disabled will NOT be exempt from 'bedroom tax'

I agree completely, Nelliemoser.

And of the worst things about the bedroom tax is how often it will force people to move - first as a family grows, then as it gradually shrinks, so this stressful, costly, cruel upheaval many times over.

The cost of this to councils / HAs is also overlooked. Despite what the press would have us believe, the majority of tenants look after their homes, doing many of the simple 'maintenance' jobs themselves. When it ceases to be a home, and becomes simply a temporary 'house', they will be unlikely to spend a penny on it. Indeed, I foresee many more houses being trashed, at huge cost to the landlords.

But we ain't seen nothing yet, as they say. The Benefits Cap and Universal Credit are potentially far worse. They could lead to many evictions.
This won't save taxpayers a penny - quite the opposite! It's just that instead of it coming directly from government spending, it will be councils who have to foot the much larger bill for temporary accommodation. I presume that in order to fund this, they will have to make huge increases in Council Tax.

So a warning for Frank: Beware, more of your precious money will soon be required to pay for these "cuts"!!! (I wish there was a suitably wicked emoticon to put here )

I agree Nelliemoser.

People who are subject to the bedroom tax won't be able to afford to move to a smaller property (even if some were available) and so in effect are just having to take a drop in an already inadequate income.

Good for those authorities. This piece of legislation is a "Dangerous dogs act" knee jerk legislation!

Let's be clear! this only applies to those in accommodation and in receipt of housing benefit! That is those with the least income.

The perpetrators of this "bedroom tax" should be made to try and answer the questions of how to find enough smaller accommodation for those affected and to have to visit affected areas themselves and to try and identify areas where the smaller accommodation can be found.

Then they need to speak to those persons who have studied the evidence about the financial and social effects of the health stresses that are involved, when settled communities are forcibly disrupted.

This is a really nasty piece of legislation as it going to be so difficult to implement without great harm.

Nottingham City Council have also re-designated some high rise two bedroom flats as one bedroom plus store room (or something similar). It is good news for the tenants there but to be honest the council have only done it because no one wants to live there anyway.

I've read that Leeds City Council are re-deignating "spare" bedrooms as a study, or dining room, thus avoiding many of their tenants ending up with rent arrears and eviction notices. Hopefully, it will also help many people avoid the stress that can lead on to anxiety/depression and ill health. MamaCaz is right to point out that this isn't a simple problem. I hesitate to post information about family members who are directly affected by this as the tone of some of the posts defending the Bedroom Tax have been hostile, negative and dismissive of the vulnerability of so many people unlucky enough to find themselves in a situation not of their making and over which they have no control.

No of course not, Mamacaz! And I should imagine that's just how it would be seen (a 2-bedroom property). I was just making a comment that we downsized to a one bedroom property because we were looking towards a time when we may not be as able as we were at that time. Thankfully that hasn't happened yet.

Marelli: I am not disagreeing for one moment that yours is a one bedroom house. However, I'd like to mention that some councils/HAs (though not many, I don't think) would now be classing your 'front room' as a bedroom, making it a two-bedroom house by their standards. In other words, if it were a council/housing association property, it might still attract the bedroom tax!

Hope you don't mind me pointing that out - I just wanted people to realize that things aren't always quite as simple as they seem

I did. I moved from a council house which we had bought in the early 80's to a small cottage in the next village. From 3 bedrooms and living room to 1 bedroom, living-room and front room. The choice was made because the time was right to sell once the family had moved on and we no longer needed 3 bedrooms. We also had it in mind that because this cottage had no stairs, then we very likely wouldn't have to move when we became older.

I will be doing just that MamaCaz in a couple of years time, for financial reasons.

My mil -she took in students for years and years to be able to keep her own 3 bed cottage, but as she got older she got a one bed flat- and then paid for her own care in an OAP home out of the final proceeds.

My parents moved to a 2 bed bungalow- but had to move out in the sticks to be able to afford 2 bed and a small garden.

I also know many who lived in near squalor, or total squalor- in order not to move.

A question for everyone:

Just out of interest , how many home-owners do you know who have downsized to a one-bedroom property unless due to illness/disability?

Greatnan , way to go !!!!!

There was no need to name names. I simply replied to Bags's question.

Ana, have I become nameless?
If you all enjoy endless repetition of Frank's tale of inheritance, greedy girl friend, etc. plus his apparently inhumane attitude to those less fortunate, of course you are at liberty to do so. I don't , so I won't be reading anything he posts.

I'm sure it would have been, deserving.
I can't speak for MrBags but MrA doesn't mince his words when he's in the driving seat of his boat in a critical situation, or, come to that, in the passenger seat of my car, something I try my best to avoid

I am minded of an expression, "Stop pulling your jib"which is something quite different, as is the tack we seem to have adopted now. Should people be made to share a cabin, do you think?
You might like to get on course again,but then you might not. To ,disregard, a polite instruction, for the sake of semantics, could have been dangerous, then again if it was likely to have been dangerous, It may have been given a little differently.

Indeed I have Bags, there's just no telling some people, is there?

I expect you've been in the place where you're helming and you give a command and he starts arguing about it too, jane

The use of medicinal plants by Ayla in the Bear Clan was particularly interesting, like willow bark as a pain killer (the original source of aspirin) and so many more.

Bags I had to laugh at your sailing anecdote.
Been there, done that

Ana

No, Bags, by the same person each time.

I hadn't noticed it had been three times on this thread, ana. By different people?

your remark about poeple not liking being told what to do reminds me of a story from when DH and I were sailing together. He was helm and said to me: "You might like to tighten the jib."
I looked at the jib and thought: "Looks fine to me" and did nothing.
He later asked me why I had done nothing. Answer: because it was a suggestion. That means I can choose whether to do what has been suggested or not. If you'd said "Tighten the jib" of course I would have tightened it since it would have been obvious that you, helming the boat, wanted it done. As it was phrased it wasn't a command, I wasn't being told to do anything.

The advice not to encourage Frank and not to 'feed' him has been made three times on this thread alone! People don't like being told what to do even if it is phrased as a suggestion.

As has been said, it's up to the individual whether they wish to respond to any other member's posts.

jopa, I think we are on a different wavelength. Enjoy gransnet