Housing benefit changes

The British Social Attitudes survey found that only 27 per cent of 3,500 people questioned now agree that the Government should spend more on benefits — at the cost of higher taxes — compared with 58 per cent 21 years ago when Mrs Thatcher left office.

This may particularly interest people on housing benefit in Oxford, many of whom will next year receive letters from the city council about cuts in their income — and who face high rents thanks to competition from a large transient student population.

Nick Turnill, of Oxfordshire Welfare Rights, said that as public-sector job cuts bite, the number of people seeking the allowance will rise. He said: “More and more people coming to us now in order to talk about benefits are saying they have never been in this situation before. ‘Never thought it would be people like us’, they say.”

He added: “Oxford has been identified as one of the areas likely to be affected by caps on housing benefit, but as always, the devil will be in the detail.”

The deputy leader of Oxford City Council, Ed Turner, sees coming changes in Oxford’s housing benefits as “an unprecedented and savage attack by central Government on vulnerable people”.

His problem is that the council itself, not central government, is largely seen as the villain, since it administers the benefit — though in fact it acts simply as a conduit for central Government money and is obliged to impose national rules.

He maintains the changes will have a particularly harsh effect here.

He said: “The problem in Oxford is not so much the caps on housing benefit, which have been widely reported, and are accepted as reasonable by many, but in cuts to the Local Housing Allowance which dictates how housing benefits are calculated.”

The new system will be based on the rents of the bottom 30 per cent of the Oxfordshire market, instead of the bottom 50 per cent as at present. This means that the housing benefit for a two-bedroom Oxford home will effectively be cut from a maximum of £184 a week to £172 a week.

He added: “The level of rents in Oxfordshire as a whole is lower than in Oxford on its own and therefore not representative. And secondly the private rental market is so overblown, for example by students, that rents may become impossible for many on benefits.

“The Government’s own impact assessment of housing benefit changes envisages an increase in homelessness.”

Three paragraphs in the latest report from the Department of Work and Pensions into the likely impact housing benefit changes caught my eye: “Customers affected by the changes have a number of options. Some may start work or increase working hours to be able to meet rents above the new benefit level. Some with smaller shortfalls may be able to renegotiate their rent with their landlord and others may have resources such as savings that they can fall back on. Households which are at risk or where there are exceptional grounds may be able to stay in their accommodation if the local authority makes a Discretionary Housing Payment. However, some households may need to seek alternative accommodation either in the area or further afield if the supply of affordable rented accommodation is limited, for example, in central London. Any resulting population movement could have wider impacts. People who move may need to rearrange their children’s schooling, healthcare arrangements or, where relevant, social services support; they may also need assistance with finding accommodation.

“There is also a risk of households falling into rent arrears leading to eviction and an increase in the numbers of households that present themselves as homeless.”

Behind that official-sounding language lies the seed of much discontent and unhappiness in Oxford, which Mr Turner says, the Labour-controlled council “will do its best to mitigate”.

From a business point of view, namely that of landlords, the Government appears to be attempting to bring down private rents overall by decreasing the amount tenants can pay. But because of the “overblown” nature of the Oxford market, Mr Turner has doubts about it working here.

What is now all-but-certain is that a huge number of people in the city will next year, probably in October, receive letters telling them that their benefit is being cut.

The Government is also planning to cut Legal Aid for tenants appealing to tribunals on benefits decisions . Phillip Turpin, housing expert with law firm Oxford Turpin Miller, said: “It is proposing no legal aid for benefits problems, limited aid for housing problems, and none for debt problems.” He added wryly: “In the meantime, it has cut the pay of legal aid lawyers by ten per cent.”

To top it all, Oxfordshire Welfare Rights’s finances, from the public purse, are under threat. District tribunal judge Godfrey Cole said: “Any restriction of their work would be an inestimable loss to Oxfordshire’s vulnerable residents.”

Debt and housing benefit are all too often closely related, according to a case worker at Turpin Miller, who did not want to be named. He siad that problems often arise because a tenant takes work but then finds that housing benefit is held up for months while the new, lower benefit is confirmed. During that time he or she gets into debt Many landlords have recently been put off renting to claimants because the benefit is now paid to the tenant instead of direct to the landlord. Also, many tenants and landlords are amazed, when they propose to come to a deal, that no inspection of the property is made by the council.

In this context Mr Turner said: “It’s felt that a tenant proposing to take a flat with housing benefit should not be able to choose a flat like anyone else.” He added: “There is simply a shortage of housing.”

The Government might say there is also a surplus of money chasing that shortage. I am reminded of Dr Johnson going to the outer Hebrides where, he found eggs were expensive. He said: “Either there is a shortage of eggs or a surplus of money.”

All in all, here is hoping that attitudes to people on benefits will soften as more and more of us find ourselves in that position.