Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Grieving mum found hanged near Bedroom Tax eviction letter Watch

    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by djh2208)
    Just want to say as someone who supports austerity this is absolutely heartbreaking and obviously someone in this situation should not have to pay bedroom tax.

    I think the government should reconsider this policy and evaluate whether too many people are unfairly treated by it to continue its implementation.
    This is the natural outcome of austerity. The bedroom tax has received play in the media because it was poorly calculated: unlike other, even crueller, austerity measures, most of which have cost more than they have saved, the bedroom tax has hit enough people to become a viable political issue for the papers to take up.

    We always have compassionate hand-wringing from supporters of austerity. I am reminded of Esther McVey wheeled out to take the flak for IDS on previous suicides, putting on her concerned face and saying this must have been a tragic mistake with someone who fell through the cracks.

    I give you credit: I assume your compassion is genuine. But here you see the human cost of your ideology. I hope more people wake up to what this government has been doing over the past six years.
    • TSR Support Team
    • Very Important Poster
    • Reporter Team
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    I don't understand. As saddening as this is, what else was supposed to happen? She should have moved or gotten a housemate.

    If you don't pay your rent then you face eviction. And there's a process. She'd have received warning letters. I'm not heartless, I just fail to see this as a bedroom tax issue.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by z33)
    That's ****ing tragic man
    my God... do they not have any sympathy? why can't they consider it on a case by case basis because in this case the poor lady is grieving over her son's recent suicide IN THAT VERY ROOM and all they can say to that is "give me money for the room he left behind"...

    be a little more considerate would ya? :/
    Sympathy is not a good enough thing to base it on. Someone somewhere will have to decide whether your particular tear-jerker is more or less sad than someone else's.

    It's not fair and equitable: it could be a no if the decision-maker has had a bad day and a yes if he's had a good one. It could be a no if you're ugly and a yes if you're hot.

    It's not predictable, so you can't plan future expenditures with any confidence.

    It's counter to human rights, particularly in a country rich enough to provide it, to have to beg someone for the money you need to live: it should be an inalienable right.

    If you want to beg and be given stuff on a whim, there are charities for that.

    We therefore have to have a system that either sets out in excruciating, expensive, litigious detail which situations will be provided for and which will not, or we have to have a system which plays it safe and builds in a buffer so that, even if some people at the margins get money they don't quite deserve, you are sure the people who do deserve it are getting the money.

    We will all have to grow up and ignore it in future when the Daily Mail runs a story about the one family in Britain that has 15 kids or extrapolates 2 weeks in an emergency B&B in central London to "claims £50,000 in housing benefit a year".

    These marginal scroungers are, quite categorically, the price we pay to ensure cases like this never happen again as a result of government policy.

    This time, it is a government policy in which the British people are especially complicit, because we actually voted, Christ help us, for the insane benefit-slashing Tory manifesto which even the Tories didn't expect they would have to implement.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kvothe the arcane)
    I don't understand. As saddening as this is, what else was supposed to happen? She should have moved or gotten a housemate.

    If you don't pay your rent then you face eviction. And there's a process. She'd have received warning letters. I'm not heartless, I just fail to see this as a bedroom tax issue.
    By God, you've solved it! Get a stranger living in the room where your own son committed suicide. That's what's been holding the economy back all this time! I urge you to join the Tory party: you could be future cabinet material, you could.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by scrotgrot)
    Spoiler:
    Show
    sympathy is not a good enough thing to base it on. Someone somewhere will have to decide whether your particular tear-jerker is more or less sad than someone else's.

    It's not fair and equitable: it could be a no if the decision-maker has had a bad day and a yes if he's had a good one. It could be a no if you're ugly and a yes if you're hot.

    It's not predictable, so you can't plan future expenditures with any confidence.

    It's counter to human rights, particularly in a country rich enough to provide it, to have to beg someone for the money you need to live: it should be an inalienable right.

    If you want to beg and be given stuff on a whim, there are charities for that.

    We therefore have to have a system that either sets out in excruciating, expensive, litigious detail which situations will be provided for and which will not, or we have to have a system which plays it safe and builds in a buffer so that, even if some people at the margins get money they don't quite deserve, you are sure the people who do deserve it are getting the money.

    We will all have to grow up and ignore it in future when the Daily Mail runs a story about the one family in Britain that has 15 kids or extrapolates 2 weeks in an emergency B&B in central London to "claims £50,000 in housing benefit a year".

    These marginal scroungers are, quite categorically, the price we pay to ensure cases like this never happen again as a result of government policy.

