Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I have just received an email from Southwark Council which included a link to "help work out what benefits you are entitled to."


I have to say it is fascinating and if you change your circumstances from "Property Owner" with no job to "Renting from a private Landlord" with no job, the differences in what you can claim are amazing.


As a private owner you are entitled to ?0 in housing benefit, yet the same person renting somewhere (say ?1000 a month) can get upto ?270 in housing benefits a week.


Surely both circumstances need money to keep a roof over their heads, a bit unfair don't you think.


anyway if you need help then go to Sponge Calculator to see what you can or can not claim.


I am interested in peoples views on the issue of Housing Benefit if you rent vs. nothing if you own.

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/5530-benefits-calculator/
Share on other sites

No Gordon is making sure homeowners are helped if they lose their job...so he trumpeted back in the autumn....this is, of course the reality, there's only one person he's trying to keep in his home and that's himself in Number 10...


he's a shambolic imbecile on the bridge of a sinking ship.....we need someone with vision and boldness...and I can't see who that is, but it sure isn't him

It's right that the government should pay rent for unemployed people so that they don't wind up homeless. I see no reason why the State should help someone buy their home by paying their mortgage. If somebody's really desperate they need to sell their home, rent privately and then duly claim housing benefit.
I can understand the logic of Government money not being used to pay off the capital on an unemployed person's mortgage, but what if it was switched to interest-only for the unemployed period? If it's interest-only then the Government isn't helping anyone to accrue wealth, merely keeping a roof over people's heads. I confess I've never given it much thought and would be interested to know what others think (just so long as the thread doesn't go all Daily Mail - yawn).

It is quite an interesting question. Which is worse, using public money to pay for people?s mortgages ultimately enriching the banks, or making people give up their homes and rent privately thereby putting more homes on the market which will be snapped up by private landlords ultimately resulting in more property in the hands of fewer people?


If I look at the face of it I have to say I have an issue with benefit money ultimately ending up in the pockets of private landlords or the banks.

Brendan Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> It is quite an interesting question. Which is

> worse, using public money to pay for people?s

> mortgages ultimately enriching the banks, or

> making people give up their homes and rent

> privately thereby putting more homes on the market

> which will be snapped up by private landlords

> ultimately resulting in more property in the hands

> of fewer people?

>

> If I look at the face of it I have to say I have

> an issue with benefit money ultimately ending up

> in the pockets of private landlords or the banks.




So more council housing then?

Don?t know. I don?t have any opinions or answers, just trying to unpack the question properly.


Where would more council housing come from? Councils buying up repossessed properties? That would probably be too expensive. The government appropriating properties from the banks or private individuals? All sounds a bit ?Zimbabwe?.


A long term strategy of proper regulation in the housing market may work. Now if only we had a government who we employed to run the country because that is the sort of thing we could rely on them to do, surely.


Anyway hopefully not too many people will lose their jobs and consequently their homes and it won?t be a problem. Well any more of a problem than it already is.

At the moment benefits are going to McDonalds, KFC and the cigarette companies. What's new?


MrRose claimed unemployment benefit recently. As taxpayers we are taxed separately (I am self employed), but when claiming he was assessed as part of a couple, and even though I earn less than ?10,000 a year, and he was out of work, guess what - he only only entitled to ?60 and no council tax benefit either. We don't have a mortgage and don't pay rent.


What's even more frustrating, Peckham's JobCentrePlus gave NO help or advice regarding retraining and new NOTHING about all the schemes and plans and extra help and retraining that the government keeps telling everyone is happening now. Peckham JobCentrePlus is utterly useless.


Fortunately, quite a few of you kind lot are employing him at the moment and so we hope this will continue till he gets another job because he signed off since there was absolutely no point in signing on.

"What's even more frustrating, Peckham's JobCentrePlus gave NO help or advice regarding retraining and new NOTHING about all the schemes and plans and extra help and retraining that the government keeps telling everyone is happening now. Peckham JobCentrePlus is utterly useless. "


Nope it's not the jobcentre that's uselees it's the governemnt that is...these schemes don't exist (see also support for mortgages and freed up lending for small businesses), this governemnt is useless, shambolic, and corrupt. They have made a lot of noise about what they are doing and apart from giving away ?10bn on a useless 2.5% cut in VAT they've done SFA...but it all sounds great and dynamic in mr "I feel your pain' Brown's media appearances....or slimey, corrupt ?1m pension pot from the EC, Mandleson's pronouncements...bring on the revolution get rid of these leeches

I went to the CAB in Peckham after 6 months without a job and was told that because I have no children and am not pregnant I am not applicable for any kind of help whatsoever. Apparently 25 years of paying taxes is irrelevant. Luckily I am in a contract role at the moment and saving desperately but do feel that there is no safety net for many.
I was on the Southwark Waiting List from 1973 until I bought my own place in 1983...better check as I might still be on the list...kept getting pushed further and further down the list....:-S....why couldn't I have been born in Borneo or Andorra or Liechenstein..I've have been housed within around 7 minutes/weeks/months by Southwark....still maybe in the next lifetime..(tu)

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • I fully support this petition, however it will need to be shared far & wide to be effective. Also there is always a huge amount of interest / objection during the festival, but not so much when they start consulting for the next one, usually around January. It's crucial that everyone that has been impacted makes their voice heard then.  A couple of points which may be good to include in the wording (if it is still possible to amend?) - The total tickets sold are way more than 3000. The licence allows a capacity of up to 9,999, but this may include staff & performers etc. The published attendance for 2024 was:  Friday – 8,999 / Saturday – 9,512 / Sunday – 9,422 So that's c.28,000 people trampling & littering our park over three days - people who have no need or desire to take any care or consideration of our park.  - Gala claim for 2024 that "62% of all ticket holders were from Southeast London and 18% of these were from hyper-local postcode areas SE15 and SE22." So a bit of maths shows that means that around 89% of attendees were not what most people would term 'local'... - Gala have ambitions / plans to extend the number of event days to 6, over two weekends. They applied for a licence for this in 2024, but then withdrew it. Instead they added a "free" event, billed as a community day, to the existing 3 day festival, thereby increasing the event days to 4.  This would appear to be an attempt to set a precedent for increasing the number of event days, and it's inevitable that they will attempt to secure the 6 days they desire for 2026, to increase their profits further. Two weekends in a row of noise, disturbance & disruption would be unacceptable, plus an extra c.18,000 trampling & littering the park... - The site size has been increased. The claim is that it is to compensate for lost storage space due to recent flood alleviation works, but the area has increased by more than the area lost, and appears to have been used for attendee activity rather than site storage. Gala have often stated that the festival can only be located in the park because the footprint has been designed specifically for that area, and yet this year the footprint had been amended & extended without any apparent issues. Surely this proves that it could be relocated?  Apologies, I just can't help going into rant mode on this issue, but hopefully some of the above may be helpful in increasing the argument presented by the petition?
    • Best to just get in touch with the council. You need to see what works were approved and the scope.  It's probably advisable to get an independent legal survey (not a standard RICS) and look at current condition, what they said they'd fix, if they did what they said and what the problems are with what they did. Was it just your flat and the other flat mentioned? Asking in case there's any other leaseholder/ tenant involved  
    • Terry did some work for us recently, putting in an outdoor socket - happy to add my recommendation to this thread. Lovely chap, takes pride in his work, and charges a reasonable price. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...