, why not lock people up? We do it for non-payment of council tax.

I'm not necessarily suggesting these actual ideas as such, just questioning why we accept one premise but won't extrapolate that to other areas of the society in which we live.

by Jay James

11:06 AM, 20th May 2015, About 7 years ago

Reply to the comment left by "Luke P" at "20/05/2015 - 11:00":

Think I see your point Luke.
We seem only to fit our arguments/logic/ways of thinking to what we already believe and are not prepared to apply the same logic to opposing views.

Are you suggesting no benefits for future children? (I would agree with this.)

by Luke P

11:45 AM, 20th May 2015, About 7 years ago

Reply to the comment left by "Jay James" at "20/05/2015 - 11:06":

That was pretty much what I was trying to get across 'logic' wise.

I don't think the status quo can continue. There are questions we all need to discuss the answers to. I was careful not to mention sterilisation, because you get jumped on immediately as a Nazi etc. but I don't think it's out of the question entirely. We wouldn't let someone adopt a dog from a rescue centre without first being checked out as to their suitability, so why on earth are kids okay to pop out as and when you please. There is a definite underclass in our country and they need knocking into shape. That way there will be more money for the genuinely needy.

by Alan Loughlin

11:52 AM, 20th May 2015, About 7 years ago

Like the 2 suggestions. Maybe we could start by abolishing child benefits. This is outdated and just encourages irresponsible breeding.

1 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

Leave Comments

Please Log-In OR Become a member to reply to comments or subscribe to new comment notifications.

Forgotten your password?


Landlord Tax Planning Book Now