Council Tax - why do seniors have to pay the full amount?

Very funny clip Daphne. I love it . I shop at Aldi and Sainsbury by the way

Not sure what young or old have to do with it. Many of us have worked all our lives and are still working todate (37 years)and paid into the system and earned our pensions state and private so I think we should get whatever discounts avaliable

Phoenix you are fortunate to have such a wide choice of supermarkets to use.

My local shopping town has a town centre Waitrose of a reasonable size and a small co-op. There is a large inconvenient out of town Tesco and that is it. We have a small Co-op in the village which I use for any top-up shopping

To use Sainsburys or Aldi I have to make an extra 10 mile round trip by car to one of two towns I do not shop usually in. As far as I know there is no Asda, Morrisons, Lidl or Iceland within 30 miles.

However, as I live in a rural area there are an abundance of farm shops, 2 producer/butchers and an excellent bakery. All much closer than any of the supermarkets so I do not buy any of my fresh meat or bread in a supermarket and only a few of my vegetables because I grow my own.

I did a short temp job data inputting with a company which provided dental insurance. It amazed me the difference there was in cost between different areas for the same dental plan - more than trebling the cost/month in some cases

Short answer to the OP question.

Why shouldn't we seniors pay full Council Tax? I accept that street lighting, parks, and the library have to be paid for.

Claim the discount if you don't feel you should have it donate the funds to a charity the money will then benefit actual people rather than just going back into the council coffers!

By far the biggest slice of council tax goes to education. The next biggest is vulnerable adults and older people. Those two cost twice as much as everything else combined.

I don't see why age (rather then ability to pay) should make people eligible for discounts.

What do you think the council does with the money in its coffers?

CC your daughter should be able to get advice and help with her benefit claims from your local Citizens Advice. Give them a call or go on the website to see how to access them

My point Daphned is that the council cuts mean that their priorities will often not be in line with ours eg I would like to see more rather than less spent on social care if you claim your discount and don't feel you should have it you could donate to a charity which supports those the council funding leaves short

I take your point.

I wish people would think about that kind of thing when they vote.

In the money pages of today's DT there is a question regarding a single mum who has !moved in with her partner. Because of this she is losing her benefits of £900 a month. She is asking advice on how best to invest the £168,000 she holds in cash. Should all benefits be means tested? She had been earning £45,000 but wanted to spend more time with her children.

I really don't understand how she was getting benefits at all if she had that much in savings?

annsixty can you give a link please?

Has she sold her home before moving in with her partner? In that case, it's just tough. If she tries to claim benefits, she will almost certainly be asked what's happened to the money. I'm not sure which benefits she could have claimed anyway, if she was earning £45,000. Nearly all benefits are means tested.

Please could we have a link, because I couldn't find it.

Found it.

www.telegraph.co.uk/money/money-makeover/how-can-i-use-my-162k-savings-to-spare-me-from-full-time-work/

Firstly, she was earning £8,200 (not £45,000), which was why she was receiving tax credits.

Secondly, the article doesn't give precise details, but my guess is that she owned her own home before moving in with the partner, but has now sold the home and doesn't know what to do with the released equity.

She's asking for advice on how to invest the money. The benefits are irrelevant.

Maybe I'm being dense, but I don't understand the relevance of this to the thread.

The benefit system is really complex and this case illustrates that - I think it's quite misleading as there are so many unanswered questions

Exactly! The benefits situation isn't really relevant to the article. The question is really about how the lady should invest a lump sum to give her income.

I'm off to the naughty step don't worry. She gave up a job paying £45,000 to take a low paid one to spend more time with her children and then was paid £ 900 in benefit. When the sick are being forced to work I just found this strange, but then I am a simple soul and not very bright

The relevance of course is that the benefit system is very unfair.

But how many threads are there on GN with people saying that mothers should be with their children? Sorry, but she was a single mother, who had previously paid loads in tax and NI. The article doesn't state how long she had been receiving tax credits, nor whether she had previously been married/had a steady partner.

The fact that some ill/sick people are expected to look for work is a red herring.

Jonothan McColgan, director of Combined Financial Strategies and chartered financial planner, said:
I'm sorry that Ms Bishop has been caught by a strange and cruel quirk of the benefit system that means the decision to live with her new partner has cost her £900 each month in benefits.
Moving in together has left Ms Bishop owing her partner £55,000 on the property purchase on top of the benefits loss.
After deducting the money owed to her partner, Ms Bishop has savings of £111,000, which she needs to generate £600 per month.

I have no idea why this should be considered cruel, why a woman with that much money to invest should be considered hard-done-by because she has moved in with her partner (who presumably has a reasonable job) and is no longer eligible to be funded by the taxpayer.
She is a similar situation to my DIL who has taken a part-time, lower paid job to be there for her children - but is married to my DS therefore never been eligible for benefits either! Although DIL does not have a separate large lump sum to invest in property.

I am not sure if the person in the article is widowed or divorced or a single mother, but in the latter two cases there is surely a father somewhere who should be contributing to the upkeep of his children?

The article doesn't state how long she had been receiving tax credits,
The article gives me to understand that, before she had the children, she had a very well paid job as an accountant on £45,000 pa, since she had the children she has worked in a part-time term-time job to fit around the children which paid £8,200 pa and received benefits on top of this; benefits have now ceased because she has moved in with a new partner.

Helping an abandoned, single mother on a low salary with top-up benefits is one thing, but when they re-marry or move in with a new partner I don't see why the taxpayer should be expected to help fund their lifestyle.

Back to the OP - I don't think we should be given a discount on council tax just because we are in receipt of pensions.

OK, at the moment we do not get much for our money - but our children were educated and we may need help in the future (if any is available).

I think single person households should receive a discount.

Yes, that Telegraph article is hard to make head or tail of.

The woman and her partner bought the property jointly for £135,000, so obviously they intended to share it.

But the 'expert' says

Moving in together has left Ms Bishop owing her partner £55,000 on the property purchase on top of the benefits loss.

She's got plenty of capital to pay the £55,000, a guaranteed pension sum and surely she can work more hours once the children are older? What a non-problem!

Sorry, yes, back to the OP...