>> >>Fair points in this case, but there are people out there, as you must well
>> know, where societal or familial responsibility comes way down their list of priorities.
>>
>> ah, Boris.......
Of course there are such people and, as the example of our erstwhile former PM amply shows, they're not limited to people on 'welfare'.
As I'm sure you know I have topped up my pension for the last few years as a Welfare Rights Advisor. Initially the benefits were peripheral; we were assessing people for a Social Tariff with income maximisation as part of the process. Since then I spent three years dealing with new Claimants to Universal Credit.
In the first role there were a few who seemed to think 'the social' owed them a living and who knew the rules, for the then Income Support etc, as well as, or occasionally, better than I did. However, compared to those who'd been left alone, whether traded for a younger model, widowed or left to care for a critically ill partner they're a tiny minority.
Even in Social Housing with two pre school kids the Benefit Cap can bite. For those renting privately the amount towards their rent is limited by Local Housing Allowance. Rents set by comparison to those at the bottom end of the market and, apart from being revalorised at the start of the pandemic have been frozen/uprated only by CPI.
Saw a lady on Friday with stage 4 cancer. Her rent is £625/month. The LHA rate is £475. She will have £77/week to live on, find the balance of her rent and pay 20% of her Council Tax. As she's having Chemo she'll get a bit more to live on, about £160/week but only from the fourth month of her claim.
And that's why people being judgemental makes me very cross.
No kids as it happens but if she did the LHA might be a bit more and she's get something for the kids but she'd get diddly for the third onwards if they were under 6.
|