It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Bedroom Tax Suicide Victim in Vain: Granny was exempt from housing loss

page: 1
8
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 12 2014 @ 09:40 PM
link   


www.theguardian.com...

Woman who took her own life over bedroom tax would have been exemp


Stephanie Bottrill, from Solihull, West Midlands, left note blaming government for financial stress before her death in May 2013


Months ago this 53yo grandmother took her own life because she was struggling to pay her own rent. Now so much later, it has been determined that she was exempt from losing her housing, altogether.

Her son has since declared Iain Duncan Smith has “blood on his hands” for her killing herself.

www.mirror.co.uk...


Iain Duncan Smith has “blood on his hands” says the son of Bedroom Tax suicide victim Stephanie Bottrill – after it emerged she was exempt.

And there were calls last night on the Work and Pensions Secretary to ­apologise personally to her family.

Steven Bottrill, 28, spoke out after it emerged his mum was never liable for the cruel tax in the first place.

A loophole in DWP rules meant Stephanie should not have lost any of her housing benefit because she was exempt under 1996 regulations.

"My mum lived in that house for 18 years and now we find out she didn’t have to pay Bedroom Tax.

"It’s unforgivable."



"TRAGEDY: Stephanie Bottrill told neighbours: “I can’t afford to live any more” -DailyMirror




posted on Jan, 12 2014 @ 10:09 PM
link   
reply to post by gardener
 

You really can't expect the heartless and soulless creatures who enact laws such as these to have any pity or remorse for the pain and suffering they cause. It means little to them that this woman killed herself because she had a troubled life, and they furnished the last straw to push her to the point of no return.

Yet we'll continue to make excuses for these creatures, and many will say she was selfish for taking her own life. *sigh*



posted on Jan, 12 2014 @ 10:26 PM
link   
It is very sad to hear that this woman ended her own life. But when it comes down to it, that is exactly what happened - she ended her life. The only person with blood on their hands, unfortunately is the woman who killed herself. She must have truly been suffering in her life and it is heart breaking to hear that it ended in such a way for her. The story mentioned that her children had moved out and she was fearing the prospect of having to move away from her friends as well - loneliness can be very scary.

My heart goes out to her family.



posted on Jan, 12 2014 @ 10:35 PM
link   

Infinitis
It is very sad to hear that this woman ended her own life. But when it comes down to it, that is exactly what happened - she ended her life. The only person with blood on their hands, unfortunately is the woman who killed herself. She must have truly been suffering in her life and it is heart breaking to hear that it ended in such a way for her. The story mentioned that her children had moved out and she was fearing the prospect of having to move away from her friends as well - loneliness can be very scary.

My heart goes out to her family.


That's right...lay the blame on her and her family but not Govt.

All according to plan.

Will you be the first in line for a roof and a meal when people can no longer justify tyranny?

Probably.

Peace



posted on Jan, 12 2014 @ 11:38 PM
link   
reply to post by jude11
 


The government instituted a policy that makes it so if you are living off welfare, you shouldn't be allowed to live in a home with extra bedrooms, without paying a tax for it.

Now in the case of this woman, she was given the choice to stay in her home that she was comfortable in while paying the extra money, or keep her regular benefit and move to a smaller location. In an incredibly heartbreaking turn of events she chooses to take her life instead. Unbelievably sad.

Now I am not making a case for or against the new law or policy which led to her being presented with the 2 options I referenced above. However, we all have to face challenges in life, and some people experience events which would make having to move to a different house with less extra bedrooms seem like a blessing from God in comparison to where they live now.

The real crime that exists is people are growing up so entangled in this inhuman economic/social system that has grown around us and caused us all to become so disconnected from each other and focused on pursuing activities and objects that destroy our minds, bodies and home (earth). We don't know how to take care of ourselves let alone taking care of each other (which is how it's supposed to be). This woman was clearly having sever emotional problems, and if they do not stem from a psychological or physical problem, then it most likely is a product of her entire life - not the product of the new law and not the prospect of having to move to a new home.
edit on 12-1-2014 by Infinitis because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 13 2014 @ 12:09 AM
link   
reply to post by Infinitis
 


Thats all well and good, just one problem....

