Couple moved because of cash promised on council website – then got nothing

Out of pocket – Dawn and Shane Benson in their uncarpeted living room

Out of pocket – Dawn and Shane Benson in their uncarpeted living room

First published in News by

A FAMILY who were persuaded to move to a smaller council home by the promise of a £1,500 sweetener have now been told they were never entitled to any cash.

Dawn Benson, 52, and husband Shane, 53, agreed to swap their three-bedroom house in Bardfield, Vange, for a two-bedroom bungalow after being tempted by a promise of cash on Basildon Council’s website.

Having spent several hundred pounds moving house, they have now been told the wrong information had been posted on the website and the cash offer didn’t apply to them.

The Bensons and daughters, Charlotte, 19, and Susan, 24, moved into a rundown two-bedroom bungalow in Samuel Road, Laindon in May.

Mrs Benson said: “Me and my husband are both disabled, so we were told we needed to move to a bungalow, even though we’d had a stairlift put in and other adjustments made to our old house.

The only one available was a twobedroom place, so we had no choice but to go for it.

“The move has ended up costing us money. We’ve had to fork out hundreds of pounds already and the bungalow is in a bit of a state, so we’re going to have to save up to get it up to scratch.

We’ve even got bare boards in our living room.

“If we’d known we weren’t going to get the £1,500 we’d never have moved.

“We worked and paid taxes our whole lives until we became ill, but now we’re not getting anything back.

“We’ve uprooted the whole family and our daughters are having to share a bedroom for the first time.”

Mrs Benson has health problems including arthritis and diabetes, while Mr Benson has the lung condition emphysema.

The couple, who had lived in the Vange property for ten years, first got in touch with Basildon Council about moving in September 2013- four months before the downsizing scheme was introduced.

They moved into the bungalow in May.

A council spokesman said: “The downsizing incentive scheme is predominately aimed at applicants occupying three, four or five-bedroom accommodation, wishing to move to a one - bedroom property. The policy states consideration will be given to applicants in four or five-bedroom properties wishing to move to a two-bedroom property, subject to approval.

“As Mr and Mrs Benson were in a three-bedroom property, they were not eligible.

“The council accepts our website contained incorrect information, regarding the criteria for the scheme.

“We have apologised to Mr and Mrs Benson and can confirm the website has now been updated.”

Comments (34)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

12:32pm Sat 19 Jul 14

BasildonDond says...

I think the Council should, having accepted they published incorrect information, honour the incentive to the Bensons
I think the Council should, having accepted they published incorrect information, honour the incentive to the Bensons BasildonDond
  • Score: 75

1:00pm Sat 19 Jul 14

heartbeat says...

Banks have been ordered to repay PPI for "mis-selling" so surely the Council should pay up to compensate this couple for the incorrect advice given to this family by way of the website?
Banks have been ordered to repay PPI for "mis-selling" so surely the Council should pay up to compensate this couple for the incorrect advice given to this family by way of the website? heartbeat
  • Score: 57

1:35pm Sat 19 Jul 14

pebbles85 says...

I think this is terrible. .... they said they would pay it so now they should.... that family have lost everything. The council!!!!! How would they feel if that was them. This makes me soo angry
I think this is terrible. .... they said they would pay it so now they should.... that family have lost everything. The council!!!!! How would they feel if that was them. This makes me soo angry pebbles85
  • Score: 44

1:56pm Sat 19 Jul 14

emcee says...

This is certainly an error by Basildon Council. Now, if I was the Bensons I would make a claim through the courts for any costs incurred in moving and for any costs in renovating/carpeting
/decoration of the new premises. This course of action is very easy and cheap to do and the result could easily cost the council a lot more than £1500. If the council was smart (although councils rarely are), they should make a goodwill payment to Mr and Mrs Benson, to the sum of the £1500, to avoid any potential embarassment further action would inflict.
This is certainly an error by Basildon Council. Now, if I was the Bensons I would make a claim through the courts for any costs incurred in moving and for any costs in renovating/carpeting /decoration of the new premises. This course of action is very easy and cheap to do and the result could easily cost the council a lot more than £1500. If the council was smart (although councils rarely are), they should make a goodwill payment to Mr and Mrs Benson, to the sum of the £1500, to avoid any potential embarassment further action would inflict. emcee
  • Score: 47

2:23pm Sat 19 Jul 14

pembury53 says...

should have got it in writing, it was probably just a wind up on the website, someone's having a right laugh over it.......
should have got it in writing, it was probably just a wind up on the website, someone's having a right laugh over it....... pembury53
  • Score: -29

2:26pm Sat 19 Jul 14

TheWizzard says...

