News

It may help a few % claimants on guaranteed long term disability awards (if there is such a thing yet) but otherwise it will tempt people to take on a mortgage that cannot be sustained if their benefit is reduced or removed in the future...leading to enormous stress and more homelessness.

As a resident with one of the G15 housing providers Southern housing group I have found that becoming a tenant with them and having a home non fit for purpose has caused long term mental health and much anxiety in trying to fight rip of service charges charges of non provided or agreed services and a home and enviroment with estate troubles of the higest nature the enviroment continues to cause non quiet enjoyment of home and that the anxiety of decant or regentrification adds to the anxiety. I feel many residents have been kept in deliberatly falled standards for profit, much miss trust accurs when complaint systems fail us, who would buy from those we miss trust the most and those of us on universal credit and unable to obtain daily basic needs throughout the month without hand outs from food banks or growing debt is hardly likely to beable to reasonable or inteligently make such a decision anyway, without resident involvement and training the average resident on low to medium wage will be forced into uneducated decisions with present huge consequences. I do not believe we can effectively own a house but mearly lease it and then the charges escallated into total unreasonableness, clever buisness heads will not sell assets but attemp to rid back stock that private investor would not be interested in. This up and coming offer is supposed to correct the imbalance of equal right to progress to the housing market before any such idea homes and estate need to be brought up to reasonable standards and that the DWP needs to make changes in aiding Housing profiteers by not paying service charges or rent untill properties are fit and the resident is agreeable to any additional charge agreements. 

If the benefit Claimant passes all the hurdles to get a mortgage, will the government help them to get social housing if  they can't afford the outgoings that come with owning a home? Somehow I don't think so. 

So they will help buy a house but won't help put food on the table!!! Rather twisted.. a future with your mortgaged home being taken from you, hike up the interest rates just as you think you are safe and then consider that home an asset perhaps.  Something radically wrong with this 

Isn't this how the 2008 finacial crisis happened!? If you are on benefits especially housing benefit then you are most probably struggling financially. I also think this could be a very devisive issue once again giving a false impression that people on benefits have got it easy. I believe that the real issues that need addressing are, more social housing, fair rent caps, fairer tenancy agreements, for both social and private rented accomodation. For Councils, social housing, and private rent landlords to be held accountable for their properties, in regards to maintenance and good living standards. And of course good standard affordable houses for people to buy. I could go on for sometime if I had the energy, I have no idea what the government are thinking, I can only imagine they just are not.

The disconnection between the government and most people's idea of everyday reality seems to be evident in this ridiculous housing policy, that takes housing from those who really need it and condemns others to longterm crippling debt, when they are unable to keep up their mortgage payments.

This happened in the USA and caused the financial crash in 2008/09. It was called Ninja mortgages and when claimants couldn't afford to pay their mortgages the debts were sold on to other financial institutions around the world. This caused some financial institutions to go bankrupt and people lost their homes. It's not a good idea and it will result in more social housing being unavailable to those that desperately need it.

Claims change and people are treated by the DWP very inconsistently,  this will leave people in debt and unable to pay leading to houses being repossessed . A vicious cycle and one that will create more homeless ,evictions , struggling to make ends meet, if the government guarantees extra support for home owners then less homeless , people getting into rent / mortgage arrears. I don't think this is a good idea at all. 

What about the ridiculous outdated benefits £6,000 saving rules it’s far out of date by 34 years old that benefit mortgage cannot meet the old DSS saving rules which it’s should be scrapped the old £6,000 it’s no longer safe that some claimant still have to pay £40 a week income tax if he or she has over £6,000 in saving. It is extremely too low in today benefits rate despite local council personal budget payment saving limit is between £23,000 to £25,000 per person & why this cannot be that new saving limit from the local authority with the state benefits system is not fair?

This is a tactic for the upcoming elections, don't be fooled by their false promises, its all smoke and mirrors.

Is this some kind of a joke? Obviously Housing Benefit and Council Tax Support would be stopped. How on earth someone on means tested benefits be able to pay mortgage, service charges, insurances, repair costs etc.? Are our law makers that hollow, even if they live in a parallel world?

I am paying more in rent than I would a mortgage. It’s a very good idea. 

How can this work? Folk lose their mobility car due to slow reviews so will they also lose their homes too? Very worrying. As I am a widow and own my house sadly I cannot afford the re-wire that this old house needs. Plus other much needed repairs. 

mim

Only includes those working on low incomes. +they need to look at the situation of those who have a mortgage+loose their job. The mortgage is often substantially lower than a private landlord and the gov is wasting money lining their pockets via the housing benefit system, rather than looking at decreasing their wasted money. I paid £73 mth for my mortgage, but loss of house would have meant housing benefit of £400 mth to pay for one bedroom bedsit (nb that was several decades ago in cheap area to live in). Even if time limited say 12-24mth while trying to get another job it’d be waay cheaper.

