Could the Bedroom Tax be about to go pear-shaped?

speye.wordpress.com/2014/02/07/bedroom-tax-is-a-lesser-spotted-dodo-a-successful-appeal-you-have-to-read/

Another very significant court decision. What is so important is that although it was only a First Tier case, the judge looked to the recent Upper Tribunal ruling to define a bedroom: to be a bedroom, a room must be used as or furnished as a sleeping accommodation.

The implications are huge.

Councils will have to go out and inspect the "bedrooms" in every single property to see how many fit this definition.
Then presumably a lot of refunds will have to be made where people where wrongly charged.

Can you imagine the cost of all this?

As I have said so many times before, if you know anyone affected by this please, please, tell them to appeal!

I don't either MamaCaz. I fear we may be heading for a tory government, how scary is that

It's a mystery, Durhamjen! The true facts and figures are available for anyone who can be bothered to seek them out for themselves, but I guess most people don't think beyond what they are told by the DM and its ilk.

This whole issue has made me very sceptical of our whole parliamentary system.

Apart from anything else, why on earth are opposition MPs not pouncing on every lie that is told and every "mistake" that the Government is keeping quiet? They should be shouting about them from the rooftops. Armed with the correct information, surely it should be easy to disprove the claims of IDS (Grant Shapps and Lord Fraud Freud also come to mind). Why aren't they doing that? I don't get it!

Yes, I agree, Mamacaz. Makes you despair.
Do people actually read the same things that we do, or do they just skim?
IDS has been called before committees before for misrepresenting data. They never call it lying, do they?

Durhamjen - and no prizes for guessing how IDS and his cronies will present those figures: "Waiting lists have fallen dramatically thanks to our reforms ... blah blah blah".
More worrying still is that most people will believe it!

There's an interesting article about council housing in yesterday's Guardian, about how councils are removing people /families from their waiting lists, telling them they no longer stand a chance of getting a home from the council unless they meet new local criteria.
At the same time the bedroom tax means many people have to move from the area they know to somewhere where nobody can help them.
Hammersmith's waiting list has gone from over 8000 to 768 in a year, Warrington's from 12000 to 3000, Bournemouth from over 9000 to 3000.

It's all wrong.

If the 11 children have five or six parents between them, it doesn't make them any different from four or five children who have two parents they share time with.

If those 11 children had the same two parents who had split up and had joint custody, there could be a problem with floorspace!

That's quite an extreme example granjura.

Draconian indeed. I think we've all agreed that the present bedroom tax is illthought and ill administered- which does not mean the basic principe, is not valid- combined with flexibility for special cases and a proper building programme (where friends and communities can downsize together for support). Maybe with a couple of extra studios for each complext for visiting relatives (not talking about children here).

BTW what do you do with parents who have 11+ children who spend time with each of the 5 or 6 parents? How does that work?

Amazing Oasis.org featured a wonderful idea for one bed accommodation yesterday

Thanks Nfk - I agree, draconian. It's not easy for children to move between parents, despite the fact we all wish it was. So, to go to the non resident parent, and sleep in their bed, whilst they sleep on the floor, as has been suggested - what a life eh?

I used to work for a housing association and that's the way it happened then. A child could only have a bedroom with one parent, but joint custody was occasionally given as a reason for a dad being allowed a one bedroom place instead of a studio flat! Draconian or what! I hoped things had changed but I fear not.
What was available was also an issue. They did their best to get roofs over as many heads as possible.

Sorry, I meant to add, the child has two homes, and needs to feel at home in both of them. That means, they need a bedroom, with their own belongings in it.

Nfk -
"something to do also with a child not having the right to have two bedrooms".

I may have misunderstood your post, if so apologies, but you seem to be saying that if the legal situation is shared care, each parent should have a bedroom for the child. Many parents agree to joint custody, but that doesn't always mean the child spends half time with each parent. It means shared responsibility for the child, who may spend the greater part of his/her time with one parent because that works better for children given school/out of school activities etc.

Many parents simply agree the children will live with one parent, and have staying time with the other. It seems grossly unfair to treat these two types of families differently.

I think perhaps Mamacaz it may be the difference between joint custody and access / visiting rights. Something to do also with a child not having the right to have two bedrooms!

rosesarered I think you've hit the nail on the head. It's just a way of raising more revenue but has been craftily presented as a matter of social justice.

Vampirequeen: There was a case in Newcastle back in December where a father successfully appealed against the Bedroom Tax being imposed on a room that he used at weekends when his son, for whom he had joint custody, came to stay.
I think I might have posted a link to it at the time, but here it is again in case you want to read about it:
speye.wordpress.com/2013/12/11/another-bedroom-tax-success-and-a-very-significant-one/

It is one of an ongoing series of blogs on the Bedroom Tax by Joe Halewood, who was also mentioned by durhamjen.

It is very definitely worth appealing. Most councils have refused to exercise any discretion whatsoever in this matter, but now that there has been time for cases to go to court, successful appeals are coming through at an increasing rate.
Please, don't accept the decision as final. You have the right to put in an appeal! Perhaps the CAB would be able to help you with this if you feel you can't do it alone.
Good luck.

I think that FlicketyB answered really well. Hopefully the new housebuilding will help matters. I feel very uncomfortable with taking away houses where people have settled, for the sake of one room.It can't be done anyway as there are not many 1 or 2 bedroomed houses to move people into.So, it just seems to be another way of raising revenue, the reality is that there is very little choice.Also, sometimes what seems right in theory, is often not the case in practise.Not just dealing in figures here, but in human lives.

As their second home I mean. This would stop some shifting their primary mansion home into second home status.

Actually I think the same rule should apply to MPs, yes. They should only be allowed claim expenses for a one or to bedroomed house/apartment.

I know that Jen which is why I feel the tax is unfair in the case of one spare room but fair when there are two plus.

So all MPs should have to pay back the equivalent from their expenses as they are being subsidised by tax/council tax payers, Galen.
What is their subsidy for their second home if it isn't housing benefit?

I agree with Aka I think people should be allowed 1 spare room. But 3 is excessive! Especially when they are being subsidised by other rate payers,

good luck with the challenge vampire

www.shelter.org.uk explains it really well, and tells you what to do if you think you have been unfairly charged.