Wasn't turner trumpeting this a while a go, others should now be aware of this so called helping to downsize scheme
Wasn't turner trumpeting this a while a go, others should now be aware of this so called helping to downsize scheme TheWizzard
  • Score: 17

2:27pm Sat 19 Jul 14

John Bull 40 says...

pebbles85 wrote:
I think this is terrible. .... they said they would pay it so now they should.... that family have lost everything. The council!!!!! How would they feel if that was them. This makes me soo angry
Lost everything ? They still have a roof over their heads, people who suffer real disasters lose everything.
[quote][p][bold]pebbles85[/bold] wrote: I think this is terrible. .... they said they would pay it so now they should.... that family have lost everything. The council!!!!! How would they feel if that was them. This makes me soo angry[/p][/quote]Lost everything ? They still have a roof over their heads, people who suffer real disasters lose everything. John Bull 40
  • Score: -4

3:11pm Sat 19 Jul 14

CHRISTMAS CAROL says...

Not good enough, sue them you will win and not have to paycosts. It will be cheaper for them to pay the £1500.00 T is is an outrage, dont give up
Not good enough, sue them you will win and not have to paycosts. It will be cheaper for them to pay the £1500.00 T is is an outrage, dont give up CHRISTMAS CAROL
  • Score: 25

3:20pm Sat 19 Jul 14

John Right says...

CHRISTMAS CAROL wrote:
Not good enough, sue them you will win and not have to paycosts. It will be cheaper for them to pay the £1500.00 T is is an outrage, dont give up
Look forward to eviction if you attempt to sue the council, you got it free, dont bloody moan, you can always leave..
[quote][p][bold]CHRISTMAS CAROL[/bold] wrote: Not good enough, sue them you will win and not have to paycosts. It will be cheaper for them to pay the £1500.00 T is is an outrage, dont give up[/p][/quote]Look forward to eviction if you attempt to sue the council, you got it free, dont bloody moan, you can always leave.. John Right
  • Score: -14

4:19pm Sat 19 Jul 14

runwellian says...

Surely they would have checked the finer details of this agreement before upping sticks and moving?

I would have wanted to when and how the money would be paid before I packed a box!
Surely they would have checked the finer details of this agreement before upping sticks and moving? I would have wanted to when and how the money would be paid before I packed a box! runwellian
  • Score: 20

5:51pm Sat 19 Jul 14

Nebs says...

Move back.
Move back. Nebs
  • Score: 8

6:11pm Sat 19 Jul 14

Audioman says...

I think it is very very funny
should have stayed where you were
what a daft pair of barnpots
I think it is very very funny should have stayed where you were what a daft pair of barnpots Audioman
  • Score: -2

8:15pm Sat 19 Jul 14

Almeda11 says...

heartbeat wrote:
Banks have been ordered to repay PPI for "mis-selling" so surely the Council should pay up to compensate this couple for the incorrect advice given to this family by way of the website?
l completely agree. l have read about banks sometimes having made an overpayment, and an ATM machine that kept spewing out cash, and in both those instances they admitted liability and let the customers keep the money.
This is banks we are talking about but they admitted their mistake, the council should do the same and honour this couple by either moving them back, or providing a similar property close by, and re-imbursing them for the money they have lost, that would be the decent thing to do.
[quote][p][bold]heartbeat[/bold] wrote: Banks have been ordered to repay PPI for "mis-selling" so surely the Council should pay up to compensate this couple for the incorrect advice given to this family by way of the website?[/p][/quote]l completely agree. l have read about banks sometimes having made an overpayment, and an ATM machine that kept spewing out cash, and in both those instances they admitted liability and let the customers keep the money. This is banks we are talking about but they admitted their mistake, the council should do the same and honour this couple by either moving them back, or providing a similar property close by, and re-imbursing them for the money they have lost, that would be the decent thing to do. Almeda11
  • Score: 9

8:21pm Sat 19 Jul 14

Almeda11 says...

