Here we go again

Discussion in 'Current Affairs' started by Rumrat, Oct 12, 2010.

Welcome to the Navy Net aka Rum Ration

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial RN website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Whilst all and sundry have been beating on about the dirty trick of stopping Child benefit to high earners, another leviathan seems to have come amongst us unmentioned, with far more far reaching repercussions than child allowance.
    The lowering of the mortgage interest pay rate.
    This is the amount of interest they will pay to homeowners on benefit.
    A mortgage of £62,000 would at present rates get an interest rate payment of £71.40 per week or about £309PCM.
    The new rate would realise around £149PCM.
    The actual interest would be around 250PCM on an average interest rate mortgage. So a shortfall of about £100 or more, is now about to happen to thousands of unemployed homeowners.
    As houses are hard to sell, when a glut of repossessed home hit the market it will aggravate an already precarious position.
    If the repossessed then claim rent allowance at an average of around £70/£80 per week this will increase the government spending bill by millions compared to what they would have paid before the cut in relief.
    Also a small problem arises when the Private sector landlord will not accommodate unemployed tenants. As there is already a shortage of council houses, it begs the question where will the people live?
    Are we about to see the start of shanty towns in Britain?
    Why are we still paying Billions in aid to countries like Pakistan who although they can afford and maintain a nuclear capability, cannot feed or house their population. Why does charity always with the British begin at someone else's home?
     
  2. The Foreign Aid budget should be the first port of call for cuts like France and Germany have done. However, Nick Clegg promised the UN an increase each year AND that the coalition would seek to make it 'against the law' to reduce the budget. In Britain the economic reform etc always start with a sharp thrust into the back of the taxpayers
     
  3. Blackrat

    Blackrat War Hero Moderator Book Reviewer

    Because we are a nation of mugs that want to be seen as great at helping others. Why we don't look inwards has always been a mystery to me.
     
  4. We are mugs for allowing it to happen.
     
  5. i have noticed that when we have floods and peoples homes and businesses are ruined that all the foreign countries we help are the first to send aid/help to us (not), we need someone with balls in govenment to stand up and put this country first, yes i agree some countries do have it hard but hey, life is hard at times. apart from using the tax payers money to help other nations the brits also raise money through charities to help the disaster stricken county, why not let the charities do there work and if people want to help then they can through their own donations and not by the government using tax payers money


    ok rant over
     
  6. Is his name Ed?

    Seriously folks; isn't poverty amongst Johnny Foreigner supposed to be one of the triggers for malcontent and terrorism? The argument being that if we throw money at the buggers they will stay "on side".

    Like many theories, though, that is probably bollox. Accordingly, Rumrat makes a fair point.
     
  7. Blackrat

    Blackrat War Hero Moderator Book Reviewer

    You are quite right Fink. A classic catch 22 situation.
     
  8. So, we are swapping a position where the unemployed homeowner is paid more than his mortgage repayments to one where he has to contribute something to stay living in the style to which he has become accustomed - usually in a much nicer house than most of those in receipt of benefits (asylum seekers in Kensington notwithstanding), and the contribution is (generally speaking) higher the nicer the house. Am I the only one who thinks that this is equanimical.
     
  9. From these figures it would seem that in the past the unemployed homeowner was actually being paid more than the interest and therefore the government were by paying this extra assisting in the purchase of the property. In the past many properties were endowment linked and owners elected to pay interest only until the policy matured.
    I do feel though that for a period of up to three years the unemployed house owner should have ALL his interest up to the value of housing benefit paid. After three years he should consider selling and moving to rented property.
     
  10. Agreed Charity starts at home.
     
  11. Yes the unemployed homeowner was overpaid and it is a position I was in a few years ago. when I queried it as over payments have a nasty habit of being reclaimed, I was told in so many words to "shut up and enjoy your good fortune"
    Problem is I knew at that time people in rented accommodation who could only receive a much lower figure, and either pay the difference or move.
    A rather stupid system wouldn't you agree?

