Parents face eviction from family sized homes under planned law

Officials at the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) disclosed that couples and lone parents in social housing will be forced to downsize when their children leave home, or supplement their housing benefit. If children stay with the family into adulthood and go to work, they may be expected to contribute to a higher rent.

The move, which took department officials by surprise yesterday, will affect a substantial proportion of the three million people in homes owned by councils or housing associations. It will require primary legislation, which is expected to be laid early next year and implemented by 2012-13.

Under current rules couples can stay in family-sized accommodation for life, despite the shortage of multiroom houses suitable for families presently in properties too small for them. Figures released by the Department for Communities and Local Government show that nearly 500,000 people are living in “underused property” while more than 250,000 families are in overcrowded accommodation.

Philippa Roe, Cabinet member for housing at Westminster council, backed the move to reduce overcrowding. “We have more than 1,000 families who are in overcrowded accommodation in Westminster, and more or less the same number whose homes are under-occupied,” she said. “We could solve that problem overnight if we could move people from larger houses into smaller ones.”

But housing organisations and charities said the change could lead to family breakdown and questioned whether there would be enough homes for couples to move into. Leslie Morphy, chief executive of Crisis, said: “People’s houses are their homes, and their homes are their neighbourhoods. It is very difficult to do that and you risk breaking up families by doing it.”

In a separate move the Treasury disclosed that all local housing allowances — paid to those in private rental accommodation — will now be about a third of market rates, rather than 50 per cent at the moment.

That will mean that families in poor areas could lose nearly 40 per cent of their housing allowance. Officials at the DWP argued that many people in rural areas and towns in the North would probably see a difference of only a few pounds a week and could meet the extra amount themselves. But in London and other big cities the differences will be much larger and many people might have to move to less affluent areas or even to different parts of the country.

Liz Phelps, a Citizens Advice housing officer, said the Government was risking disaster by setting the allowance at the 30th percentile of local rents and predicted that numbers of homeless people would soar. “That is potentially the big one,” she said. “The rental cap is going to affect most of London but cutting down to the 30th percentile will potentially affect people across the country. It will mean lower rates across the country. It is very crude, short-term thinking. It will cut the DWP budget but it will explode the homelessness budget. We will see a lot more rent arrears, a lot more debt and acute poverty, and then more homelessness.”

‘I can’t afford to rent a flat near my family’

Rebecca Mill-Wilson, 25, fears the lowering of the cap on housing benefit will trap families in areas where work is hard to come by, further stigmatising them as benefit claimants (Laura Whateley writes).

She lives with her two children, Niamh, 5, and Johnathan, 3, who has learning difficulties in a two-bedroom flat in Warminster, Wiltshire — towards which she receives £500 a month housing benefit to part cover her £575-a-month rent. She says: “I cannot imagine what it is like for families living in London. I would like to rent somewhere in Bath, where my family and friends live and there is much more work available, however the housing market is just prohibitively expensive. The two-bedroom flats, to which I am entitled in Bath, are way out of my price league.

“This is a problem, as I have really struggled to find a job near Warminster. I cannot afford to commute to work in Bath, and the extra two hours a day childcare I would require if I did.

“The fact my son has learning difficulties adds to the problem. I need to be flexible so I can attend appointments with him, which is not easy to match with working hours.”

Ms Mill-Wilson has been looking for clerical work in the public sector as she used to work in administration for the Ministry of Defence. However, the recession has meant that finding a job is a “nightmare”.

To improve her prospects, Ms Mill-Wilson has embarked on an Open University diploma in politics and government and a degree in international studies, so relies on income from child tax credits, child benefit and maintenance from her former husband. She says that the freeze on child benefit will worry her if inflation spirals out of control, as she only just gets by at the moment, on a very tight budget.

She says: “As a ‘young, single mum on benefits’ I really understand how it feels to be stigmatised. Contrary to belief, it is not easy to claim from the state. I study economics as part of my degree, and even I can’t work out all the tax credits.

“The form to apply for Johnathan’s disability benefit is 70 pages long. The idea of having to go through an assessment for him, too, is worrying.”

‘I’d love a fourth child but will we have the money?’

Laura and Robert Moisey-Smith’s finances will be dealt a blow from 2012 when they will no longer be eligible to claim child tax credits for their three children, Sam, 11, Imogen, 2, and Wilson, 10 months, left, because their joint annual salary is more than £25,000 (Laura Whateley writes).

Mrs Moisey-Smith, a teaching assistant, is on maternity leave and her husband works as a structural engineer. Although they are, in George Osborne’s eyes, a middle- class family, they say that they will really feel the pain of the cuts in tax credits and a freeze in child benefit.

They probably won’t be able to go on holiday next year and might have to sell their car. “When you have three children and three mouths to feed you rely on every penny you’ve got,” Mrs Moisey-Smith said. “This year’s trip to France was the first time we have been on holiday for four years. We did have to go during term time, though, as it is too expensive during the holidays.”

Mr Moisey-Smith has seen colleagues made redundant and questions the security of his own role. He says: “As we don’t have a bad standard of living I accept that we all have to take a hit, but it will also affect modest incomes, not just those of the rich.”

Their youngest two children have benefited from Child Trust Fund payments at birth and Mrs Moisey-Smith was given the £190 health in pregnancy grant. “I spent it on a buggy, which meant that I could then afford to eat well,” she said.

“I would love a fourth child, but I’m not sure we will have enough money for that,” she added.

‘Will I have to be reassessed every year?’

Martyn Sibley, 26, is concerned that the coalition’s plan to introduce medical assessments for disability allowance claimants will be one more obstacle for disabled people to face (Laura Whateley writes).

Wheelchair-bound because of spinal muscular atrophy, he receives £250 every four weeks in disability allowance.

Mr Sibley says: “I think there are many worrying, unanswered questions about this new medical assessment that is to be introduced.

“What does it entail? Will I, for example, need a one-off test, or will I have to be reassessed each year, or every few months? ”

Mr Sibley says he is also concerned that assessors will be required to meet targets to force people off benefits: “The Chancellor’s conclusion that a rising number of claimants means more claims are illegitimate is a bit fluffy. Perhaps the rise is because more disabled people are aware of their rights and what they are entitled to claim, which should be encouraged.”