Nebs wrote:
Move back.
HOW exactly Nebs. Presumably you read the article properly, sounds like they`re skint!
And, you should know that it would have to be a council decision, or didn`t you know that either?
[quote][p][bold]Nebs[/bold] wrote: Move back.[/p][/quote]HOW exactly Nebs. Presumably you read the article properly, sounds like they`re skint! And, you should know that it would have to be a council decision, or didn`t you know that either? Almeda11
  • Score: 5

8:23pm Sat 19 Jul 14

Almeda11 says...

emcee wrote:
This is certainly an error by Basildon Council. Now, if I was the Bensons I would make a claim through the courts for any costs incurred in moving and for any costs in renovating/carpeting

/decoration of the new premises. This course of action is very easy and cheap to do and the result could easily cost the council a lot more than £1500. If the council was smart (although councils rarely are), they should make a goodwill payment to Mr and Mrs Benson, to the sum of the £1500, to avoid any potential embarassment further action would inflict.
A good idea, but how cheap is cheap? Sounds like they haven`t got much, and legal aid these days is almost impossible to get.
Hope they`ve got a legal add on for their home insurance.
[quote][p][bold]emcee[/bold] wrote: This is certainly an error by Basildon Council. Now, if I was the Bensons I would make a claim through the courts for any costs incurred in moving and for any costs in renovating/carpeting /decoration of the new premises. This course of action is very easy and cheap to do and the result could easily cost the council a lot more than £1500. If the council was smart (although councils rarely are), they should make a goodwill payment to Mr and Mrs Benson, to the sum of the £1500, to avoid any potential embarassment further action would inflict.[/p][/quote]A good idea, but how cheap is cheap? Sounds like they haven`t got much, and legal aid these days is almost impossible to get. Hope they`ve got a legal add on for their home insurance. Almeda11
  • Score: 4

8:27pm Sat 19 Jul 14

Almeda11 says...

pembury53 wrote:
should have got it in writing, it was probably just a wind up on the website, someone's having a right laugh over it.......
lt`s a pity they didn`t copy and paste it, but even then l doubt they`d have got far.
[quote][p][bold]pembury53[/bold] wrote: should have got it in writing, it was probably just a wind up on the website, someone's having a right laugh over it.......[/p][/quote]lt`s a pity they didn`t copy and paste it, but even then l doubt they`d have got far. Almeda11
  • Score: 4

8:32pm Sat 19 Jul 14

Almeda11 says...

Audioman wrote:
I think it is very very funny
should have stayed where you were
what a daft pair of barnpots
l think you`ve got a very wierd and slightly sadistic sense of humour if you think that`s funny.

l agree they would have been better staying in their old 3 bed house, especially as it had had a stairlift put in ect, and l believe they had the choice, regardless of what the council said, but "funny" it certainly aint!!
[quote][p][bold]Audioman[/bold] wrote: I think it is very very funny should have stayed where you were what a daft pair of barnpots[/p][/quote]l think you`ve got a very wierd and slightly sadistic sense of humour if you think that`s funny. l agree they would have been better staying in their old 3 bed house, especially as it had had a stairlift put in ect, and l believe they had the choice, regardless of what the council said, but "funny" it certainly aint!! Almeda11
  • Score: 13

8:37pm Sat 19 Jul 14

Almeda11 says...

John Right wrote:
CHRISTMAS CAROL wrote:
Not good enough, sue them you will win and not have to paycosts. It will be cheaper for them to pay the £1500.00 T is is an outrage, dont give up
Look forward to eviction if you attempt to sue the council, you got it free, dont bloody moan, you can always leave..
What do you mean " got it free" ? There are plenty of WORKING people living in council homes who PAY RENT, so please explain what you mean by "free" it IS NOT, and you are the one who has a bloody cheek to say otherwise.
[quote][p][bold]John Right[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]CHRISTMAS CAROL[/bold] wrote: Not good enough, sue them you will win and not have to paycosts. It will be cheaper for them to pay the £1500.00 T is is an outrage, dont give up[/p][/quote]Look forward to eviction if you attempt to sue the council, you got it free, dont bloody moan, you can always leave..[/p][/quote]What do you mean " got it free" ? There are plenty of WORKING people living in council homes who PAY RENT, so please explain what you mean by "free" it IS NOT, and you are the one who has a bloody cheek to say otherwise. Almeda11
  • Score: 10

10:22pm Sat 19 Jul 14

andy:) says...