    As to having to sell your home and rent, two problems as I have already stated.
    Complete lack of council accommodation available, and most private landlords will not take DSS claimants.
    If the person evicted has no equity in the house, which is no rarity now, then the state becomes responsible to house and pay rent for the person.
    A person with less than £7,000 or £14,000 as a couple can after two years claim housing benefit.
    Where is the saving to government in that scenario?
    I would be in the same boat myself if I was unemployed for no reason but couldn't find work, and had no personal income or capital, so I cannot but feel sorry for people who for no fault of their own will loose their home and be wiped out financially.
    Not everyone who is unemployed is a scrounger, there are a multitude of circumstances, and when you are cocooned in a well paid secure employment it is easy to be cynical about others misfortune.
    John my oppo who's circumstances I have used as my illustration, cannot work as he has a physical disability. He receives the benefits accordingly and had help with his mortgage from the social. He will be able to find the £100 shortfall now, but if interest rates go up he will be stuffed.
    He planned like me to sell his house and either buy a mobile home (Static and residential) or share a bought home with our other buddy.
    His house has lost like many £25,000 value and there are no buyers out there anyway.
    So the Cameron promise to protect the vulnerable seems to have evaporated. The Pakistani Government and others, will continue to receive aid and our citizens will pay dearly for it.
    And I helped put him in power, a fact I'm already starting to regret. :oops:
     
  12. What are your thoughts on this solution

    1. Your house is valued at market rates.
    2. Your outstanding loan is subtracted from this value.
    3. The government takes over ALL mortgage payments for a maximum of 10 years.
    4. If you cannot find work in this time the property is then sold, any remaining mortgage paid off and you are given the amount calculated at step 2.
    5. The government takes the rest.

    This would of course have to be subject to the same maximum mortgage repayment as for those in private rented accommodation.

    If a person managed to find work then any payments made by the government could be added (with no interest) to the mortgage total.
    This would guarantee housing for 10 years and should cost the government no more than it would have if it had paid rental benefit, in fact it may even make them a few bob
     
  13. Rummers, I can neither sympathise nor empathise with your oppo's situation. Mortgage protection insurance (which will cover someone in the event of death, accident, illness, or redundancy) is readily available, and is generally recommended by mortgage brokers. If your oppo decided that he would rather risk not having his mortgage insured than pay what is really a quite meagre amount, then it is a problem of his own making, and I really do not see why I (as the taxpayer) should foot his bill.
     
  14. Inclined to agree with JC (never thought I would be writing those words!)

    The sad fact of the matter is that the social welfare safety net is too big, too deep and too open to abuse so something has to be done. Hopefully they won't end up throwing baby out with the bathwater and genuine cases of hardship will be evaluated on merit while those who are just spongeing off the State will be bounced out of the net and into the big bad real world.
     
  15. You best read your insurance policy Joe.
    It usually pays out for 1 year and you have to resume work for 3 months in order to claim again.
    Critical illness insurance pays out exactly on what it says on the tin.
    I have not found any extended mortgage protection schemes that cover more than a year, but will stand correction if some one names the Insurance company that does.
    As a tax payer you will face a bigger bill if he is repossessed the average rent in this area is between 74 to 80 pound per week.
    If he makes less than £7,000 profit, and is given a rented gaff at lets say an average £77 PW that works out at £334 a month more than he was receiving in mortgage benefit. The only satisfaction you could draw from this is that you wont be helping him buy his house.
    You will however be helping numerous foreigners to whatever whilst you stand and watch your own countries defences run down whilst theirs is maintained.
    Cool comfort for me and many like minded people. But then complain about internal affairs in this country where a foreigner may dip out because of it and your a racist.
    When we are a total banana republic I wonder if the Middle Eastern countries will be as benevolent to us?

    Now to slims idea, I think they could guarantee tenancy by legislation, whereby you can live there as long as the value increase is taken as a percentage of the rent if you move.
    Whilst you should not make profit at the tax payers cost, you could at least have the same amount paid as a rent in your area. When you sell the property, any benefit taken out of the profit less your entitlement.
     
