Doodledog
DaisyAnne
It could be more the madness of coucil tax per se, rather than this particular application. (But that is a much more in depth discussion
)
Indeed.
There are people getting the rebate who have houses which were banded A-D in 1990 but are now worth £££, and others being denied it whose houses haven't increased much but were banded E-H 30 years ago.
I know I bang the means-testing drum to the point of tedium, but this is yet another example of how unfair it can be. Council tax is lowest in Westminster, where they pay £677 pa for a house in band D. In Rutland, living in a Band D house will cost you £2300 pa. Why choose this as a measure of who should get the rebate? People in some (seemingly random - I think the next-highest CT area after Rutland is Dorset) areas are already being hit by disproportionate bills that have absolutely no link to their earnings, and neither do CT bandings, outside of the extremes.
Why choose this as a measure of who should get the rebate?
It isn't, as we have had some agreement on, a "Council Tax" rebate. It is a government heating allowance paid to households. But it is neither paid to all households nor the poorest households. My thought originally, based on how the Aussies used it to get household payments out quickly, was that you could ask for less than the best if it was near-instant and stopped people's anxiety for the time being. But this government doesn't do instant, nor on target, or competently. So it will leave a lot of people annoyed but more people, in the end, reasonably happy and that seems to be the level of success they seek to achieve.
You know more about some means-tested areas than I do and I salute any drum banging on this topic. I am convinced we would have a fairer, quicker and cheaper system if we have a proper Universal Living Pension.