John Right wrote:
CHRISTMAS CAROL wrote:
Not good enough, sue them you will win and not have to paycosts. It will be cheaper for them to pay the £1500.00 T is is an outrage, dont give up
Look forward to eviction if you attempt to sue the council, you got it free, dont bloody moan, you can always leave..
Rubbish ! You clearly know nothing about housing law !. I agree with making a small claim, it would cost very little and there is no risk of costs on the small track, I think a judge could be persuaded that the offer on the website was legally binding.
[quote][p][bold]John Right[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]CHRISTMAS CAROL[/bold] wrote: Not good enough, sue them you will win and not have to paycosts. It will be cheaper for them to pay the £1500.00 T is is an outrage, dont give up[/p][/quote]Look forward to eviction if you attempt to sue the council, you got it free, dont bloody moan, you can always leave..[/p][/quote]Rubbish ! You clearly know nothing about housing law !. I agree with making a small claim, it would cost very little and there is no risk of costs on the small track, I think a judge could be persuaded that the offer on the website was legally binding. andy:)
  • Score: 10

2:21am Sun 20 Jul 14

Devils Advocate says...

John Right wrote:
CHRISTMAS CAROL wrote:
Not good enough, sue them you will win and not have to paycosts. It will be cheaper for them to pay the £1500.00 T is is an outrage, dont give up
Look forward to eviction if you attempt to sue the council, you got it free, dont bloody moan, you can always leave..
Really? when you've been alive long enough to understand anything you still won't see it. Most lifetime tenants (As they used to be) had wages so low, even for skilled work, they would never be able to enter a mortgage. The brilliant idea of Council houses (Not the misrepresentation "Social housing) gave hard working people a place where they could have secured tenancy for the foreseeable future. This would mean that, over their long and miserable lives, they would repay the cost of that house many, many times over. They would not get the joy ride that most people of middle class incomes enjoyed, tax reduction on the repayments of their mortgage, and a secure property which would leave a nice sum to get there kids a good start in life later on. In fact when you look at the fact that today's better off buy cheaper commodities at places like Costco, get free health insurance via the employment, and most business owners do very nicely with their accountants expenses and VAT allowances, etc. etc. and you get annoyed when one of these suckers who were told " Learn a trade. You will be respected, well paid and have security of employment!" Do you wonder why working people have huge chips on their shoulders with the con job worked on them from a very young age by people like you? And, before you start on the unemployed have you ever looked at the employment figure for the last say, 60 years?
Well, guess who keeps those between one point five and four million unemployed? yes, those same people who besmirch every other "perk" the hard working people are told they enjoy? That's right, the ones who promised a vote on whether we join the common market and then took it away in case we didn't vote the way they wanted us to.
You really are a nice selfish chappie aint you?
[quote][p][bold]John Right[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]CHRISTMAS CAROL[/bold] wrote: Not good enough, sue them you will win and not have to paycosts. It will be cheaper for them to pay the £1500.00 T is is an outrage, dont give up[/p][/quote]Look forward to eviction if you attempt to sue the council, you got it free, dont bloody moan, you can always leave..[/p][/quote]Really? when you've been alive long enough to understand anything you still won't see it. Most lifetime tenants (As they used to be) had wages so low, even for skilled work, they would never be able to enter a mortgage. The brilliant idea of Council houses (Not the misrepresentation "Social housing) gave hard working people a place where they could have secured tenancy for the foreseeable future. This would mean that, over their long and miserable lives, they would repay the cost of that house many, many times over. They would not get the joy ride that most people of middle class incomes enjoyed, tax reduction on the repayments of their mortgage, and a secure property which would leave a nice sum to get there kids a good start in life later on. In fact when you look at the fact that today's better off buy cheaper commodities at places like Costco, get free health insurance via the employment, and most business owners do very nicely with their accountants expenses and VAT allowances, etc. etc. and you get annoyed when one of these suckers who were told " Learn a trade. You will be respected, well paid and have security of employment!" Do you wonder why working people have huge chips on their shoulders with the con job worked on them from a very young age by people like you? And, before you start on the unemployed have you ever looked at the employment figure for the last say, 60 years? Well, guess who keeps those between one point five and four million unemployed? yes, those same people who besmirch every other "perk" the hard working people are told they enjoy? That's right, the ones who promised a vote on whether we join the common market and then took it away in case we didn't vote the way they wanted us to. You really are a nice selfish chappie aint you? Devils Advocate
  • Score: 2

3:12am Sun 20 Jul 14

emcee says...

