Why is rent allowance so generous?

Bannasidhe

Treehousetim wrote: »

Yes of course you don't if you are clearly hugely better off working.

Not really - I teach in distant education too and tbh what I am left with after tax and PRSI and levies barely covers the cost of my petrol to travel to the venues. But still I am not bitching about SW because it is a safety net that all citizens can avail of in time of need. I happen to think that is both a good thing and an important thing.

None of us know what the future holds, and I, for one, believe that a safety net is vital to our society.

murphaph

Treehousetim wrote: »

Not so. Not everyone gets to live where they want. There's a reason rent is very expensive in dublin and some of that reason is rent allowance.

Not any more.

The thresholds are all below the market rates in all Dublin areas these days.

RS tenants are on the move to cheaper areas as LLs refuse to reduce rent to the level the state thought it could force LLs to reduce it so.

Bannasidhe

Gatling wrote: »

Was working 100hrs a week for 13 years until I suffered major health problems forced me to retire

Not having a p*ssing contest - just pointing out that as someone who has been hammered in taxes for decades I have no issue with the existence of a SW safety net to which my considerable taxes contribute.

The alternative to the existence of such a net is no safety net and I would not wish to live - or contribute taxes - to a society like that.

Treehousetim

So you don't mind paying for people on the dole or on the sick who are working on the black economy, or people who are on the ''sick' and have an exemption to work as many hours as they like , 40, 50 hours, and get their primary payment and perks or single mothers claiming to live alone and living with the boyfriend who works and earns full wages?
That's great - you are more tolerant than me. I do have a problem with this though. I find it unfair that people who work are penalised for working in many respects.

Bannasidhe

Treehousetim wrote: »

So you don't mind paying for people on the dole or on the sick who are working on the black economy, or people who are on the ''sick' and have an exemption to work as many hours as they like , 40, 50 hours, and get their primary payment and perks or single mothers claiming to live alone and living with the boyfriend who works and earns full wages?
That's great - you are more tolerant than me. I do have a problem with this though. I find it unfair that people who work are penalised for working in many respects.

Who said I am happy to pay people working in the Black economy??? That is fraud pure and simple and should be treated as such.

As is claiming lone parents while living with a partner....

I think where we differ is that I do not believe the majority of people claiming SW are committing any kind of fraud. I believe the vast majority are people who lost their jobs when the economy nose dived and are now struggling to keep their heads above water nor do I believe every single mother (or father!) is shacked up.

I do not doubt these people exist - I do doubt they exist in the numbers some posters like to claim they do.

Nor do I believe because there are some fraudulently claiming SW we should punish all SW claimants or tar them with the same brush.

We have had many TDs who were found to be dodgy - should we get rid of the Dáil? Or should we actually police these thing properly?

fussyonion

Rent allowance is not generous in a lot of cases.

I was on Rent Allowance and I was entitled to €265 for two adults. The properties I looked at in my area were all around €700 to rent, so it was hard to find anywhere.

I agree, though, that some people are having kids purely to get more rent allowance as it is more generous to families, but not so much for couples.

I also don't think RA should ever be a long term arrangement as it gives no incentive to people who are wanting to get back to work.

The local councils are slowly phasing out RA and getting people to source their own homes via the RAS scheme.

rugbyman

Tim
I agree with most of what you have said, especially the last post.
I find it irritating where people read more into a statement than is in there.

Bannasidhe,
you have worked a lot , you are in favour of a S.W. system,as most are ,(i`d say 99 .9 %) ,clearly you type a lot but most of your replies on here ASSUME something that Tim did not say.

Regards,Rugbyman

murphaph

fussyonion wrote: »

The local councils are slowly phasing out RA and getting people to source their own homes via the RAS scheme.

The councils don't administer the Rent Supplement system and never did. They DO administer the RAS system, which IMO needs serious work to make it attractive to more landlords.

Treehousetim

How is the RAS any different to rent allowance? Looks like the same to me only maybe more generous? You don't work, maybe have a few babies or not, then after turn up, sign up for RAS and expect your need for housing to be met without doing anything in return. Is that how it works?

Bannasidhe

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Not having a p*ssing contest - just pointing out that as someone who has been hammered in taxes for decades I have no issue with the existence of a SW safety net to which my considerable taxes contribute.

The alternative to the existence of such a net is no safety net and I would not wish to live - or contribute taxes - to a society like that.

Treehousetim wrote: »

So you don't mind paying for people on the dole or on the sick who are working on the black economy, or people who are on the ''sick' and have an exemption to work as many hours as they like , 40, 50 hours, and get their primary payment and perks or single mothers claiming to live alone and living with the boyfriend who works and earns full wages?
That's great - you are more tolerant than me. I do have a problem with this though. I find it unfair that people who work are penalised for working in many respects.

rugbyman wrote: »

Tim
I agree with most of what you have said, especially the last post.
I find it irritating where people read more into a statement than is in there.