  16. It doesn't work like that as it would be too easy.
    What do you class as real hardship? The bloke had a form of polio in his leg and he is one step away from amputation.
    Insurance for mortgage protection is not everlasting as I stated, if you know better publish the companies name. I have had dealings with insurances for the last four years now and have not found a long stay company.
    So we evict him and then what throw him in a field? If you rehouse all the dispossessed it is going not only to impose an astronomical burden on housing stock, and financial strain on the tax payer but you are going to feel the shock waves as well my friend no matter what you might say or think.
    Try and sell your house now at a reasonable level of profit. You wont my friend unless you bought it when Noah was a boy seaman.
    Now imagine this swamped market that already exists, blanket saturated with thousands more cheap houses from repossessions.
    Getting nearer home now is it not?
    Don't say it won't happen, it already is.
     
  17. . I didn't say it would be easy (and it won't be painless either)
    Yep, that gets a tick in the box as far as I am concerned
    Don't disgaree with you
    Where does "reasonable profit" come into the equation - see my comment about not being painless
    Perhaps, but I still maintain that there is considerable abuse of the system and some of the more blatant examples of abuse need to be cleaned up
     
  18. Rumrat
    I understand that your mate will be an amputee, however this does not stop many hundres of his fellow amputees working.
    There will be a number of positions that he will be able to fill.
    When I served at boscombe Down I had a civie mate who had polio as a child. While not requiring amputation it left one of his legs extremely withered.
    He was one of the best Scientific Occifers I ever met, his technical abilities were second to none. sadly he has now gone to meet his maker
     
  19. I wasn't questioning that the system is abused, and I was not challenging your every stance.
    The point is the system is blanket fashion at present and whilst helping my oppo we even came across the DWP contradicting itself.
    On its web site with the date on it, it clearly stated that people claiming the benefit prior to the 5Th Jan 2009 would continue to receive it at the same rate.
    That is a blatant lie according to their own help line. So I'm buggered if I will start an argument about who gets what when they don't even know themselves.
    I maintain that people who are genuine should not be suffering the pain of loosing all they have worked for because the Government wont tackle the problem at grass roots.
    The Banks instead of being punished for their reckless disregard have actually had massive hand outs from the public purse, and are now making it almost impossible for the little man to prosper or even retain what he has striven for over years.
    Anyone ( no not aimed at you) taking the pompous high ground about the unemployed and benefit claimants should do well to think that the old saying "There but for the grace of god as it may well sit on their door step one day.
    I have always been industrious and hard working, but I survived on state hand outs for two years through necessity, a situation I never ever thought I would be in. My parents were wealthy and had they still been alive I would have been looked after, as they knew me to not be a sponger.
    The money they left me I placed in trust for my kids and both will inherit on their 40Th birthday, so as to avoid the temptations of youthful waste.
    So when I see others in need I have compassion toward their predicament. My life changed in a matter of minutes one night on a filthy wet cold pavement, and so can anyone's. All my insurances were spent (run out ) within 18 months and you get nothing from employers after 6 months in the Public sector, well I never despite all appeals.
    And my house has been on the market reasonably priced for six months. It is far from basic, but the competition is fierce because of people selling through necessity.
    My oppo being far less ambient than me has not done half the work on his that I have so has no chance. we do try to help him though.
    Reasonable profit means not expecting anything like what it was worth before the shit hit the fan.
    Many people who bought houses around here within the last 6 years are now well out of equity by sums of 27 thousand the prices have fallen so rapidly. The west midlands is reputed to be one of the worst areas for job losses.
     
  20. Slim it's not that he cannot work it's just he cannot get work.
    I have both a HGV and PSV licence and every time I tried I got as far as interview. THEN... Hows your health, or I see on your application you state you had a heart attack? yes I did .
    We will let you know........not. :evil:
    Did I mention I am also a trained Para Medic, but cannot secure work in that direction If I wanted to as I have a problem. :oops:
    He can hardly disguise a 20 degree to starboard list when he walks.

    The job centers answer to their jobless statistics down here is to advise everyone over the age of 60 that they would be far better taking pension credits.
     

Share This Page