Smaller properties are next to non-existent right now. In some areas there are no single occupancy properties at all.



posted on Jan, 13 2014 @ 02:31 AM
link   
I bet she isnt the only person who has committed suicide over the bedroom tax. I compare this tax to the Window Tax

Ian Duncan Smith shoudent apologise - He should resign from government as he is clearly a heartless b*stard



posted on Jan, 13 2014 @ 04:42 AM
link   
It is NOT a TAX...It is a reduction in housing benefit for those in council owned property when they have extra bedrooms. The average cost is about £4 per week reduction in housing benefit. This rule has been in place in the private rented sector for as long as I can remember. Even with the two bedroom allowance I have, due to the shortage of council property, I have to rent in the private sector, where my rent is £104 per week, the allowance is £98.00, therefore, I have to pay £6 per week extra. The same flat, when it was owned by the council costs £60 per week and I would have no top up to pay.

Where were all the bleeding heart liberals when that rule was made for the private sector? As soon as my daughter turned 18, I had to provide evidence that she was still in full time education or my allowance would have been cut to a one bed property, as it is, it will be cut when she turns 20, so we will have to cough up an extra £20 a week, because private rents are so much higher than council rents. But I can assure you, that the difference between a 5 apartment council property and a 2 apartment one is no more than £12 a week.

If she was concerned about her rent, why did she not speak to her family? Although times are tough, I am quite sure they could have helped her with a couple of pounds each per week. Why did she not contact the housing association? Because if she had she would have discovered that the difference in rents was nowhere near £20 per week and of course, she was exempt anyway and even if she wasn't she could have applied for the discretionary payment...one phonecall would have been all it took!

In fact, one of the biggest problems with this new legislation is the scaremongering that goes with it. No one said a thing about the legislation for private rented property, and there wasn't a flurry of Daily Mail articles talking about suicides among private sector tenants, who in fact have always had to "top up" their rent. So perhaps think about others who are not lucky enough to have the cheap rents in the public sector before ranting on about someone losing a couple of quid a week might be more useful.

Also, suicide is not something that occurs because of one factor, there were probably a number of reasons this woman took her own life, and the fact that she obviously couldn't speak to her own family is clearly one of them.



posted on Jan, 13 2014 @ 04:44 AM
link   
reply to post by SearchLightsInc
 


The window tax is something totally different, you are entirely wrong to compare them. I am sure I have pointed this out to you before. Deny ignorance please and stop scaremongering!



posted on Jan, 13 2014 @ 07:37 AM
link   
reply to post by Infinitis
 


Mate the extra £5 could have just been the bit that put her over the edge.

Im disabled after years of working and building houses, a roof I was working on collapsed and left me in a bad way.

I get industrial disablement benefit, I had private insurance but the bank cheated me out of it and as legal aid is restricted there is nothing I can do.

I became a type 1 diabetic in 2008, I need extra stuff for my diet that I cant afford, so I have one meal a day and keep the constant hypos off with drinking tea with sugar in it.

I get no extra money to deal with it, Now if I had to pay and extra £5 a week that would be just to much,

. I was top of the housing list, ocupational thearpy says I need a 3 bedroom property with 2 toilets, the council said we think he needs a ground floor heated flat, and there is a 10 year waiting list.

In otherwards they allocated me a property that there is a 10 year waiting list for, so they did not need to re house me.
There is no choice to move its a con.

What they have done is limit increases to 1% in benefits whilst gas and eletric rise by 13% food by 25% etc and now they are taking and extra £5.

I am of sound mind but have already come to the decision that if my benefit is cut anymore then there is nothing I can do, I will lapse into a coma through hypo and lack of food and it will be over quickly.