Bannasidhe,
you have worked a lot , you are in favour of a S.W. system,as most are ,(i`d say 99 .9 %) ,clearly you type a lot but most of your replies on here ASSUME something that Tim did not say.

Regards,Rugbyman

Well thank you kindly for your input Rugbyman, but may I just point out that I said I was in favour of a SW system that protects those in need which tim spun to say I am in favour of people committing fraud.

I said no such thing.

Talk about assuming people said things they didn't say....

Marsden

Treehousetim wrote: »

How is the RAS any different to rent allowance? Looks like the same to me only maybe more generous? You don't work, maybe have a few babies or not, then after turn up, sign up for RAS and expect your need for housing to be met without doing anything in return. Is that how it works?

Why put down a scheme if you've no idea how it works? RAS like council houses are there to help low income families afford some standard of living they could otherwise not achieve. You seemed in favour of giving people houses down the country so they wouldn't be claiming rent allowance, yet put down a viable alternative that would incentivise long term unemployed to find work.

Treehousetim

Em working as many hours you like with the exemption or partial capacity or whatever they call it now is totally legit so you can be an 'invalid' ( on the payment with all the household package) and work 80 / 90 hrs a week doing anything you like and earn fully from that so thats legitimate AFAIK.
And AFAIK also, welfare fraud is not uncommon at all.

Bannasidhe

Treehousetim wrote: »

Em working as many hours you like with the exemption or partial capacity or whatever they call it now is totally legit so you can be an 'invalid' ( on the payment with all the household package) and work 80 / 90 hrs a week doing anything you like and earn fully from that so thats legitimate AFAIK.
And AFAIK also, welfare fraud is not uncommon at all.

So because those rules apply (can you please give me a link to where it says this?) to the few who are granted invalidity we should abolish SW?

Funny, any headlines I have read re: SW fraud have mentioned that many cases it was a mistake by the Dept. of Social Protection...

Is fraud really 'not uncommon' - in which case how common is 'not uncommon' and have you any proof? Or is it, as I suspect, one of those 'sure the dogs in the street' know that 'facts'?

Care to acknowledge that I never said I supported fraud?

Treehousetim

Seriously, I don't want to burst your bubble. If you believe there is little fraud, then believe what you want.

murphaph

RAS is superior to RS as it functions like a council house. The tenants are not disincentivised to find work because their RAS rent contribution will increase, but they will not be thrown out of the house. Under RS you work you get no RS.

kingofslaves

RA or any other benefit is not for people who have 'never worked a day in thier life' What about pensioners, disabled, children etc? My g/f ex hubby used to earn 100K a year as editor in a very well known national newspaper, but was made redundant just before Xmas (thanks guys happy xmas !) His ex wife (they have separated due to other reasons) has 4 children (2 his & 2 from previous marriage) But she can't get RA due to him having a large redundancy payoff. They won't give her anything until 'every penny is spent'

Treehousetim

Well that's a good example of how Ireland works

Bannasidhe

Treehousetim wrote: »

Seriously, I don't want to burst your bubble. If you believe there is little fraud, then believe what you want.

I never said I didn't believe there was some fraud - I am simply asking for proof that it is as widespread as people claim.

Not an unreasonable request tim.

Treehousetim

No offence but if you are a lecturer you may have limited exposure to all sides of society. I don't want to tell stories of people I know on this forum but I've personally seen a lot of what I mentioned above, and a lot of people living away from Ireland on the long term sick schemes etc. Its not pretty but its the reality.

rugbyman

Bannasidhe

you said
Well thank you kindly for your input Rugbyman, but may I just point out that I said I was in favour of a SW system that protects those in need which tim spun to say I am in favour of people committing fraud.

I said no such thing.

Talk about assuming people said things they didn't say....



I say ,
you are quite right Tim did as you did and made an ASSUMPTIOn that was



not right


But then you said

`So because those rules apply (can you please give me a link to where it says this?) to the few who are granted invalidity we should abolish SW?`

Tim had not suggested abolishing SW or anything like it.

I dont want to seem a nitpicker but I LOVE rational debate and often learn from it.

Regards,

Tar.Aldarion

Gatling wrote: »

Funny how some tax payers think there small amount of tax pays for every body else,

The top 5 % of tax payers pay the majority ,

Average industrial wage in ireland is nearly 41k, that's plenty of tax!

rugbyman

Bannasidhe

you said you do not condone fraud, but that you do not think it is as commonplace as some believe, neither you or `some` have indicated your estimate , in your case just that it is smaller than `some`s. So to have a debate about the percentage when nobody has hazzarded a quess is a bit pointless really

I dont know what percentage it might be but it is certainly significant,though falling, the SW staff and CWOs are certainly more strict than some years ago.

I know of several who are pushing it a bit and though I am farther to the right than Tim(by my reckoning) or as far, I dont have the nerve to confront them.

Perhaps I am as much a Keyboard Warrior as anyone so.

Regards

Mark Tapley

COYW wrote: »

Because people on rent allowance don't want to live in the areas in which those houses are located. Personally, I would offer them one of these properties and if they did not accept it, I would cut their RA. I would love to live in a detached property on a half acre site overlooking the sea but I can't.

