Under-occupancy benefit cuts to hit vulnerable hardest

New research: Under-occupancy benefit cuts to hit vulnerable hardest

New research launched today by the Housing Futures Network, a collection of leading housing groups, has revealed the impact housing benefit changes would have on social housing tenants underoccupying their homes.

The network interviewed 452 working-age households in receipt of benefit and living in social housing, which face cuts to their benefit payments from 2013 under Government proposals. In total 670,000 households could be impacted by the cut.

Results from the survey showed:

• 72% per of underoccupying households have members who are disabled or have serious illnesses. 40% are in receipt of disability benefits.
• 71% of the tenants surveyed stand to lose up to £15 per week, or up to 10% of their household income and nearly a third (29%) would lose more than £15 a week. 
• Whilst a quarter of underoccupiers would try to downsize to a smaller property to escape the benefit cut, the majority do not believe this is an option for them.  Over a third (35%) believed they would be likely to end up in rent arrears as a result of the cut.
• 43% of underoccupiers are already struggling financially and 83% would find it difficult to find the extra money to pay their rent if their housing benefit were cut.

Hilary Burkitt, Head of Research at national affordable housing provider Affinity Sutton, which has 56,000 homes and co-ordinated the survey, said: “The Government’s own impact assessment admitted that they didn’t know how households would react to a cut in their Housing Benefit, which is why it was so important to carry out this research.  The results show that whilst reducing Housing Benefit would incentivise some to downsize these are mainly people who are already keen to move.  This suggests that what is needed is more support to facilitate downsizing, rather than the risking increased financial hardship for a large number of social tenants.

“The research shows that most households with children who are deemed to be underoccupying do not have any ‘spare’ bedrooms, but the new rules would still see these families losing benefit.  There are also significant numbers of households who would be caught by these proposals who have specific needs for extra space, such as shared parenting arrangements or because of a disability.  One in five live in a home which is specially adapted for someone in their household with a disability: forcing these households into a position where they have to move is likely to be counterproductive.”  

Hugh Owen,  Director of Policy and Communication at Riverside, which has 51,000 homes across the country said:  “We are very aware of the problems and consequences of under-occupation and the need to make best use of existing stock and reduce overcrowding.  However we do not support government plans to push people into financial hardship by reducing their housing benefit using a definition of under-occupation which is frankly draconian.  Our research shows this blanket approach will hit many people with genuine needs for additional space which are not recognised by the government’s proposals, and at the same time will put many of our residents at risk of falling behind with their rent and potentially leading them into homelessness.

”We are committed to tackling overcrowding and under-occupancy through building more homes and providing help and support to those seeking to downsize.  We do not believe reducing benefits will help tackle this problem and we urge the Government to rethink.”