    This time, it is a government policy in which the British people are especially complicit, because we actually voted, Christ help us, for the insane benefit-slashing Tory manifesto which even the Tories didn't expect they would have to implement
    .
    Thank you for this excellent post. You articulated it much better than I can. People who support austerity do so from a position of comfort which can often by the consequence of fortunate circumstance. That's the most ironic thing about it.
    • TSR Support Team
    • Very Important Poster
    • Reporter Team
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by scrotgrot)
    By God, you've solved it! Get a stranger living in the room where your own son committed suicide. That's what's been holding the economy back all this time! I urge you to join the Tory party: you could be future cabinet material, you could.
    My sister and I had to move from our family home when our mother died. It happens.

    It's an unfortunate situation but it's been 3 years since the death if I read correctly and she's had adequate time to make alternate arrangements.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kvothe the arcane)
    My sister and I had to move from our family home when our mother died. It happens.

    Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk
    It shouldn't happen. Even if it's the bank wanting its mortgage.

    Of course, the main problem with the bedroom tax, even if you agree with the idea that people (only council tenants, of course, not actual people who matter) should be shoved from pillar to post for daring to have a room free, is that there aren't actually any one-bedroom properties to move into.

    So she has to pay it; and if she can't pay it, she can't pay it, and the outcome is plain to see.

    Sorry for biting your head off, I'm angry.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    the use ' bedroom tax' is just an example of shoddy Journalism, compunded by the implication that this didn;t take the nearly 2 years between the death of the young chap in question the issing of an eviction notice ...

    the reality of the changes to housing benefit was the playing field being levelled rather than some tenants being treated unfairly on the basis of who owns their home ...

    i am unsure of the time frames with regard to HB payments following the death of a member of the household, but the fact that this got as far as the eviction process and a time sacle of approaching 2 years indicates that the situation is not the situation as being painted ( vs the collection of motability cars on the death of a recipient which in some cases have been less than a week following death )
    • TSR Support Team
    • Very Important Poster
    • Reporter Team
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by scrotgrot)
    It shouldn't happen.

    Of course, the main problem with the bedroom tax, even if you agree with the idea that people (only council tenants, of course, not actual people who matter) should be shoved from pillar to post for daring to have a room free, is that there aren't actually any one-bedroom properties to move into.

    So she has to pay it; and if she can't pay it, she can't pay it.

    Sorry for biting your head off, I'm angry.
    People shouldn't have to move houses when their circumstances change?

    Seeing as I'll have to share for the next 10 years, I'm not so easily swayed by your "daring to have a room free" comment. What makes you think there aren't any one-bedroom properties?

    You don't have to apologise. I'm mature enough to be able to handle someone disagreeing with me .

    Edit: it was 2 years and not 3 as her suicide was last year :holmes:.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by scrotgrot)
    Sympathy is not a good enough thing to base it on. Someone somewhere will have to decide whether your particular tear-jerker is more or less sad than someone else's.

    It's not fair and equitable: it could be a no if the decision-maker has had a bad day and a yes if he's had a good one. It could be a no if you're ugly and a yes if you're hot.

    It's not predictable, so you can't plan future expenditures with any confidence.

    It's counter to human rights, particularly in a country rich enough to provide it, to have to beg someone for the money you need to live: it should be an inalienable right.

    If you want to beg and be given stuff on a whim, there are charities for that.

    We therefore have to have a system that either sets out in excruciating, expensive, litigious detail which situations will be provided for and which will not, or we have to have a system which plays it safe and builds in a buffer so that, even if some people at the margins get money they don't quite deserve, you are sure the people who do deserve it are getting the money.

    We will all have to grow up and ignore it in future when the Daily Mail runs a story about the one family in Britain that has 15 kids or extrapolates 2 weeks in an emergency B&B in central London to "claims £50,000 in housing benefit a year".

    These marginal scroungers are, quite categorically, the price we pay to ensure cases like this never happen again as a result of government policy.

    This time, it is a government policy in which the British people are especially complicit, because we actually voted, Christ help us, for the insane benefit-slashing Tory manifesto which even the Tories didn't expect they would have to implement.
    That is true I guess but there should be a system that allows for cases like this I mean if the room is not in use because the person who resides in it has passed away then they should at the very least not evict the lady... they can talk to her and figure something out. And it won't be done in one day these things take weeks to wait for payment, to send the letter etc so it won't be a 'bad day' or 'heartless employee' thing right?

