Brent Council Tax Support Scheme changes will ask 'those with the lowest income to find spare income that doesn’t exist'. CAB flash survey says average claimant's bill will rise by £524.98.

 Brent Council is to adopt changes to the Council Tax Support scheme that will require residents to pay at least 35% of their Council Tax Bill (increased again this year by 4.8% D-band total £2,133.15). It will also require non-dependent members of the house-hold to pay £8 weeky if not in work and £20 if in work.

The majority of resident respondents rejected the proposed changes at consultation but the Council faced with a new deficit of £16m  and a potential saving of up to £8m in council tax support costs will go ahead.  The changes do not affect pensioners as they are in a separate Government administered scheme.

The Cabinet report states:

The aim of these changes is for all households to contribute towards the Council services that residents in the borough benefit from. However, it is recognised that where a resident is unable to work because of their disability they may face a particularly significant impact, as they may have higher disability related costs and will not have the ability to increase their income. The Council Tax Support scheme seeks to reduce this impact, by disregarding all income from DWP or HMRC benefits in the Council Tax Support calculation. This includes disability related benefits, disability premiums, carer’s allowance and much more.

 

The Yellow column above is the reduction in the amount of Council Tax to be paid.

The yellow column above is the weekly amount of Council Tax that non-dependant members of the household will have to pay

 

The results of the Council's consultation are below showing the majority of respondents rejected the change. The majority of respondents were non-recipients of Council Tax Support:

The consultation enabled people to comment and these make interesting reading including the comment in this article's headline:

 

Out of 397 responses, 115 respondents also left comments.

 

For the people that Agree or Strongly agree, the top themes that emerged were:

 

• Reasonable – These respondents thought that the changes proposed were reasonable given the Council’s financial situation and need to make savings. These respondents in general thought that the scheme was generous and that it was a fair proposal to introduce a minimum contribution for all Council Tax Support recipients.

• Scheme Recommendations – Some respondents raised suggestions for the new scheme. These included: Reducing the top band to 80% instead of such a steep drop to 65% & reducing last band to 15% (instead of 20%), having council tax support as a monetary value (i.e. £) rather than a % reduction, including a vulnerable group to be exempt from 35% minimum contribution & including other income, capital or savings into the means testing (e.g. property, benefits income, etc.)

• Scheme still too generous – Some people agreed but thought the minimum contribution should be higher, for example, 50%.

 

For the people that Disagree or Strongly disagree, the top themes that emerged were:

• Financial Difficulties – These respondents thought that the changes proposed would cause them to fall into further financial difficulty. The cost-of-living struggle was frequently mentioned as well as an inability to pay the additional council tax that would be required. Many people raised concerns around their disability and the inability to find work or increase their income. Some answers highlighted that pushing residents into further financial difficulty could increase the demand on other council services and reduce the actual savings achieved by this change.

• Protecting the Vulnerable – Many respondents raised concerns around disabled residents, the elderly, carers, or parents all with a reduced ability to find employment and cover the council tax shortfall that will be created because of this change to their support. These answers raised worries that this scheme change would affect those on a low-income unfairly and expects those with the lowest income to find spare income that doesn’t exist. Responses highlighted that people were already struggling and this change would only serve to exacerbate their struggle.

• Unfair – These replies often highlighted that they thought it was unfair to target those in receipt of Council Tax Support who have low-incomes already and an inability to pay council tax often being carers, disabled or in receipt of benefits only. Some answers highlighted that the people receiving this support are already on the poverty line and this change could push people into poverty. Some respondents believed that the change would breach Discrimination & Human Rights & Equality Laws.

• Find savings elsewhere – These answers highlighted the need for the council to find the savings from somewhere else. Some of the reasons given were that this change would be potentially more costly in the long run due to increased demand on council services or increased outstanding debt. These responses raised that the changes were targeting individuals who don’t have the means to contribute more, and many suggestions were received to look to the wealthier residents within the borough for savings. Other suggestions included: advocatingfor more equitable funding from central government, finding efficiencies in other areas of spending, increase income rather than cut services, targeting outstanding debt/fraud or council tax evasion or reducing Brent employee salaries.

 

Question 2 - Changes to the Council Tax Support non-dependant deductions

 

(£8 deduction for non-dep in household out of work and £20 deduction for non-dep in household in work).

 

Out of 397 responses, 88 respondents also left comments.

 

For the people that Agree or Strongly agree, the top themes that emerged were:

 

• Fair – These respondents thought that it was fair to ask non- dependants to contribute towards household bills including Council Tax and sensible to look at household income as a total rather than only the income of a claimant or partner.

• Simpler – Comments highlighted that a two flat-rate deduction system is an improvement on the previous system and would be simpler or easier for residents to understand.

• Unfair – Whilst these people agreed with the proposal, they believed in general that the £20 deduction for working non-dependants was fair whereas the £8 deduction for non-working was too much of an ask.

• Scheme Recommendations – These comments made suggestions to not take non-dependant deductions for students.

 

For the people that Disagree or Strongly disagree, the top themes that emerged were:

• Financial Difficulties – These respondents thought that the charges proposed were too much of an increase especially considering the current cost of living. Some people highlighted that £20/week for a working non-dependant would be over £1000 per annum and a significant portion of the Council Tax bill. These respondents highlighted that this change would not be affordable, further push families into poverty or struggle and that this change would hit the poorest.

