The government has vowed to “protect renters”, but landlords have continued to dish out Section 21 notices.
As yourself I am always skeptical on any Government initiative, especially around the DWP, however, there is always the chance this may be the one to trust no matter what as happened previously.
Families are facing homelessness because of errors in the way local authorities calculate housing benefit entitlements.
Source: Ombudsman warns of the ‘human cost’ of housing benefit errors : Welfare Weekly
This is in some respects is good news, but what is not good is that Housing Benefit is not able to cover all rents. Housing assistance needs to be made avalable and I believe this is the decision of the Supreme Court. However, this still means a private tennant could lose their home, therefore surely aome form of Affordable Rent legislation needs to be in force, so that tennants will not lose their accommodation due to housing benefit shortfalls or exorbitant rents being charged.
A truly worrying situation and one that could be happening within the UK. The DWP situation with Benefit claims and while the appeal process is reversing many of the wrongful dismissed cases, will this always be so. Not if we implement the American system as we appear to be doing.
It is very worrying and this should be noticed by the DWP, but will it be, I fear not.
It is good to know that some councils, may be all councils are un undertaking measures of this nature, but how do people in those situations know that some help may be available.
Where is this information published or is it published. If it is, is it in areas where people in need will see it, are there posters in doctors surgeries, Pharmacists, council hosing offices open to the public, if they still exist or anywhere else.
A few months ago I attended a meeting hosted I feel by Healthwatch Sheffield, or a voluntary organisation on PIP/UC where 2 persons from the DWP where giving a presentation.
They mentioned that within the last year some additional areas were added to the PIP process, one including the opportunity to receive advance payments and other aspects to minimise hardship while claimants were in the application process.
This prompted a flurry of questions about, if this is so why are there so many reports of continuing hardship and even deaths being reported.
Their response that these were a small fraction of the cases going through and in the majority no hardships were being felt and that many of the reported cases were historic, being over a year or two hold and this will not be occurring now.As in many of these reported cases dates are not mentioned, their comment could not be effectively challenged.
Except they were asked, if hardship was now not being experienced and, at least, they appeared to be honest and advised that there were most likely some but may be less than 1% of the cases being processed.
This led to more questions on the lines of one case is one too many and they did go away knowing they had been challenged and promised to feedback on the points raised.
It is now approx two months since this meeting and I have yet to receive a note of any feedback, but to be generous we have had Christmas and New Year.
But i do fear that this promise will not be fulfilled.
So again no change there, so we all need to keep challenging at every opportunity.
Yet another benefits scandal creating problems for a person with a disability.
In this instance it is not only the reduction in benefit, but also reduction in care for Nigel Hamlett needs, leading to non-payment of rent, which could well see him being evicted, then where would he live.
Nigel has been appealing regular reductions in the care he needs. Time and again this was reinstated, but the stress involved in this appealing has eventually been too much and did not appeal on this occasion. Why should anyone have to regularly appeal, why can the authorities just accept that the care is needed, not only for his care needs but also the additional needs these benefits can produce.
Do they really wish to see Nigel evicted, creating more stress for Nigel and probably more work for the same authorities.
This is not only occurring on Universal Credit, but also Employment Support Allowance and Personal Independence Payment, that is all the 3 new benefits introduced over the last few years.
On case would be bad enough but these are occurring on a regular basis and the Government is not appearing to be concerned.
It is as though the whole point of introducing these new benefits is to make the vulnerable persons within the UK suffer by creating homelessness and eventual the committing of suicide.
The Government is intent on reducing the financial costs of benefits and it appears they will do this at any cost to human life, which ultimately meaning the the claimants take their own lives, thereby reducing the overall benefit costs.
Reduce the market and therefore there are less people to claim the benefits.
A woman whose husband murdered her two children now fears eviction thanks to the DWP stripping her benefits.
Her case is indicative of the DWP’s apparent refusal to appreciate the difficulties of living with mental health conditions.
‘Fit for work’
As the Sunday Post reported:
A medical assessor has ruled June Martin is fit for work despite being diagnosed with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder and depression after losing her children, Michelle, 25, and son Ryan, seven.
Martin’s ex-husband murdered their two children in 2008 and is currently serving life in prison. Since findingher children dead, she has struggled to rebuild her life. She suffers from multiple mental health conditions and has felt suicidal at times.
Martin was receiving the Personal Independence Payment (PIP) disability benefit until she failed a Work Capability Assessment. The decision was upheld by a tribunal on 20 June. Independent Assessment Services, formerly known as Atos Healthcare, conducted Martin’s assessment. After the tribunal, a spokesperson stated:
Whilst the tribunal accepts Ms Martin has mental health problems and balance problems, the nature and extent of the resulting limitations are insufficient to score the required number of points.
As a result Ms Martin does not qualify for either component of personal independent payment.
But Martin claimed that the assessment was not fit for purpose. She told the Sunday Post:
Neither the assessor or the tribunal last week seemed to want to know about the trauma I suffer daily reliving finding my children posed as if they were asleep in their beds, or pulling back the covers to find them stabbed to death