    That is true with the benefit frauds and stuff - you can't really do anything about that unforunately :/ I hope those people realise the damage their actions cause and just take it upon themselves to not be selfish but that probably wont happen

    These cases are a rare occurrence and they're terribly tragic but its just sad that the system means they are bound to happen. At least the people that really need it are getting what they need but the people like this poor lady... it's sad that nothing can be done
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by zippyRN)
    the use ' bedroom tax' is just an example of shoddy Journalism, compunded by the implication that this didn;t take the nearly 2 years between the death of the young chap in question the issing of an eviction notice ...

    the reality of the changes to housing benefit was the playing field being levelled rather than some tenants being treated unfairly on the basis of who owns their home ...

    i am unsure of the time frames with regard to HB payments following the death of a member of the household, but the fact that this got as far as the eviction process and a time sacle of approaching 2 years indicates that the situation is not the situation as being painted ( vs the collection of motability cars on the death of a recipient which in some cases have been less than a week following death )
    The problem is the ideology behind the bedroom tax and what it represents. That's what the issue is. If it weren't for the tax then we wouldn't be discussing whether or not she should have paid it within a certain amount of time.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by z33)
    That is true I guess but there should be a system that allows for cases like this I mean if the room is not in use because the person who resides in it has passed away then they should at the very least not evict the lady... they can talk to her and figure something out. And it won't be done in one day these things take weeks to wait for payment, to send the letter etc so it won't be a 'bad day' or 'heartless employee' thing right?

    That is true with the benefit frauds and stuff - you can't really do anything about that unforunately :/ I hope those people realise the damage their actions cause and just take it upon themselves to not be selfish but that probably wont happen

    These cases are a rare occurrence and they're terribly tragic but its just sad that the system means they are bound to happen. At least the people that really need it are getting what they need but the people like this poor lady... it's sad that nothing can be done
    Your lack of cynicism is heart warming. And so is your sense of empathy. But the Tory government doesn't see these kind of people as humans, they are just numbers and opportunities to make a saving so that they can be praised for their thriftiness in the deficit figures.
    • TSR Support Team
    • Very Important Poster
    • Reporter Team
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by z33)
    That is true I guess but there should be a system that allows for cases like this I mean if the room is not in use because the person who resides in it has passed away then they should at the very least not evict the lady... they can talk to her and figure something out. And it won't be done in one day these things take weeks to wait for payment, to send the letter etc so it won't be a 'bad day' or 'heartless employee' thing right?

    That is true with the benefit frauds and stuff - you can't really do anything about that unforunately :/ I hope those people realise the damage their actions cause and just take it upon themselves to not be selfish but that probably wont happen

    These cases are a rare occurrence and they're terribly tragic but its just sad that the system means they are bound to happen. At least the people that really need it are getting what they need but the people like this poor lady... it's sad that nothing can be done
    There is usually an escalation procedure for social housing rent arrears and evictions.

    She killed herself before receiving the letter so clearly it was not that which caused her to end her life. It might have been the situation however I'm not sure what else could have been done. She would have been warned that she had arrears, instructed to get advice from a charity like the CAB and if she's sought advice, she'd have been made aware of her options.

    You're not thrown out of the streets by bailiffs when you receive an eviction notice so she wasn't in any immediate danger of being made homeless. She was a vulnerable person who might have been failed by those around her for not advising she seek further help but the article reeks of sensationalism imo.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kvothe the arcane)
    People shouldn't have to move houses when their circumstances change?

    Seeing as I'll have to share for the next 10 years, I'm not so easily swayed by your "daring to have a room free" comment. What makes you think there aren't any one-bedroom properties?

    You don't have to apologise. I'm mature enough to be able to handle someone disagreeing with me .

    Edit: it was 2 years and not 3 as her suicide was last year :holmes:.
    No, but you see, you should have an 'inalienable right' not to have to share.

    So speaks the voice of the infantile left, which for some reason takes pride in its refusal to acknowledge real-world constraints and practicalities.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by z33)
    That is true I guess but there should be a system that allows for cases like this I mean if the room is not in use because the person who resides in it has passed away then they should at the very least not evict the lady... they can talk to her and figure something out. And it won't be done in one day these things take weeks to wait for payment, to send the letter etc so it won't be a 'bad day' or 'heartless employee' thing right?
    Yes, of course they can, but, as I said, it needs to be built into the system fairly and equitably. I accept your point about the bad day thing, but remember, with each person who has to review or ratify a decision, the cost goes up, the time goes up (especially bad if paying a bedroom tax you can't afford, say), and the stress goes up for the claimant too.

    "Talking to her and figuring something out" is definitely going to cost a lot of money (probably payable to Capita, Atos, Maximus etc) if you are going to conduct a bespoke interview with everyone who pleads special circumstances - and everyone will be if that's the way to avoid paying the bedroom tax, regardless of the merit, or even the truth, of their plea.

    And this is one reason why the current benefit "reforms" have mostly cost more than they have saved, without even taking into account the impact on the NHS etc.

    (It's worth noting that these things didn't use to take more than two weeks for payment. Now there is usually a special lower rate when say an appeal is being considered, even if you're disabled, and appeals run for the best part of a year. And even in the smoothest cases they have changed from fortnightly to monthly payment which means they can save on one fortnight's worth of payments to each new claimant and one at the end too.)

