Soldiers' mother welcomes bedroom tax "u-turn"

8:00am Wednesday 13th March 2013 in News

Alison Huggan with photos of her twin sons who are serving in the Army Alison Huggan with photos of her twin sons who are serving in the Army

A MOTHER of two teenage North-East soldiers about to be hit by the so-called ‘bedroom tax’ told of her joy last night (Tuesday, March 12) after a surprise government U-turn.

Alison Huggan, from Coulby Newham, Middlesbrough, faced a £100 monthly loss of housing benefit from next month, because she was deemed to have spare rooms.

And her 18-year-old twins, Anas and Aaron – who are serving in Germany and Cyprus – would have been left with nowhere to sleep, after she was urged to move to one-bedroomed home.

The case, revealed by The Northern Echo, was raised in the House of Commons by Labour leader Ed Miliband – when David Cameron insisted the changes were “fair”.

Now, in a hurried U-turn, Work and Pensions Secretary Iain Duncan Smith has announced that armed forces personnel will be exempt from the bedroom tax, if living with their parents.

As controversy about the shake-up grows, Mr Duncan Smith also lifted the threat of benefit cuts from 5,000 approved foster carers and from households with severely disabled children.

Last night, Alison, a volunteer worker with Durham Tees Valley probation trust and a graduate in criminology, said: “I’m absolutely ecstatic.

“I have lived in this community for 30 years, and worked in the area as well, so it means so much to stay. My roots are here.

“My boys don’t know yet, because they are serving abroad, but they will be delighted as well, because this is also their community.

“But it feels wrong that we have been put through this trauma and I know this is horrendous for a lot of other people who are affected by the bedroom tax. I really feel for them.”

The shake-up will penalise social housing tenants with spare rooms, cutting benefit by 14 per cent for an extra bedroom and 25 per cent where there are two spare rooms.

Threatened with losing more than £1,000 a year, Alison approached a housing association about moving to a one-bed home, but had yet to find one.

One of the strongest criticisms of the change is that there are no smaller homes for 95,000 affected families in England, with the North-East the hardest-hit area.

Tom Blenkinsop, the Middlesbrough South and East Cleveland MP, welcomed the U-turn – but insisted “the fight will continue” for all others hit by the bedroom tax.

More Middlesbrough News

Comments(42)

Bemused or bewildered says...
9:24am Wed 13 Mar 13

What about all of these older people who are living in 3 bedroom homes with one occupant ! These are the main people taking up family homes and yet don't have to pay ! It would be in best interest to offer these people flats and bungalows ! Mr Cameron getting it all wrong again

Report this post »

Davy Crocket says...
9:36am Wed 13 Mar 13

Labour created our bankrupt country. They sold our Gold for a plate of beans and promised no more boom and bust. They squandered billions on wars, massively increased council tax, robbed the taxpayer to fund the workshy, etc and now its payback time. Dont shoot the messenger by blaming this Government.

Report this post »

argo2013 says...
9:59am Wed 13 Mar 13

Davy Crocket, The banks bankrupted the country,time you went back to the wild countree!!

Report this post »

argo2013 says...
12:19pm Wed 13 Mar 13

Bemused, The reason people are living in homes with spare bedrooms is the tories sold of council houses and did not replace them, (like they promised_some hope) now ithey are punishing people for their deeds.

Report this post »

Copley23 says...
12:23pm Wed 13 Mar 13

The one thing that I hoped wouldn't happen is this government caving into the MOD - again!

These lads get paid furfoxache, they are working away...getting paid!

We already pay for them through our taxes (which I am more than happy to do) but this stupid u-turn does nothing to help who REALLY can't afford it.

Idiot Cameron, idiot.