Its outwith my control, the amount of community centres houses, hospitals, schools I have build is endless, but always I knew that if I had an accident doing a dangerous job that I lived in the UK I would be taken care of ( how wrong was I)

Without me and people like me you would all be living in caves' and now Im treated like dirt.

Im not going to beg' I paid for years, infact I dont want the governments money, stop stealing my 2 sons money from their wages and they will give it to me direct, but the government takes from my sons and gives me a little bit back and makes me jump through hoops for it

The only advice I would give' is dont do a dangerous job because if you have an accident you are on your own.



posted on Jan, 13 2014 @ 09:14 AM
link   
reply to post by destination now
 


Exactly, and I get tired of repeating it myself.

You can even tell the papers that carried the story (Mirror and Guardian), which are both left-wing rags, try to hammer home the point by capitalising the words "Bedroom Tax" to make it appear that is actually what this is, which is just a blatant lie.

I'm sorry, I have no sympathy really. The actual reduction in Housing benefit entitlement is actually really small, only £14 a week. She originally got the house when her two kids lived with her, but they moved out, so why should the taxpayer fund her to have a 3 bedroom house with a single occupant? I could do with an extra bedroom but I can't ask the Government to pay for it!

If it was such an issue, why didn't her kids chip in and help her out? Why is this the Government's fault and not the fault of her and her immediate family. I find it very, very frustrating that her son has the bare faced cheek to blame anyone else but his immediate family.

This is just typical of modern society - a total lack of personal responsibility.



posted on Jan, 13 2014 @ 09:18 AM
link   
reply to post by pavmas
 

Why would you need a 3 bed flat? Unless your sons live with you, then I don't see why they can't help with your living costs. My daughter is a full time student, but she accepts that her student loans have to go into the household budget, so that we can both eat, heat the flat etc.

As for the waiting list, it is the same for all property types, which is why so many people, myself included, rent in the private sector. There is no conspiracy to "do you out of a house" just the problem of a lack of social housing, which was A)sold off to the tenants that lived in them (and who then sold them on for a nice profit to buy to let landlords) and B) never replaced by either this, or previous Governments.



posted on Jan, 13 2014 @ 09:22 AM
link   

pavmas
The only advice I would give' is dont do a dangerous job because if you have an accident you are on your own.


Sorry, but that is a total load of bollocks. If you have an accident at work that results in either extra costs or you being put out of work, the employer is liable via their insurance. On top of that, many employers offer additional benefits including insurance. If I was to get injured to the point I couldn't work (or even killed) my family would get a very nice pay off of 5 x annual salary. That's not to mention the plethora of "no win - no fee" lawyers about who will make sure they get you something.

I suspect the only reason you were left in the lurch was a lack of planning on your part. Since I joined the workforce at 17, I have always opted into workplace benefit schemes that offered life insurance. The State, for it's part, would have provided all the medical care you obviously have and continue to receive, so your flippant remarks are just rather immature to be honest. Do you expect the State to pay for a house, all the medical care and anything else because you failed to adequately insure yourself?



posted on Jan, 13 2014 @ 01:08 PM
link   

Infinitis
reply to post by jude11
 


The government instituted a policy that makes it so if you are living off welfare, you shouldn't be allowed to live in a home with extra bedrooms, without paying a tax for it.

Now in the case of this woman, she was given the choice to stay in her home that she was comfortable in while paying the extra money, or keep her regular benefit and move to a smaller location. In an incredibly heartbreaking turn of events she chooses to take her life instead. Unbelievably sad.

Now I am not making a case for or against the new law or policy which led to her being presented with the 2 options I referenced above. However, we all have to face challenges in life, and some people experience events which would make having to move to a different house with less extra bedrooms seem like a blessing from God in comparison to where they live now.

