UK definition of homelessness

[The Don]

At the moment there is a move to cap the maximum amount of benefits a family can receive. The move has public support but some groups (including those who campaign against child homelessness and the church) are fighting against these moves on the grounds that it may increase levels of child homelessness.

In part this is because large families in the South of England would need a bigger house which in certain parts of the country would be expensive and hence the support wouldn't be there and people would have to move.

Part of the debate was a claim by Iain Duncan Smith that some groups class someone as homeless if they have to share a room:

Warning link is to the Daily Mail: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...y-meaning-homelessness.html?ito=feeds-newsxml

ain Duncan Smith was embroiled in a row with a charity yesterday after he said families on benefits were officially regarded as homeless if two children were forced to share a bedroom.

This didn't sound right to me and this morning someone from Shelter came on the radio (he is also quoted in the article) to say that this is utter nonsense. In cases of extreme overcrowding (i.e. people sleeping in kitchens or several to a room) then this could contribute to a homelessness definition but that two teenagers sharing a bedroom wouldn't.

So again, the ConDems are constructing a strawman to influence public opinion.

 

[Skepticemea]

So again, the ConDems are constructing a strawman to influence public opinion.

As Lansley did this morning when Dorrell (chair of the Health Select Committee stated that (not really happening) top-down reorganisation of the NHS was costing money and making it difficult to create the £20bn worth of savings required.

Lansley retorted "they've no evidence to back this claim" except for the new report that Dorrell was referring to and all its pesky evidence.

 

[richardm]

The public thinks that homelessness is about not having any reasonable accommodation to go to.

‘That is not the definition. The definition inside government and places like Shelter is that children have to share rooms

​

Well it's not the definition within the Housing Act, is the Government not using that? And since Shelter claim it's nonsense, I'm sure we'll be hearing a retraction from him soon.

Homelessness and threatened homelessness.(1)A person is homeless if he has no accommodation available for his occupation, in the United Kingdom or elsewhere, which he—
(a)is entitled to occupy by virtue of an interest in it or by virtue of an order of a court,
(b)has an express or implied licence to occupy, or
(c)occupies as a residence by virtue of any enactment or rule of law giving him the right to remain in occupation or restricting the right of another person to recover possession.
(2)A person is also homeless if he has accommodation but—
(a)he cannot secure entry to it, or
(b)it consists of a moveable structure, vehicle or vessel designed or adapted for human habitation and there is no place where he is entitled or permitted both to place it and to reside in it.
(3)A person shall not be treated as having accommodation unless it is accommodation which it would be reasonable for him to continue to occupy.
(4)A person is threatened with homelessness if it is likely that he will become homeless within 28 days.

It's pretty blatant lies, really. But the soundbite is out there, and another meme is freed to fight the good fight for the Tories.

 

[Soapy Sam]

I heard the same interview and was also astonished at this comment.

 

[Tsukasa Buddha]

I found a quite lengthy investigation here:

Iain Duncan Smith's claim that the definition of homelessness is that children have to share rooms seems very loose when considering all the factors involved in the defining process by local authorities and the circumstances in which shared rooms actually constitute overcrowding in the first place.
If we charitably allow that the Work and Pensions Secretary provided for cases involving kitchen and living room accommodation when he described children as “having” to share rooms, as is laid out in statute, there remains the problem that there is little evidence for this providing a sufficient proxy for determining that individuals in the said household are 'homeless'.
Furthermore, the terms in which Mr Duncan Smith makes his claim are unhelpful. Given that his technical definition would only capture a few extreme cases (if an example could be found at all), his reference to "most people who work whose children share rooms" suggests a much broader application than can be backed up.
However, without specific guidelines in the local authority code, we cannot entirely verify Shelter's claim that Mr Duncan Smith's case would never consitute a homeless definition.

Conclusion.

Unfortunately... I couldn't follow it . Seems to be mostly false, with certain caveats.