Report this post »

Bemused or bewildered says...
1:18pm Wed 13 Mar 13

Yes ! I remember when councils who sold off houses were suppose to rebuild a house for everyone sold ! Working people are suffering also ! I work and live in a coucil home, I simply cannot get a mortgage so will be stuck here paying extra ! Looks like private rented homes are the way forward

Report this post »

IanfromCrook says...
1:31pm Wed 13 Mar 13

Bemused or bewildered wrote:
Yes ! I remember when councils who sold off houses were suppose to rebuild a house for everyone sold ! Working people are suffering also ! I work and live in a coucil home, I simply cannot get a mortgage so will be stuck here paying extra ! Looks like private rented homes are the way forward
just a minor point the local councils were not supposed to, in fact they were prevented in doing so. Although that is what should have happened.

Report this post »

argo2013 says...
1:33pm Wed 13 Mar 13

Yes soldiers are working away,risking their lives and you want to stab them in the back financially!!, the government rejected a tax on expensive homes so fairs fair.

Report this post »

jude666 says...
1:50pm Wed 13 Mar 13

argo2013 wrote:
Davy Crocket, The banks bankrupted the country,time you went back to the wild countree!!
and time Argo you went back and sat in a history class. Labour did 'almost' bankrupt this country and the issue with the banks started with their government and their mantra of borrow borrow borrow and dont worry about paying it back. Yes the tories brought in the right to buy but this practice was encouraged by the subsequent Labour government who sqandered all the money on funding someone elses wars, and to buy votes in the form of ludicrous benefits for headaches, ingrowing toenails, being fat etc. Davy Crocket you are spot on my friend.

Report this post »

Mod says...
3:26pm Wed 13 Mar 13

No matter how loud the partisan protestations to the contrary, the history books will be very unkind to Labour 1997-2010.

Report this post »

argo2013 says...
5:16pm Wed 13 Mar 13

JUDE666, The labour government borrowed and borrowed,then why are the current government doing the same! Unlike you i do know my history,the banks wrecked the country,labour had to put the country into debt to stop the banks crashing altogether,else we would be in a worse state than we are now. The labour government didn't cut benefits to disabled soldiers, low paid workers genuine disabled people,or penalised poor people because of selling council properties at give away prices creating a shortage in the present day .What will this governments legacy be, people begging on the street.

Report this post »

the-big-yin says...
7:33pm Wed 13 Mar 13

THIS GOVERNMENT COULD NOT ORGANISE A P..I.S.S. UP IN A BREWERY....WHAT ABOUT TRYING TO FIND 1 AND 2 BEDROOM PROPERTIES
FOR PEOPLE TO DOWNSIZE TO....THERE ARE NONE....WHAT A **** UP...

Report this post »

Duke of Aycliffe says...
7:38pm Wed 13 Mar 13

Or the lady in the above article could possibly get a job & pay her way like millions already do, or is that too nasty?
I don't really care if her son's are in the Armed Forces they volunteered, I served in the Armed Forces myself, but I don't expect a discount off my mortgage.

Report this post »

secretvoice says...
7:51pm Wed 13 Mar 13

Now that the sons are included as part of the household, non dependant deductions will apply which will more than likely mean she does not qualify for any housing or council tax benefit at all.

Report this post »

argo2013 says...
10:31pm Wed 13 Mar 13

The lady in the article may get a job,when we get a new government that isn't trying to destroy the working classes,instead of punishing the people who caused the problems ________the bankers.

Report this post »

A Dermot says...
4:40am Thu 14 Mar 13

secretvoice wrote:
Now that the sons are included as part of the household, non dependant deductions will apply which will more than likely mean she does not qualify for any housing or council tax benefit at all.
They have issued legislation stating no non dep deduction will apply!

Report this post »

A Dermot says...
4:54am Thu 14 Mar 13

If the house was the main residence of a non dependent soldier then they would have a non dependant deduction. Once they leave to serve abroad for Housing Benefit purposes there would be no non dependant deduction but they would still be classed as resident so there is no room reduction.

However for Council Tax the soldier son is still classed as resident so there will be a non dependant deduction - as the property is still classed as the main residence under the working away from home rules.

Joined up thinking from the government.

.

Report this post »

Copley23 says...
2:37pm Thu 14 Mar 13

Dot-to-dot more like.