There should be a base rate for RA also. None of this nonsense of giving extra for children. It only encourages these people to have more children, from my personal experience.

Could you define what you mean by "these people" .

Marsden

rugbyman wrote: »

Bannasidhe

you said you do not condone fraud, but that you do not think it is as commonplace as some believe, neither you or `some` have indicated your estimate , in your case just that it is smaller than `some`s. So to have a debate about the percentage when nobody has hazzarded a quess is a bit pointless really

I dont know what percentage it might be but it is certainly significant,though falling, the SW staff and CWOs are certainly more strict than some years ago.

I know of several who are pushing it a bit and though I am farther to the right than Tim(by my reckoning) or as far, I dont have the nerve to confront them.

Perhaps I am as much a Keyboard Warrior as anyone so.

Regards

To be fair rugbyman, when someone claims that SW fraud is commonplace the onus is on them to prove it, not on others to disprove it. Bannasidhe said he assumed it was "the dog in the street knows that" facts, and no hard evidence was used as input, and he was right. No statistics or links have been given, just "I know people who do it".

As for confronting people or reporting them, you'd want to be 100% certain that it is fraud or you could end up starting a load of grief for people who are already struggling.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=84356400

ted1

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Oh dear.

Anyway, I will put you in my situation. I am a PhD student currently in my 4th year. I only had 3 years funding, so I currently have no source of income. I can't apply for the dole as I am not looking for a job. I have a job, I am just not being paid for it. In order to pay for food, bills etc, I have to do lots of little things (grinds, correct leaving cert scripts etc.) I have worked just as hard as you, if not more, and I will contribute just as much to Ireland's economy as you when I'm done, if not more. If rent allowance was lowered even slightly, I would be screwed. Very screwed. Do you think I, one of the so called "never worked a day" people you are talking about, should receive a lower allowance as you think everyone who does is just lying on the couch all the day?

I'm not sure I agree with funding people's lifestyle choices. E.g staying in education and not working. I'm nearly finished my masters which has taken me three years part time as I had to work to pay mortgage food etc

Gatling

Op you seem to problems with people getting rent allowance ,or been on the Ras scheme ,another thread you started your complaining about people having medical cards ,

A lot of people don't like being reliant on RA but as things stand there not a lot of options for some people accommodation wise ,
Maybe be you'd be more interested in hearing people handing back council homes so they can go back on RA

Treehousetim

Alright dude relax. Its a forum. That's what its for -discussion.

Slutmonkey57b

The only thing I can say is that if the op or anyone else has such vast experience of this endless fraud, and the people gaming the system to the detriment of the state, the taxpayer, and the genuinely needy, they must obviously have made an appointment with the police to report it, right?

Otherwise, they'd look like a stupid, mindless, daily mail reading troll who spews thoughtless sweeping drivel around like a degenerate.

Marsden

Treehousetim wrote: »

Alright dude relax. Its a forum. That's what its for -discussion.

I don't think anyone's getting bent out of shape about it, just offering opinions. I know where your coming from though tim, and you're right that there are some people defrauding the SW and RA is a terribly flawed system that needs to be looked at.

Unfortunately a lot of these threads that get started quickly turn into people blaming the less fortunate for all the countries problems. Have a look around the forum or search the term dole or fraud and you'll see there's no shortage of threads. It's inevitable that once a new one starts, a lot of us are sick of them. That and the fact that a lot of their posters come across as pig headed and refuse to look at things from a different perspective(I'm not saying this is you).

Also anyone in receipt of RA will be on the defensive as it's bad enough to have to rely on welfare payments and have the threat of getting shifted from their home whenever a budget looms, but to read this stuff reinforces a sense of them v us. The RA recipients aren't a sub race of humanoids that exist to leech off your taxes, rather the majority are the unfortunate who didn't make any money during the boom years and now have to rely on hand-outs to get by.

gurramok

Slutmonkey57b wrote: »

Otherwise, they'd look like a stupid, mindless, daily mail reading troll who spews thoughtless sweeping drivel around like a degenerate.

Thats uncalled for. The OP in my opinion has a problem where a social welfare recipient "family" are entitled to bid for the same properties in the private rental market as a worker, especially when the property is in a middle class area. As you know we all work to live and earn money to live in a nice area as a reward

I have experienced this problem before and stated it on boards. Before the present rise in rents a couple of years ago, I had to compete with RS applicants for a house in Castleknock above all places, how is that justified??
The DCC treated the whole Dublin(DCC) area as one when classifying rates of RS rather than say rates for Blanch were lower than in Castleknock as Castleknock was "posher"

Anyway, I think everyone can agree that RS careerists are the ones who deserve to be criticised, not those who indeed paid taxes and lost their jobs.

As regards fraud, they expect to save on One Parent Family Payments (€165m) this year alone, how many of these are also in receipt of RS we do not know. http://www.welfare.ie/en/pressoffice/Pages/pr080313.aspx