Almeda11 wrote:
emcee wrote:
This is certainly an error by Basildon Council. Now, if I was the Bensons I would make a claim through the courts for any costs incurred in moving and for any costs in renovating/carpeting


/decoration of the new premises. This course of action is very easy and cheap to do and the result could easily cost the council a lot more than £1500. If the council was smart (although councils rarely are), they should make a goodwill payment to Mr and Mrs Benson, to the sum of the £1500, to avoid any potential embarassment further action would inflict.
A good idea, but how cheap is cheap? Sounds like they haven`t got much, and legal aid these days is almost impossible to get.
Hope they`ve got a legal add on for their home insurance.
About £70.
[quote][p][bold]Almeda11[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]emcee[/bold] wrote: This is certainly an error by Basildon Council. Now, if I was the Bensons I would make a claim through the courts for any costs incurred in moving and for any costs in renovating/carpeting /decoration of the new premises. This course of action is very easy and cheap to do and the result could easily cost the council a lot more than £1500. If the council was smart (although councils rarely are), they should make a goodwill payment to Mr and Mrs Benson, to the sum of the £1500, to avoid any potential embarassment further action would inflict.[/p][/quote]A good idea, but how cheap is cheap? Sounds like they haven`t got much, and legal aid these days is almost impossible to get. Hope they`ve got a legal add on for their home insurance.[/p][/quote]About £70. emcee
  • Score: 2

10:01am Sun 20 Jul 14

_Lotus_ says...

Nebs wrote:
Move back.
How? Somebody else will be living in that house now and as it is Council accommodation, they can't just "move back".
[quote][p][bold]Nebs[/bold] wrote: Move back.[/p][/quote]How? Somebody else will be living in that house now and as it is Council accommodation, they can't just "move back". _Lotus_
  • Score: 1

12:02pm Sun 20 Jul 14

Almeda11 says...

_Lotus_ wrote:
Nebs wrote:
Move back.
How? Somebody else will be living in that house now and as it is Council accommodation, they can't just "move back".
l have to agree there, l`m always amazed that some people just say the first thing that comes into their heads without even THINKING about it, bad habit that, and it should have been obvious anyway!
[quote][p][bold]_Lotus_[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Nebs[/bold] wrote: Move back.[/p][/quote]How? Somebody else will be living in that house now and as it is Council accommodation, they can't just "move back".[/p][/quote]l have to agree there, l`m always amazed that some people just say the first thing that comes into their heads without even THINKING about it, bad habit that, and it should have been obvious anyway! Almeda11
  • Score: 3

1:36pm Sun 20 Jul 14

Bigmama1 says...

Although I feel very sorry for the couple, they were obviously not prepared for this move and should have got this offer in writing first. Why couldn't their family checked this all out first? The article now states their daughters are living there with them! In a 2 bed roomed bungalow, I cannot believe this. Why? Did the daughters not have their own place? So now the bungalow is overcrowded! Did the tenants get permission for other members to move in? I suppose not. So now they could face eviction due to breaking their terms of tenancy.
Although I feel very sorry for the couple, they were obviously not prepared for this move and should have got this offer in writing first. Why couldn't their family checked this all out first? The article now states their daughters are living there with them! In a 2 bed roomed bungalow, I cannot believe this. Why? Did the daughters not have their own place? So now the bungalow is overcrowded! Did the tenants get permission for other members to move in? I suppose not. So now they could face eviction due to breaking their terms of tenancy. Bigmama1
  • Score: 4

4:22pm Sun 20 Jul 14

thispaperistrash says...

Wouldn't mind a sweetener when I move, thank you very much. #benefitsbritain
Wouldn't mind a sweetener when I move, thank you very much. #benefitsbritain thispaperistrash
  • Score: 4

4:44pm Sun 20 Jul 14

_Lotus_ says...