Report this post »

jude666 says...
3:01pm Thu 14 Mar 13

Duke of Aycliffe wrote:
Or the lady in the above article could possibly get a job & pay her way like millions already do, or is that too nasty? I don't really care if her son's are in the Armed Forces they volunteered, I served in the Armed Forces myself, but I don't expect a discount off my mortgage.
You are wasting you breath on here mate, the loony left will not let you get a sensible post on here without rebuke. There was a previous article about this lady that provked the same response. The lady is on benefits but is quite able to do voluntary work and that seemingly is quite adequate enough for the Labour brigade to shout the odds about her losing her benefit. For the record I am with you on this one, however sadly we are in the minority. Something seriously wrong with this country and the people in it if this is deemed acceptable.

Report this post »

argo2013 says...
5:20pm Thu 14 Mar 13

Jude, She probably is doing voluntary work,because there are no jobs to get,and yes the left will jump in to defend people ,people with little or nothing are under attack from this government so somebody has to defend them.Smug people like you who sit back and say get a job should get real,have you seen the unemployment rates in Middlesborough,it has got the highest unemployment rate in the north east,so give your head a shake.

Report this post »

Jonn says...
8:53am Fri 15 Mar 13

The 480 million said to be saved by introducing this policy relys on EVERY ONE of the 600,000 said to be over occupying moving to a smaller property.
That isn't going to happen in the slightest.
Theo Paphitis hit the nail on the head on Question Time lastnight. It won't save money, if you live in the real world.

Report this post »

jude666 says...
11:41am Fri 15 Mar 13

argo2013 wrote:
Jude, She probably is doing voluntary work,because there are no jobs to get,and yes the left will jump in to defend people ,people with little or nothing are under attack from this government so somebody has to defend them.Smug people like you who sit back and say get a job should get real,have you seen the unemployment rates in Middlesborough,it has got the highest unemployment rate in the north east,so give your head a shake.
Wow Argo, no need to get quite so personal, however since that is the attitude you wish to take then here goes. Unlike your goodself I do some research before I quote on an article. And if you chose to do the same research then you will find this lady is actually on SICK benefit. My point being if you can do voluntary work then you are clearly not SICK, That is not smug it is a FACT so methinks it is you who needs to give your head a shake.

Report this post »

argo2013 says...
12:46pm Fri 15 Mar 13

You have been very personal with this lady,the fact is the government seems like they did no research into the housing problem,and did not consult with people ,like the fostering agencies and the like,was this lady doing voluntary work to aide her gwetting back to fitness?anyway the way either her or her sons were going to be penalised for a problem that was created by the tories many years ago has been proved to be totaly unfair and won't even save any money in the long run.sorry if you think i was being to personal,i was merely trying to defend people caught in this unfair situation.

Report this post »

Jonn says...
12:58pm Fri 15 Mar 13

jude666 wrote:
argo2013 wrote:
Jude, She probably is doing voluntary work,because there are no jobs to get,and yes the left will jump in to defend people ,people with little or nothing are under attack from this government so somebody has to defend them.Smug people like you who sit back and say get a job should get real,have you seen the unemployment rates in Middlesborough,it has got the highest unemployment rate in the north east,so give your head a shake.
Wow Argo, no need to get quite so personal, however since that is the attitude you wish to take then here goes. Unlike your goodself I do some research before I quote on an article. And if you chose to do the same research then you will find this lady is actually on SICK benefit. My point being if you can do voluntary work then you are clearly not SICK, That is not smug it is a FACT so methinks it is you who needs to give your head a shake.
I've just researched too and she is not on sick benefit, she's on unemployment benefit. You are allowed to do voluntary work while claiming unemployment benefit.
Maybe you should research a little better.

Report this post »

argo2013 says...
2:10pm Fri 15 Mar 13

You are allowed to do voluntary work when you are on unemployment benefits,as long as it does not interfere with your job search maybe i have done my research ,and you have to tell the job centre what you are doing .Apart from that it is totally irrelevant to the story.If she was in work and getting a decent pay she would be paying full rent ,but as i've said before there's not much chance of that in Middlesbrough.