People working and claiming housing benefit are doing so because they do not have enough income to pay for their needs otherwise they’d not be entitled…so how are they expected to save anything to help go towards mortgage?!! Their income is all accounted for!

The same scenario applies if on UC. The fact you get it means you have no spare money! Especially as the rates are so low, landlords can be charging more than market rent, so claimants already having to pay top ups out of money meant for daily living costs. Plus the bedroom tax also takes money out of daily living money yet there are not the properties available to move to avoid bedroom tax.

what about those entirely on benefits+the resulting inability to cover daily expenses especially when costs rise quicker than benefits. +that benefits payments do not have a contingency element for the inevitable breakdown of crucial items to live. Eg your cooker breaks completely and you have no option but to take a loan with excessive interest. Even loans from dwp then leave you with less money than daily living expenses when they take it back. +it’s well known household items have a limited life span eg washing machine is 5 years according to plumber!!!

you cannot separate the housing benefit/mortgage situation from the whole benefit set up and inadequate support.

this will increase the issue that we have created an ‘underclass’ and their exclusion will exacerbate this.

the right to buy as it currently is dysfunctional as there is no like for like housing replacement. Someone buys the housing association property but it’s not replaced immediately with another, so you’re into minus property numbers. The private market is not much better as for decades developers have not built enough housing despite owning substantial areas that would allow need/demand to be met.

Housing+planning system needs an overhaul. ‘Landbanking’ to try+increase it’s value+then sell on should be banned. If developers don’t start building on land within say 6-12mths they should be forced to sell that land. Especially where it’s been council land. This should never be sold without guarantees of building+properties that meet local needs, not building whatever the developers want to so they get insane profits. Profit is fine but currently it’s at a level of greed. +planning law currently favours developers.

the proposal needs to address the current joke of ‘affordable’ housing. Otherwise it will still be impossible to buy. If I was offered a mortgage of three times the average wage in my area(which most jobs aren’t here), it’d give me about £40,000. The cheapest property of any kind is £100,000. The current levels of (non!) affordable housing planners have to put in needs to be upped+they should be banned from then claiming they cannot afford to do the development because they have to put in affordable housing. 4 in an estate of multiple hundreds of 4+5 bedrooms is hardly going to put a dint in profits. More greed.

+dysfunction will continue while there is a link between business and political party funding of any party.

Well done if you read it all, but this subject just makes my blood boil!😡

What mortgage provider is going to give a mortgage to someone on benefits? How are people on benefits going to be better off when they have to take on the whole cost of repairing and maintaining their house out of their benefits, as home owners have to do? What would make mine, and every other tenants' life better would be for the government to prioritise abolishing section 21 (the so-called 'no-fault' or 'revenge' eviction clause in the 1988 Housing Act) so that no landlord can ever again evict us on a whim, or because we asked for repairs to be done.

These saving and house buying help schemes are not open to mature people who still do not have their own homes. I am in my 50's and never been in the position to buy but have been too old to benefit. There should not be an age cap on them. 

Also housing benefit )or the housing element of UC) is clearly in their sights for cuts.

This is the same party that set HB at the lower third percentile of local rents, brought in the bedroom tax, made the housing element of UC sanctionable and told under 35s they'd only eligible for the HB shared room rate forcing many to leave their stable homes.

So yes, I get it. People have reason to be concerned, personally I would much rather have a mortgage (as long as it wasn't too big) and try and take control of my life than be subject to the whims of Tory ministers with an agenda.

I think people here make some very valid points and many are right to be concerned.

However there is definitely a focus on social housing and the long term sick on benefits when this policy appears to be targeted more at those in private rented accommodation that are in work.

Personally the biggest problem with it isn't the idea it's house prices and the crazy idea such people take out 95% mortgages which is a massive no no.

It would be much better if Help to Buy was reformed and very favourable terms offered to such people. But again when house prices are so high and interest rates ok the rise, it's not a good time.

After the next elections , the Tories will change the rules again. 
This policy had not been thought through. Boris is trying to retain his Red wall seats which he won by lying about Brexit 
look at what is happening with the Northern Ireland protocol which was oven ready 

This is insane. The govt won't cover the full cost of any mortgages,  and benefits by definition are insecure and will fluctuate in response to Govt whims. And the new owners are suddenly responsible for all their repairs. 
Plus -- will the Govt ensure that enough new houses are built to replace those sold out of the public sector? Absolutely not!
A few years  ago a Tory politician (David Cameron?) said he was against social/council housing because it bred Labour voters!