Bigmama1 wrote:
Although I feel very sorry for the couple, they were obviously not prepared for this move and should have got this offer in writing first. Why couldn't their family checked this all out first? The article now states their daughters are living there with them! In a 2 bed roomed bungalow, I cannot believe this. Why? Did the daughters not have their own place? So now the bungalow is overcrowded! Did the tenants get permission for other members to move in? I suppose not. So now they could face eviction due to breaking their terms of tenancy.
The couple did say in the article:

“We’ve uprooted the whole family and our daughters are having to share a bedroom for the first time.”

This means the daughters were living with them when they lived in the original house, it doesn't state how old the daughters are, they may not be old enough to move out to a place of their own.
[quote][p][bold]Bigmama1[/bold] wrote: Although I feel very sorry for the couple, they were obviously not prepared for this move and should have got this offer in writing first. Why couldn't their family checked this all out first? The article now states their daughters are living there with them! In a 2 bed roomed bungalow, I cannot believe this. Why? Did the daughters not have their own place? So now the bungalow is overcrowded! Did the tenants get permission for other members to move in? I suppose not. So now they could face eviction due to breaking their terms of tenancy.[/p][/quote]The couple did say in the article: “We’ve uprooted the whole family and our daughters are having to share a bedroom for the first time.” This means the daughters were living with them when they lived in the original house, it doesn't state how old the daughters are, they may not be old enough to move out to a place of their own. _Lotus_
  • Score: 3

10:31pm Sun 20 Jul 14

Nebs says...

_Lotus_ wrote:
Bigmama1 wrote:
Although I feel very sorry for the couple, they were obviously not prepared for this move and should have got this offer in writing first. Why couldn't their family checked this all out first? The article now states their daughters are living there with them! In a 2 bed roomed bungalow, I cannot believe this. Why? Did the daughters not have their own place? So now the bungalow is overcrowded! Did the tenants get permission for other members to move in? I suppose not. So now they could face eviction due to breaking their terms of tenancy.
The couple did say in the article:

“We’ve uprooted the whole family and our daughters are having to share a bedroom for the first time.”

This means the daughters were living with them when they lived in the original house, it doesn't state how old the daughters are, they may not be old enough to move out to a place of their own.
Paragraph 4: The Bensons and daughters, Charlotte, 19, and Susan, 24, moved into...
[quote][p][bold]_Lotus_[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Bigmama1[/bold] wrote: Although I feel very sorry for the couple, they were obviously not prepared for this move and should have got this offer in writing first. Why couldn't their family checked this all out first? The article now states their daughters are living there with them! In a 2 bed roomed bungalow, I cannot believe this. Why? Did the daughters not have their own place? So now the bungalow is overcrowded! Did the tenants get permission for other members to move in? I suppose not. So now they could face eviction due to breaking their terms of tenancy.[/p][/quote]The couple did say in the article: “We’ve uprooted the whole family and our daughters are having to share a bedroom for the first time.” This means the daughters were living with them when they lived in the original house, it doesn't state how old the daughters are, they may not be old enough to move out to a place of their own.[/p][/quote]Paragraph 4: The Bensons and daughters, Charlotte, 19, and Susan, 24, moved into... Nebs
  • Score: 3

10:48pm Sun 20 Jul 14

profondo asbo says...

there's no accounting stupidity
there's no accounting stupidity profondo asbo
  • Score: 0

9:58am Mon 21 Jul 14

_Lotus_ says...

Nebs wrote:
_Lotus_ wrote:
Bigmama1 wrote:
Although I feel very sorry for the couple, they were obviously not prepared for this move and should have got this offer in writing first. Why couldn't their family checked this all out first? The article now states their daughters are living there with them! In a 2 bed roomed bungalow, I cannot believe this. Why? Did the daughters not have their own place? So now the bungalow is overcrowded! Did the tenants get permission for other members to move in? I suppose not. So now they could face eviction due to breaking their terms of tenancy.
The couple did say in the article:

“We’ve uprooted the whole family and our daughters are having to share a bedroom for the first time.”

This means the daughters were living with them when they lived in the original house, it doesn't state how old the daughters are, they may not be old enough to move out to a place of their own.
Paragraph 4: The Bensons and daughters, Charlotte, 19, and Susan, 24, moved into...
Ahh I didn't see that bit with their ages, apologies. However, it still showed they were living with their parents in the house.