Report this post »

Withnail Lefty says...
4:32pm Fri 15 Mar 13

I agree with Argo, we need to look after poor people on benefits. I hope when Labour are elected they increase income tax so more money can be available for benefits and they can have more bedrooms for when friends and family visit on weekends and for parties and the like.
It's time we were more like the Nordic countries who make the lucky people with jobs pay more income tax so the poor people on benefits can have a better lifestyle.

Report this post »

argo2013 says...
5:33pm Fri 15 Mar 13

But the people on good wages ,well at least some of them begrudge every penny they pay in tax,they can't see if they paid zero tax they would be no better of because they would still be paying for every thing they needed,probably a lot more.

Report this post »

Jonn says...
6:02pm Fri 15 Mar 13

Withnail Lefty wrote:
I agree with Argo, we need to look after poor people on benefits. I hope when Labour are elected they increase income tax so more money can be available for benefits and they can have more bedrooms for when friends and family visit on weekends and for parties and the like.
It's time we were more like the Nordic countries who make the lucky people with jobs pay more income tax so the poor people on benefits can have a better lifestyle.
Noo. We need the current Government to stay in power so they can keep reducing benefits until all the poorest, jobless and disabled people are forced onto the work programme to be used as free labour for the Corporates. This enables Corporates to keep profits up and helps keep the interest rates down so the banks don't go bust again.

Report this post »

Duke of Aycliffe says...
9:09pm Fri 15 Mar 13

Withnail Lefty wrote:
I agree with Argo, we need to look after poor people on benefits. I hope when Labour are elected they increase income tax so more money can be available for benefits and they can have more bedrooms for when friends and family visit on weekends and for parties and the like.
It's time we were more like the Nordic countries who make the lucky people with jobs pay more income tax so the poor people on benefits can have a better lifestyle.
What planet do you live on? Why should I pay more tax to pay for people on benefits? I don't mind the genuine benefit claimants it's the lazy feckless ones that I have an issue with.
Also, before all the left wing whingers get on my case, that there are no jobs, how come all the Polish people I know all work, & have no trouble in finding employment?
The wy things are going, this country will end up like Zimbabwe.

Report this post »

Jonn says...
10:00pm Fri 15 Mar 13

Duke of Aycliffe wrote:
Withnail Lefty wrote:
I agree with Argo, we need to look after poor people on benefits. I hope when Labour are elected they increase income tax so more money can be available for benefits and they can have more bedrooms for when friends and family visit on weekends and for parties and the like.
It's time we were more like the Nordic countries who make the lucky people with jobs pay more income tax so the poor people on benefits can have a better lifestyle.
What planet do you live on? Why should I pay more tax to pay for people on benefits? I don't mind the genuine benefit claimants it's the lazy feckless ones that I have an issue with.
Also, before all the left wing whingers get on my case, that there are no jobs, how come all the Polish people I know all work, & have no trouble in finding employment?
The wy things are going, this country will end up like Zimbabwe.
I think withnail is being a little facetious.

Report this post »

Jonn says...
6:43am Sat 16 Mar 13

Demonstrations against the Bedroom TAX are taking place all over the country today and in the next couple of weeks.
There's a Demonstration in Darlington today, March 16th at 1pm, Joseph Pease Statue.

Report this post »

jd6620 says...
6:55am Sat 16 Mar 13

jude666 wrote:
argo2013 wrote:
Davy Crocket, The banks bankrupted the country,time you went back to the wild countree!!
and time Argo you went back and sat in a history class. Labour did 'almost' bankrupt this country and the issue with the banks started with their government and their mantra of borrow borrow borrow and dont worry about paying it back. Yes the tories brought in the right to buy but this practice was encouraged by the subsequent Labour government who sqandered all the money on funding someone elses wars, and to buy votes in the form of ludicrous benefits for headaches, ingrowing toenails, being fat etc. Davy Crocket you are spot on my friend.
Remember Liam Byrnes treasury seceratys little note, "There's no money left ha ha", of course Labour nearly bankrupt the country, you cant keep spending more than is coming in, simple housekeeping really.