• Unfair – Some of the suggestions received thought that the £8 deduction was too much for non-dependants that are not working, disabled or students. Some people believed that deductions for working non-dependants should be means tested & based on their income level, with higher earners contributing more.

• Find savings elsewhere – These comments suggested that Brent look to other ways of making the savings or cutting costs. These included looking at efficiency savings within the council, increasing fines for parking penalties/littering/anti-social behaviour etc. or empty property rate.

 

 Brent Citizens Advice Bureau conducted their own survey of the impact of the changes. They said: Since 2021 Brent Council has made over 40,000 referrals1 for enforcement action against residents with council tax arrears. The proposed changes risk seeing an increase in enforcement action against households already struggling with debt, and with very little income available for new or increased bills.

We conducted a flash survey to determine how the proposed changes to CTS could affect Brent residents. In total, we surveyed 32 CTS claimants over a period of 3 weeks. The survey was targeted at Brent residents who already receive some level of CTS, with questions aiming to establish respondents’ current council tax liability, level of council tax support, and whether they maintain a positive budget. This enabled us to assess how the proposed changes will alter the financial situations of individual households.

Key Findings

• The average council tax bill increase for the CTS claimants we surveyed was £524.98

• 13 out of 32 CTS claimants we surveyed did not have enough income to cover their monthly costs, despite receiving the maximum level of CTS.

• 2 in 3 CTS claimants we surveyed will receive a new or increased council tax bill that they currently do not have the monthly income to pay.

Their report and its recommendations are worth reading in full:

 

 

Fairer treatment for those in Council Tax arrears after Brent sign Citizens Advice protocol

The Brent CAB Team

Brent Citizens Advice Bureau has announced that Brent Council and its Council Tax collection enforcement agencies, Equita and Capita, to the Citizens Advice Bureau Council Tax Protocol.

The protocol if followed will ensure fairer and timely treatment of those who fall into arrears:

Council tax payers receive a better level of service when local authorities, enforcement agencies and debt advice agencies work closely together.  Early intervention and proactive contact with people struggling with bill payments can help prevent them incurring further charges and help alleviate stress. It can also potentially help reduce both collection costs and calls on local public services, particularly mental health services.

The full protocol is here:

Brent CAB gives out record number of food vouchers today

Tweet from Brent Citizens' Advice Bureau today:

Brent CAB ‏@BrentCAB

Poverty in Brent: today we gave out a record 16 food vouchers to families in need. Sign of the times?

Brent Housing Scams Alert

Brent Citizens Advice Bureau issued an alert on housing scams in the current edition of its Newsletter:

Clients are regularly reporting housing scams in Brent, which have a huge impact on vulnerable clients already struggling to make ends meet. Brent CAB is compiling evidence about these scams to help campaign against them. They include problems with landlords, estate agents and letting agencies.

Deposit scams are a frequent issue. Landlords often refuse to pay tenants their deposit back when they move out. They unjustly say the client has damaged the property or that they will pay the deposit back on a specific date. When the date comes, the deposit is not paid back. The landlord provides another date and keeps delaying the process. The landlord is meant to put the deposit into a special deposit account called a payment protection scheme so that they cannot access the money, but they often don’t. This means the client is forced to go to court to get the money back.

Another deposit problem often arises when clients pay their estate agent the deposit to give to the landlord. When the client leaves the property they ask the landlord for the deposit, but the landlord says the estate agent has it, whereas the estate agent says the landlord has it. The client is in a Catch 22 position and will again have to take court action to get their deposit back – this naturally costs time and money.

Letting agencies often do not fulfill their agreements. One of these provided a client with a contract for accommodation and said that work would be done to fix broken appliances by a certain date. After this date the client moved in but no changes had been made, including a shower which was still not working. The agency abdicated responsibility. This happens frequently in Brent.

Some Brent landlords dishonestly put their name on the client's tenancy agreement as a user of the property. This means the tenant has no security of tenure and can be evicted with very limited notice. In houses of multiple occupancy, if the tenant pays in cash and does not get a receipt each time or write it in a rent book, it is also possible they will lose their deposit as a landlord can claim it, saying they did not pay rent on a specific week, where there is no proof of payment.

Brent CAB has Housing Advisers available to help Brent residents with these problems: 270-272 High Road, Willesden, NW10 2EY Advice line: Monday-Friday 9.30am-5.30pm 0845 050 5250

Private Secretary sees Welfare Claimant Reality

Brent Citizens Advice Bureau report that as part of their campaign to make sure changes to the benefits system do not impact negatively on Brent residents, the bureau welcomed the Private Secretary to Lord Freud, Minister for Welfare Reform at the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP), to a day in the life of a welfare claimant at Brent CAB:

The Private Secretary, Jessica Yuille observed an adviser’s interviews with welfare benefits clients. She could see how severely disabled the client was and yet also saw the client being rated as able to work under the Government’s points system.

We are pleased that the representative from DWP was able to observe how the practicalities of Government policies translate on the ground. She commented on the main things she had taken away from the experience and would share with colleagues, ‘I learnt that the DWP telephone service and the Jobcentre Plus staff service is patchy and that reconsideration of Work Capability Assessments by DWP is often ineffective as no alternative medical evidence is requested.’

Ms Yuille’s experience at Brent CAB will feed back into her work on Universal Credits in the Welfare Benefits Bill. We hope it will help the Government address the obvious flaws in the current system, including the inaccurate assessments of disabled clients, poor customer service for those that need advice from DWP and Jobcentre Plus and the complexity of benefits forms.