Ironically, if their children had been one male and one female, the two bedroomed bungalow would not have been legal, but as they are two females and able to share a bedroom all is okay on that front.

Personally, I think the Council should do the right thing here and pay the couple, using the excuse that the website info was incorrect is their problem not the couples and for the Council to then say it has now been corrected on the site is neither here nor there - it did NOT say that when the couple applied and this is the issue.
[quote][p][bold]Nebs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]_Lotus_[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Bigmama1[/bold] wrote: Although I feel very sorry for the couple, they were obviously not prepared for this move and should have got this offer in writing first. Why couldn't their family checked this all out first? The article now states their daughters are living there with them! In a 2 bed roomed bungalow, I cannot believe this. Why? Did the daughters not have their own place? So now the bungalow is overcrowded! Did the tenants get permission for other members to move in? I suppose not. So now they could face eviction due to breaking their terms of tenancy.[/p][/quote]The couple did say in the article: “We’ve uprooted the whole family and our daughters are having to share a bedroom for the first time.” This means the daughters were living with them when they lived in the original house, it doesn't state how old the daughters are, they may not be old enough to move out to a place of their own.[/p][/quote]Paragraph 4: The Bensons and daughters, Charlotte, 19, and Susan, 24, moved into...[/p][/quote]Ahh I didn't see that bit with their ages, apologies. However, it still showed they were living with their parents in the house. Ironically, if their children had been one male and one female, the two bedroomed bungalow would not have been legal, but as they are two females and able to share a bedroom all is okay on that front. Personally, I think the Council should do the right thing here and pay the couple, using the excuse that the website info was incorrect is their problem not the couples and for the Council to then say it has now been corrected on the site is neither here nor there - it did NOT say that when the couple applied and this is the issue. _Lotus_
  • Score: 1

6:31pm Mon 21 Jul 14

alarminstaller says...

Why
Why alarminstaller
  • Score: 1

8:15am Tue 22 Jul 14

cropped hero says...

but surely during the application to move process they would have mentioned that they were moving cos of the 'sweetner?' and it would have come to light then that they would not receive this payment.

I reckon that we are only being told half the story here.
but surely during the application to move process they would have mentioned that they were moving cos of the 'sweetner?' and it would have come to light then that they would not receive this payment. I reckon that we are only being told half the story here. cropped hero
  • Score: 5

11:22am Wed 23 Jul 14

Mattster says...

So if you got the £1500 you wouldnt care that you have forced your daughters to share a bedroom?
So if you got the £1500 you wouldnt care that you have forced your daughters to share a bedroom? Mattster
  • Score: 2

8:24pm Wed 23 Jul 14

Dr Martin says...

profondo asbo wrote:
there's no accounting stupidity
welcome back profondo
[quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote: there's no accounting stupidity[/p][/quote]welcome back profondo Dr Martin
  • Score: 0

10:27am Wed 30 Jul 14

I-say-you-say says...

Hang on - it says they were already enquiring about moving 4 months BEFORE the downsizing scheme came into place and when they wouldn't have got any financial help for doing so and it was ok then...it was just pushed through quicker once they thought they could get a nice £1500 freebie!

So they CHOSE to move, they CHOSE to downsize, they CHOSE to make their girls share a room all for the expectation of £1500 that they would never have seen any of due to the alleged cost of moving/decorating etc.

Nobody forced them to move and there seemed no reason as the council paid to adapt their current property to suit them.

It was pure greed of the offer of a possible £1500 that made them do this and now because they're not getting it they are having a whinge off to the papers! Well I'm sorry but TOUGH!
Hang on - it says they were already enquiring about moving 4 months BEFORE the downsizing scheme came into place and when they wouldn't have got any financial help for doing so and it was ok then...it was just pushed through quicker once they thought they could get a nice £1500 freebie! So they CHOSE to move, they CHOSE to downsize, they CHOSE to make their girls share a room all for the expectation of £1500 that they would never have seen any of due to the alleged cost of moving/decorating etc. Nobody forced them to move and there seemed no reason as the council paid to adapt their current property to suit them. It was pure greed of the offer of a possible £1500 that made them do this and now because they're not getting it they are having a whinge off to the papers! Well I'm sorry but TOUGH! I-say-you-say
  • Score: -1

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

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