Mrs Abu-Hamza, Is it time for her to go?

[anotheoldgit]

http://www.express.co...mza-s-wife-at-1m-home

Why should this woman be allowed to stay in a £1million, Five bedroom house which is funded by the taxpayer, even though six of her eight children have moved out?

[daffy654]

There is no way to move her if she doesn't want to go, she is not breaking any laws.

[B00]

Been asked before AOG.

http://www.theanswerb.../Question1177708.html

[sandyRoe]

Isn't there new legislation in the offing which means under occupied council properties will have to vacated and re-let to larger families? Mrs Hamza's house could then be let to a large family of asylum seekers.

[emmie]

as you can see i posted same, don't expect much in the way of support for your idea.

[emmie]

do we need any more asylum seekers, surely there are any number of large families that have actually worked, paid tax here who are in need of a home.

[friedgreentomato]

Sandy i believe that is for new tennents not for existing - she has lived in that house for 15 years and still has children living at home.

[emmie]

2 children and her, in a five bed property. some of the others are in prison

[sandyRoe]

Perhaps she will exercise her right to buy. She must be in line for a big discount. Roots in the community, and all that.

[friedgreentomato]

Em we have discussed this before - how many elderly people are living in 3 bedroom houses when they only need 1?

[anotheoldgit]

Isn't there new legislation in the offing which means under occupied council properties will have to vacated and re-let to larger families

I don't know, but they could lose some housing benefit according to the number of vacant rooms.

I suggest that Mrs Abu-Hamza carries out a little sub-letting to her 'friends'.

No on second thoughts, that's not going to happen somehow.

/// The Government’s programme of Welfare Reform introduces a number of changes to the Housing Benefit system. One proposed reform is the introduction of rules governing the ‘under-occupation’ of a property.
Currently, there is no link between the amount of Housing Benefit received, and the size of property occupied. The Government is proposing to change this situation from April 2013, restricting Housing Benefit entitlement to the number of rooms needed in a property.
The proposed changes would mean that someone living alone in a three bedroom house would only receive payments matching those of a person living alone in a one bedroom property.
These under-occupation rules are designed to both minimise the number of empty rooms in social rented properties, and to contain public expenditure on Housing Benefit ///

[emmie]

i don't care if it was discussed 20 times, if a person is living in a bigger property then so what. That person may well have the following, family near by, friends, doctors they need to see, hospitals they attend, and any number of reasons why they are still there. If the person goes into a home because they cannot cope then that is different. Don't think any council will necessarily house the person in the same area as they live currently, because according to all the information and experience i have at my disposal, indicates they may well have to move out of their neighbourhood, borough.

[craft1948]

My mum wanted to downsize from a 3 bedroom to a 1 bedroom.........it took the council 5 years to find her one.

[emmie]

if the stupid councils didn't keep selling off property they own, and it's not in the Right to Buy Scheme, then there will be a shortfall of places to live. Add in hundreds of thousands of empty properties across the country that could be used to house those families. If only a bit of thought went into it.

[emmie]

if the person wants to then no problem, but as said even 1 bedroom properties are becoming rare. This is because so called market rents are pricing us all out of London, only those with loads of money can afford to live here.

[Zeuhl]

<One proposed reform is the introduction of rules governing the ‘under-occupation’ of a property. >

Yet another ill-considered government policy

As a Director of a national Housing Assoc pointed out to me recently, the 'bedroom tax' (as they call it) ignores not only the social consequences of starving people out of their homes

it also pre-supposes that there is an adequate supply of 2-bedroom properties - which there isn't.

[emmie]

Zeuhl and pointed out to me and what i see around me are empty homes in large numbers, those could be used for families forced into B&B's
Local estate agent has properties of half a million upwards to buy, and that is often ex council homes. The local council does not want to take any more responsibility for social housing, that was put to me a while back by a local councillor. And pretty much that is what is happening, social housing is going the way of the dodo.

[youngmafbog]

Zehul, you are ignoring the fact that if you move someone out of the large house and someone out of a small house then there is no problem. Sounds like lefty claptrap from a housing assoc director. Having bought many properties off them in the past and the state they were in I have little time for housing associations.

This womon should be moved out of the country and at the very least moved out of London to some cheaper place.

We are all mugs

[Zeuhl]

<We are all mugs >

mafbog - good to see you are so self-aware (^^^)

[boxtops]

Is she a British citizen?

[Zeuhl]

<Sounds like lefty claptrap from a housing assoc director. >

Well his organisation only has just over 40,000 properties the length of the country so I expect they aren't as knowledgeable or as objective as you mafbog