Report this post »

Jonn says...
7:36am Sat 16 Mar 13

jd6620 wrote:
jude666 wrote:
argo2013 wrote:
Davy Crocket, The banks bankrupted the country,time you went back to the wild countree!!
and time Argo you went back and sat in a history class. Labour did 'almost' bankrupt this country and the issue with the banks started with their government and their mantra of borrow borrow borrow and dont worry about paying it back. Yes the tories brought in the right to buy but this practice was encouraged by the subsequent Labour government who sqandered all the money on funding someone elses wars, and to buy votes in the form of ludicrous benefits for headaches, ingrowing toenails, being fat etc. Davy Crocket you are spot on my friend.
Remember Liam Byrnes treasury seceratys little note, "There's no money left ha ha", of course Labour nearly bankrupt the country, you cant keep spending more than is coming in, simple housekeeping really.
Liam Byrnes little note. Is that the best you can do?
Running a country is not like simple housekeeping or the often used rediculous analogy of maxing out on your credit card.
The UK has constantly been in debt for over 300 years, at some points, many more times worse than today. Capitalism needs debt to operate.
If you want to know why the debt has gone up, go ask the banks.
If you want to know where all the money has gone, go ask The Coporates.

Report this post »

jd6620 says...
1:22pm Sat 16 Mar 13

The people of this country were asked those questions at the last election,& it ended up with Gordon Brown walking down the road from No 10.

Report this post »

spragger says...
8:30pm Sat 16 Mar 13

We have become the self entitled country of Europe.
Nothing would surprise anyone about the misuse of taxpayers money

- Look at Cyprus .. .

Report this post »

outragedofmiltonkeynes says...
1:41pm Mon 18 Mar 13

Just to get back on topic. This is the third time this story in various guises has been ran and the same responses have been posted. I would still like to know if good old voluntary worker Allison has packed the smokes in yet to save some money? How much does it cost to smoke these days? Surely more than she would have lost in benefits that she shouldnt be getting anyway.

Report this post »

argo2013 says...
4:16pm Mon 18 Mar 13

And why should she not be getting benefits do you work at the job centre ,and actually know what you are talking about for once? Also the last time i checked ,this is still a free country and if she wishes to smoke it has nothing to do with you.

Report this post »

argo2013 says...
4:20pm Mon 18 Mar 13

I see you are posting comments during the day again ormk, work dried up has it ,i do hope you are not scrounging of the dole -tut tut.

Report this post »

outragedofmiltonkeynes says...
9:58pm Mon 18 Mar 13

Argo, you really are a nob of the highest order. You are incapable of sensible debate so i will spell it out for you. Benefits paymets are made to give recipients the money to buy essential items. Cigarettes are not essential. 20 smokes a day at £6 per packet = £2190 per year. Now correct me if im wrong but that is just over half of what she was whinging about losing in benefit money. I do believe Argo, if you were any thicker you would set. Now go away.

Report this post »

argo2013 says...
8:36am Tue 19 Mar 13

ORMK, O dear have i touched a nerve,, calm down dear it's only a blog!!

Report this post »

outragedofmiltonkeynes says...
10:27pm Wed 20 Mar 13

No you havent touched a nerve you buffoon, its just that i find your arguments in defence of this case frustrating.Not least because you appear to suffer from a staggering lack of insight into anything you are commenting on and seem to be arguing about it in the belief you are taking a swing to the far left but in reality you just come across as silly.

Report this post »

Alison Huggan says...
3:07am Sun 31 Mar 13

JUDGE666: Get your facts right, I am not on sickness benefit i am on job seekers allowance and have been since November 2012 which is when i graduated, you are really out of touch with the benefit system, you are not allowed to volunteer on sickness benefit, and for your information this is the first time i have been unemployed and claimed benefits in my life, so what i claim is what i have paid in and contributed, i volunteer to give something back, as for my sons, you should hang your head in shame with the comments made, you would be speaking arabic if it were not for our armed forces, shame on you

Report this post »

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree