Council Treatment of the Poor is Very Poor
Written by Matt B · first published 01/11/2008
David Green's post Tory Crisis at Thanet Council expands on a point he raised in an earlier post Monitoring the Council's Budget in which the short fall in Council budget was seen to be about £2M. The fact that the council has lost us £3M in bad property speculation suggests that we are now going to have to pay for a gamble that went very, very wrong.
Who pays most though?
Sure we tax payers are going to feel the bite as another slcie of our pie is eaten by the council but it is the poor that I worry most about. I have seen and heard some shocking stories of the way the benefits department have treated claimants of late. While the tax payer might loose some of their pie the benefits claimant is in danger not only of loosing the whole pie but retrospectively owing last year's and next's too.
It's all well and good for those (currently) with jobs to call all needy people lazy and wish to cancel all benefits but the truth is that we would be a lot worse off than we are now. Poverty is not an easy problem to address and no trite quickies are going to solve it. Studies have shown that even after the original causes of poverty are removed problems still persist well over a hundred years later. What the council is currently doing with the local benefits system is only making a bad problem worse and likely to last a lot longer.
As it is we are still feeling the effects of the last Conservative budget crises in Thanet and in no way do we need to have our most vulnerable people forced to endure a second one.
Those unfortunate enough to be benefit claimants this year have already experienced an unusually harsh interpretation of benefits rules as management pressure to cut spending here gets heavier than ever. Both local economic stability and the safety of "law and order" in the modern scheme of things relies heavily on social justice and the methods in place to insure that the poorest members of society can (a) have spending power and (b) do not become sufficiently desperate to ignore the law.
History has shown us that when the perceived cost of obedience becomes greater than the perceived cost of rebellion then at best a massive rise in crime and potentially riots and at worst bloody revolution are the results. What are we playing at people? What sort of world are we creating for our children?
On both the estates (Millmead (Dane valley, Margate) and Newington (Ramsgate)) the level of disenfranchisement is quite extreme with both having twice the national average for children in families with parents that claim out of work benefits. This is the very people that new legislation will require local Councils to re-enfranchise and offer incentives to in order to encourage people to vote - currently it seems that the outworking of the current management style is that the most vulnerable in Thanet are paying the highest cost for this budget shortfall while being driven in the the exact opposite direction that the Government has expressly requested.
Is this bloody mindedness in the face of fairly reasonable (if a little wishful) aims or rank stupidity on behalf of Sandy and co. Malice or stupidity - personally I'm tempted to consider that a bit of both might be in the mix.
Long before Councillor Green confirmed that there was a budget hole I have been saying that the actions of the Benefits department at the council point to a budget hole. I have been warning people - don't rely just on benefits to pay the rent.
Sadly the message that "I could get £600 off the council if I rented privately" seems loudest. But what happens to those families the council is desperately shifting from its (patheticaly under filled) housing stock when the rent benefit that moved them out dries up? Lots of homeless families that the council has to try to house again right when repossession are on the increase.
I have seen the administrative arm of the council become increasingly aggressive to the point of insolence in order to try to invalidate benefits claims suggesting massive management pressure to do so. One gent I know wrote everything they needed to know on a single sheet of A4 and they acknowledged that they did not need any more information but would not accept the document because it was not "signed". Another I spoke to said he had his tax benefits stopped because he was unable to prove his child was now in school rather than in nursery even though this has been the case for a number of years.
What I want to know is what happens to the families that the council benefits team shaft so hard that the council housing team evict them - who cares for them then? No one and as a result we can hope that the cycle of desperation that this will set up only lasts 160 years or so.
In short we have a housing disaster waiting to happen. The house of cards has been built and now we just have to wait for it to "all fall down". It's not only us that will pay for this but our children and their children and their children too.
I'm sure many councillors will be quick to point out that technically they have not broken the "rules", as such. But they have become very quick to apply the letter of law such that customer service does not exist in any meaningful way and they have done a lot of harm with it.
I have witnessed the council taking court action against debtors in such a way that allows them to force the issue through the courts with great stealth and little communication so while appearing to be legal the summons comes as a complete surprise to many people. No laws broken, as such, but the rules used against the spirit in which they were written.
I alleged that were the funds available to challenge the magistrates hearings for 2007 to 2008 (and possibly before) as many as 75% would be overturned by a competent yet disinterested judge because where case law applies the council would be found to be in the wrong and yet year on year poor people are the ones that suffer because they can not afford to challenge the councils ever more blatant abuse of due process.
I have been watching the council tax collections and the benefits sections these last few years and I am deeply unimpressed. The people that work on the front seem, of themselves, to be doing their job so it begs the question - at what level of management is this problem starting?
I am inclined to believe that it is somewhere at or above where these two departments share management - and that points the finger at the elected leadership and the financial (mis)management there. What I want to know from those that might stand for election is - what are you going to do to fix it? More importantly given recent voting habits - can I trust you to keep your word?
Who pays most though?
Sure we tax payers are going to feel the bite as another slcie of our pie is eaten by the council but it is the poor that I worry most about. I have seen and heard some shocking stories of the way the benefits department have treated claimants of late. While the tax payer might loose some of their pie the benefits claimant is in danger not only of loosing the whole pie but retrospectively owing last year's and next's too.
It's all well and good for those (currently) with jobs to call all needy people lazy and wish to cancel all benefits but the truth is that we would be a lot worse off than we are now. Poverty is not an easy problem to address and no trite quickies are going to solve it. Studies have shown that even after the original causes of poverty are removed problems still persist well over a hundred years later. What the council is currently doing with the local benefits system is only making a bad problem worse and likely to last a lot longer.
As it is we are still feeling the effects of the last Conservative budget crises in Thanet and in no way do we need to have our most vulnerable people forced to endure a second one.
Those unfortunate enough to be benefit claimants this year have already experienced an unusually harsh interpretation of benefits rules as management pressure to cut spending here gets heavier than ever. Both local economic stability and the safety of "law and order" in the modern scheme of things relies heavily on social justice and the methods in place to insure that the poorest members of society can (a) have spending power and (b) do not become sufficiently desperate to ignore the law.
History has shown us that when the perceived cost of obedience becomes greater than the perceived cost of rebellion then at best a massive rise in crime and potentially riots and at worst bloody revolution are the results. What are we playing at people? What sort of world are we creating for our children?
On both the estates (Millmead (Dane valley, Margate) and Newington (Ramsgate)) the level of disenfranchisement is quite extreme with both having twice the national average for children in families with parents that claim out of work benefits. This is the very people that new legislation will require local Councils to re-enfranchise and offer incentives to in order to encourage people to vote - currently it seems that the outworking of the current management style is that the most vulnerable in Thanet are paying the highest cost for this budget shortfall while being driven in the the exact opposite direction that the Government has expressly requested.
Is this bloody mindedness in the face of fairly reasonable (if a little wishful) aims or rank stupidity on behalf of Sandy and co. Malice or stupidity - personally I'm tempted to consider that a bit of both might be in the mix.
Long before Councillor Green confirmed that there was a budget hole I have been saying that the actions of the Benefits department at the council point to a budget hole. I have been warning people - don't rely just on benefits to pay the rent.
Sadly the message that "I could get £600 off the council if I rented privately" seems loudest. But what happens to those families the council is desperately shifting from its (patheticaly under filled) housing stock when the rent benefit that moved them out dries up? Lots of homeless families that the council has to try to house again right when repossession are on the increase.
I have seen the administrative arm of the council become increasingly aggressive to the point of insolence in order to try to invalidate benefits claims suggesting massive management pressure to do so. One gent I know wrote everything they needed to know on a single sheet of A4 and they acknowledged that they did not need any more information but would not accept the document because it was not "signed". Another I spoke to said he had his tax benefits stopped because he was unable to prove his child was now in school rather than in nursery even though this has been the case for a number of years.
What I want to know is what happens to the families that the council benefits team shaft so hard that the council housing team evict them - who cares for them then? No one and as a result we can hope that the cycle of desperation that this will set up only lasts 160 years or so.
In short we have a housing disaster waiting to happen. The house of cards has been built and now we just have to wait for it to "all fall down". It's not only us that will pay for this but our children and their children and their children too.
I'm sure many councillors will be quick to point out that technically they have not broken the "rules", as such. But they have become very quick to apply the letter of law such that customer service does not exist in any meaningful way and they have done a lot of harm with it.
I have witnessed the council taking court action against debtors in such a way that allows them to force the issue through the courts with great stealth and little communication so while appearing to be legal the summons comes as a complete surprise to many people. No laws broken, as such, but the rules used against the spirit in which they were written.
I alleged that were the funds available to challenge the magistrates hearings for 2007 to 2008 (and possibly before) as many as 75% would be overturned by a competent yet disinterested judge because where case law applies the council would be found to be in the wrong and yet year on year poor people are the ones that suffer because they can not afford to challenge the councils ever more blatant abuse of due process.
I have been watching the council tax collections and the benefits sections these last few years and I am deeply unimpressed. The people that work on the front seem, of themselves, to be doing their job so it begs the question - at what level of management is this problem starting?
I am inclined to believe that it is somewhere at or above where these two departments share management - and that points the finger at the elected leadership and the financial (mis)management there. What I want to know from those that might stand for election is - what are you going to do to fix it? More importantly given recent voting habits - can I trust you to keep your word?
Have your say (there are ) · read more items categorised Thanet · Don't miss a thing: Subscribe Today · Help: what's a feed? · This site is operated on set principles of policy and disclosure read them here
Sir Head wrote:
Treatment of the poor is non existant, or should i say if your poor then you may as well give the council all your cash whether you have any or not coz they will fuck you then fuck you again and when they done with fucking you they will fuck you some more just to make sure.
Let me explain.
I lived in Thanet most of my life, i moved back (stupid bastard) a few years ago and have been shafted by the council ever since. Firstly they tried to charge me TWICE for council tax, claiming i had two houses (one here and one where i moved to) when i moved back, saying i must have two houses coz i didnt claim for the house i lived in - it was rented and i therefore owed council tax on two homes whether i lived there or not - in fact i lived at a mates place when i moved and they payed CT (council tax)for the place we lived - all of it - no discount.
I proved i only had one house but they werent satisfied and wanted CT for both. I again proved that i only had one house but still they tried charging me for two.
This went on for over a year. Then i was charged the entire CT (no discount for being a single person) for that year even tho i was in the place i was at for less than 5 months on a low wage and therefore not entitled to any discount (I still had 2 houses according to them.)
When it eventually got sorted or so i thought, i had 2 months in which to pay them - December and january - for the entire year coz the coucil system only worked for ten months of the year to ensure people paid in time for the new financial year (Wha fuck - i thought a year was 12 months not 10).
When i complained saying there was no way i could afford to pay them what they wanted in the time period stated and what happened to feb and march, i was told tough luck coz thats how they worked - on a ten month basis (check yr CT bill and you will see) and because the dispute had lasted until January i was liable to pay the bill in one hit - in January.
Hold on a minute - your charged for the entire year but only have ten months to pay it in or get charged and fined or whatever if you dont.
I made the claim 5 months before this but coz they couldnt be bothered to sort it out i had to suffer - Its the law you know and if you refuse to pay we can take you to court - i wasnt refusing to pay i just couldnt pay the entire amount in January and could i pay in feb and march too - no i couldnt coz thats not how the council work - yes i know that they dont work thats obvious.
So i asked them what had happened to my claim for single person discount and various other things i had tried to claim for.
What other things said they, we have had NO forms or letters from you.
The fact that i had 16 (Thats SIXTEEN) recipts from them saying i had sent in letters and the correct forms to the RAMSGATE office didnt wash - a reciept apparently is not proof that they recieved it.
Fuck me - what is fucking proof. a blood stained letter signed by the devil himself - apparently not coz they had lost the entire lot and would i mind sending them in again - this is even after spending at least 4 hours evry monday on the phone asking what was happening to my claim and being told that it was all in order and my claim was being processed (3 years to process a claim????).
In the mean time i was liable for the full council tax and was at the time in default and was being taken to court for non payment - even tho it had actually been paid - they even had no proof of me paying - this was because they were still claiming i had two houses - i didnt - see earlier.
It took over 3 years for them to realise that i didnt have two houses and was a single person and on a very low wage even tho they had all the forms and correct letters within 10 DAYS of asking for them.
So your headline should have read - THANET COUNCIL, WE WILL FUCK YOU OVER IF YOU TRY TO CLAIM. Subtitled - The law is on our side so fuck you.
Nearly 5 years of fucking me over is enough. I now refuse to pay the council anything until they have sorted this out - which apparently i also cant do - baliffs ensuing - And no one is willing to help me out, even tho i have talked to our local MP and he said, thats not right something has to be done about it - it hasnt and he hasnt bothered either - so if your going to title something the way you have please re title it - THANET DISTRICT COUNCIL - FUCKING YOU TO PLEASE THEMSELVES and the level of incomptetence starts the moment you walk through the door and look like you cant pay - regardless of whether you can or not.
Basically, the whole system needs tearing a new arsehole from toilet paper downwards and i for one would be willing to go the whole hog just to make sure that happens.