The real crime that exists is people are growing up so entangled in this inhuman economic/social system that has grown around us and caused us all to become so disconnected from each other and focused on pursuing activities and objects that destroy our minds, bodies and home (earth). We don't know how to take care of ourselves let alone taking care of each other (which is how it's supposed to be). This woman was clearly having sever emotional problems, and if they do not stem from a psychological or physical problem, then it most likely is a product of her entire life - not the product of the new law and not the prospect of having to move to a new home.
edit on 12-1-2014 by Infinitis because: (no reason given)


Hmm, Lets set the record streight shall we, The government members whom thought this out and implemented this inhumane anti christian policy did so to benefit the immigrant job market as they needed to free up space for the cheap labour they are saying they do not want with one hand and inviting with the other and both political partys are equally to blame for this, they also wish to remove poor people from valuable housing stock so they can sell it on to private investors, Cameron seemed to be impressed by the new york Mayor whom exported all his poor to california as he kept saying the poor should get up and go where the job's are, Hmm so he is saying that but the foreigners are getting all our job's and there is Litterally no were where all the jobs are.
Get your head out of the sand boy and stop playing the devils fiddle before it is too late.
This bunch of evil cretins are even bribing the councils knowing full well the corruption in local government in order for the councils to go against there own constituants and allow fracking, it is called corruption and there is not a sound NATIONAL economic excuse.

edit on 13-1-2014 by LABTECH767 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 13 2014 @ 03:33 PM
link   

destination now
reply to post by SearchLightsInc
 


The window tax is something totally different, you are entirely wrong to compare them. I am sure I have pointed this out to you before. Deny ignorance please and stop scaremongering!



I was point out how absurd the window tax was and how the bedroom tax (although not offically called that) is JUST AS absurd.

I dont believe that the people on the bottom of society should have a reduction in benefits because they just so happen to have a spare room. The reduction of those benefits is to force people to move out - So they dont have to invest in more social housing.

So please continue to enjoy renting in the private sector because the government aint building any more affordable housing anytime this century.

Deny ignorance. Stop voting CONservative.



posted on Jan, 13 2014 @ 03:41 PM
link   
reply to post by pavmas
 


As two other poster's on this have made it perfectly clear - They would rather see you flat on your ass, starving, not being provided with proper living facilities rather than investing in social housing and not victimising the poor.

Wonder how those poster's feel about the rich... getting richer.



posted on Jan, 14 2014 @ 03:43 AM
link   

SearchLightsInc

destination now
reply to post by SearchLightsInc
 


The window tax is something totally different, you are entirely wrong to compare them. I am sure I have pointed this out to you before. Deny ignorance please and stop scaremongering!



I was point out how absurd the window tax was and how the bedroom tax (although not offically called that) is JUST AS absurd.

I dont believe that the people on the bottom of society should have a reduction in benefits because they just so happen to have a spare room. The reduction of those benefits is to force people to move out - So they dont have to invest in more social housing.

So please continue to enjoy renting in the private sector because the government aint building any more affordable housing anytime this century.

Deny ignorance. Stop voting CONservative.


I didn't vote Conservative and I don't enjoy renting in the private sector, I have no choice and lets face it, in the 13 years of the previous Labour Govt, they didn't build any social housing either, they just opened the floodgates to all and sundry to come to this country and bleed the system dry..now we are all paying the price for that!

And if you truly think that the reduction in benefit is to get tenants out of their homes, then you are living in cloud cuckoo land and you might do well to spend less time here and more time in the real world. Because tenants do have a choice, they can pay the extra couple of quid that they would have to pay anyway in the private sector, whether or not they are under-occupying and stay in their homes and guess what..shock horror, many council tenants do work and have to pay all of their rent themselves...no one is asking them to move, they can be renting a 5 bed property for one person and have no issue whatsoever, because no one else is picking up the tab for that!

But you obviously believe that those renting in the private sector should be treated more unfairly than council tenants and that they should have different rules!



posted on Jan, 14 2014 @ 03:51 AM
link   

SearchLightsInc
reply to post by pavmas
 


As two other poster's on this have made it perfectly clear - They would rather see you flat on your ass, starving, not being provided with proper living facilities rather than investing in social housing and not victimising the poor.

Wonder how those poster's feel about the rich... getting richer.


Oh don't be so dramatic..no one said that at all, you're just scaremongering..as usual. The poster is annoyed because he can't get a 3 bed/2 bath house paid for by the taxpayer, that's hardly being denied proper living facilities and he didn't say he was starving, but he doesn't want his sons to have to pay tax and instead give him the money. As such I have no idea how he expects to get any Govt handouts if no one pays tax!

I used to hate that sinking feeling of anything between £500 and £900 coming out of my pay packet on a monthly basis but I knew that money was paying not just for the NHS but also to support the welfare bill and I was okay with that and as such when I became seriously ill and had to use the system myself, I am grateful for what I receive, rather than sitting about moaning about a few quid.



posted on Jan, 14 2014 @ 03:57 AM
link   

destination now
I didn't vote Conservative and I don't enjoy renting in the private sector, I have no choice and lets face it, in the 13 years of the previous Labour Govt, they didn't build any social housing either, they just opened the floodgates to all and sundry to come to this country and bleed the system dry..now we are all paying the price for that!



Enjoy renting in the private sector was a sarcastic remark - I think we both know how horrendus the private rental sector is. No one's in a rush to fix that either. You're right, labour have done sweet F.A to build more social housing and that trend will continue - Doesnt make it right. Its been painfully clear for year's this country needs to build more social housing and yet the existing stock continues to decline with the rise of "Buy to let" extortionate capitalist landlords.


And if you truly think that the reduction in benefit is to get tenants out of their homes, then you are living in cloud cuckoo land and you might do well to spend less time here and more time in the real world.


Enlighten me, what is the actual purpose of deducting benefits from those with a spare room if not to force them from that property? You call me cuckoo yet its a very logical argument i just dont think you can stomach the sinister tone to it.



Because tenants do have a choice, they can pay the extra couple of quid that they would have to pay anyway in the private sector, whether or not they are under-occupying and stay in their homes and guess what..shock horror, many council tenants do work and have to pay all of their rent themselves...no one is asking them to move, they can be renting a 5 bed property for one person and have no issue whatsoever, because no one else is picking up the tab for that!


But why should they have to pay in the first place? Because there's not enough social housing so they're punishing people in hopes that they will vacate properties and move into smaller homes. Its simple really.



But you obviously believe that those renting in the private sector should be treated more unfairly than council tenants and that they should have different rules!


No, i believe that the renting private sector should be heavily regulated with caps on rent. In fact, i dont believe that landlords should be allowed to buy to let because they are sucking the wealth out of those on lower income's each calendar month. They are big part of the reason why people are living at home until their late 20's.

If i had my way, private renting would be a distant nightmare in the past. Making profit from the basic needs of every human being should be illegal and legally punishable.

But do please continue renting in the private sector at your own leisure *Sarcasm*



posted on Jan, 14 2014 @ 04:18 AM
link   

SearchLightsInc
reply to post by pavmas
 


As two other poster's on this have made it perfectly clear - They would rather see you flat on your ass, starving, not being provided with proper living facilities rather than investing in social housing and not victimising the poor.

Wonder how those poster's feel about the rich... getting richer.


I never said that either, so don't put words in my mouth. He isn't starving, he gets money from the state, including a house so not sure what your getting at. I have no problem with that - what I have issue with is people living in houses paid for by the taxpayer, yet are too big for them. If they want a nice big house to rattle around in, then they should pay the surcharge.

I will point out here that Gordon Brown made that change in 2007/8 for Private renters in receipt of Housing benefit. They've being paying the surcharge for years yet no one moaned then! But now it's hit the social housing tenants as well, you're rushing to their defence... Why is that?

As for Social Housing, you should really be swinging the bat at Labour who, while the UK went through it's biggest economic expansion in years, they not only didn't build new social housing, but made it even easier for those in what remains to buy it up. Add on the social engineering of their open doors policy and that is the crop we're reaping now.

I've said it before - we need wholesale reform of the political landscape too, but your current ultra-left wing views are simply you living in some fantasy land.
edit on 14/1/14 by stumason because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
8
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join