    That is true with the benefit frauds and stuff - you can't really do anything about that unforunately :/ I hope those people realise the damage their actions cause and just take it upon themselves to not be selfish but that probably wont happen
    I hope the Mail realises the damage its action causes. I have no significant qualms with people getting an extra few quid out of the system, because it's just not a significant amount of money. Just take the moralising and emotion out of it and realise the DWP's own estimate for fraud is 0.5% of spend. And it doesn't matter if I do care, they can't be stopped. No system can ever be perfect, per the above.

    These cases are a rare occurrence and they're terribly tragic but its just sad that the system means they are bound to happen. At least the people that really need it are getting what they need but the people like this poor lady... it's sad that nothing can be done
    Something can be done: abolish the bedroom tax! In general, just pay people the money they need to live on with significantly less conditionality and don't make it about their supposed moral failings.

    By cutting conditionality, and all the associated costs I touched on above, we might even save some money to pay down that blasted deficit that was meant to be gone by now according to Osborne. (Labour, remember, took just 3 years to post a surplus, 8 years out from a crash. Even Maggie managed it eventually!)
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TimmonaPortella)
    No, but you see, you should have an 'inalienable right' not to have to share.

    So speaks the voice of the infantile left, which for some reason takes pride in its refusal to acknowledge real-world constraints and practicalities.
    I'd rather be infantile than inhumane.

    I have referred previously in the thread to using measures like this AFTER measures which more appropriately hit the big corps and banks.

    I don't know your personal circumstances but so often the 'right' ironically support 'real world constraints' from a position of comfort that is more often than not a result of fortunate circumstances.
    • TSR Support Team
    • Very Important Poster
    • Reporter Team
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by EtherealNymph22)
    I'd rather be infantile than inhumane.

    I have referred previously in the thread to using measures like this AFTER measures which more appropriately hit the big corps and banks.

    I don't know your personal circumstances but so often the 'right' ironically support 'real world constraints' from a position of comfort that is more often than not a result of fortunate circumstances.
    I am a leftist but I think you'll find that big companies and banks already pay disproportionally more in tax than those less better off.

    And even if you're correct in trying to put more of a focus in increasing the amount of revenue obtained from those groups, surely for a more equitable society, both problems would have to be approached? Inefficient use of gov money and increasing the amount it gets. It is not fair to say that because you believe [insert company] should pay more in tax then the Government shouldn't try to seek ways in order to cut spending.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by EtherealNymph22)
    I'd rather be infantile than inhumane.

    I have referred previously in the thread to using measures like this AFTER measures which more appropriately hit the big corps and banks.

    I don't know your personal circumstances but so often the 'right' ironically support 'real world constraints' from a position of comfort that is more often than not a result of fortunate circumstances.
    The problem is that you appear to think that simply declaring that everyone should have x, y, or z is worth anything at all. It isn't. The underlying sentiment is great, but it is also not the only thing that exists.

    No, you don't know my circumstances, and they wouldn't form a valid argument even if you did.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kvothe the arcane)
    People shouldn't have to move houses when their circumstances change?

    Seeing as I'll have to share for the next 10 years, I'm not so easily swayed by your "daring to have a room free" comment. What makes you think there aren't any one-bedroom properties?

    You don't have to apologise. I'm mature enough to be able to handle someone disagreeing with me .

    Edit: it was 2 years and not 3 as her suicide was last year :holmes:.
    What concerns me is why you think this situation is acceptable for any of us. Why should we share our homes when we have all this space free? Apparently the profits of developers etc are more important than the population having a place to live.

    We are placidly rolling over and accepting slums again. Houses are in better repair, yes, but one wonders how long it will be before we see Londoners sleeping one family to a room again.

    Our grandparents would never have stood for this: they elected governments after the war which built swathes of housing. And other countries are perfectly capable of ensuring their citizens all have a decent, affordable place to live. But a certain section of British society, which is amply represented among members of the House, wants to earn pretend money by sitting on property (or land), restricting supply and ideally renting (or selling) it out at inflated rates to those who missed the boat.

    We are supposed to be the builders, for heaven's sake. If the fifth richest country in the world, with its long-term economic plan in full swing, can't give its citizens a place of their own to live in before they're 30 it's a pretty poor show.

    There aren't any one-bedroom council flats because social housing has always been designed with families in mind. It is a common objection to the bedroom tax, so Google it if you are interested. And the Tories are hardly likely to build any, are they?
    • TSR Support Team
    • Very Important Poster
    • Reporter Team
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    scrotgrot, if it were an actual tax then I might be inclined to agree.

    But it's simply a reduction in benefit entitlement on the premise that the extra room could house someone who could contribute to the household's income. There is nothing in the article which suggests that she was incapable of paid employment. As I said previously, she had choices. I'm not saying those choices were easy.

    You are wrong. As you can see here, there are multiple one bed places available and the list is updated weekly. This is her area: Rotherham.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: January 25, 2016
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Should Spain allow Catalonia to declare independence?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.