No DSS, No Smokers, No Pets

[JustAnotherPoster00]

Sick of seeing those 3 on every single house I look at, I'm disabled (mainly MH related) and I need to move but can't simply because of those

I am a landlord and I would be happy to rent to DSS tenants but as a PP said, insurance premiums are higher (in my case it was a LOT higher). I agree speak to the agent and see if the LL will make an exception if it isn't for the insurance reason (or maybe even if it is, they may ask you to pay a bit more of a deposit to cover).

Pets, meh . I have tenants who got a dog and didn't tell me however one of them is OCD (to the point where she has had a lot of treatment for it) and the house is cleaner than before they moved in, and dog is crated during the day. I'm fine with it. Any damage and I'd just keep some deposit back to cover . It depends on the person. If someone had a huge, untrained dog wrecking everything obviously that's different. I look at the whole picture.

I'd enquire anyway. We say no to all three, as advised by mortgage provider, but in reality we treat each potential tenant as an individual and take their specific circumstances into account. The only definite 'no' is a smoker. Our last two tenants have been on HB and have been the loveliest, most reliable people you could ask for. I was gutted when each one gave their notice, but also pleased for them that they were able to move on to something bigger/their own place. Ask if you can talk with the landlord and explain your situation. You never know ....

Do I recall correctly that Housing Benefit used to be paid direct to the landlord ? And arrears were almost unknown (obviously) because tenants simply couldn't spend their rent elsewhere ?

And then some genius said "hang on, this system seems to work. It's actually embarrassing us and showing the rest of the benefits system up as incompetent and not-fit-for-purpose*. What can we do to fuck it up ? I know - let's give the housing benefit not to the landlord but to the tenant. It has to be worse than what we have now !

Equally, you could argue that private landlords should be paid directly from their tenant's employer.

All in all the minority who live like pigs, treat other people's properties wih no respect, and are too lazy to clean up after themselves let down the many good tenants with children and pets

How long does it take to get HB tenants out ? When we had to evict working tenants they hadn't paid 7 months rent by the time they voluntarily left.

pissedoff that happened to my parents too :( was an utter nightmare. They had to take her to court (I can't remember how long it took but it was over 6 months) and when the court ruled in the LL's favour she said something like 'But hang on where am I going to live??' Totally flummoxed that none-payment of rent was going to lose her her home, she thought it would be fine to stay there despite.

The house was a total shithole and she hadn't paid in months and months and been given so many chances. It's true as PP said, these people are what ruins it for everyone else.

What on earth do they do with the rent? I mean if you're on benefits having an extra £650 a month housing benefit in your pocket would be like a lottery win

For various reasons I pick up lots of future-gazing research, and "Generation Rent" is definitely changing society. There is a swell of people building that have accepted they will never own a house, and are behaving appropriately - which means their financial profile is completely different to a decade ago.

Of course, a rise in Generation Rent will eventually deliver a voting bloc big enough to be worth chasing - if Labour could wake up and smell the hipster coffee they could look at protecting tenants as a serious voter winner.

Who knows what they do with the rent.

The tenant I had that spent the housing benefit was getting universal credit and I believe with that you get 1 monthly payment of benefit your yourself and housing benefit but I only ever saw 1 months rent.

They owe me hundreds of pounds I will never see, and I can't even sue them for it as the don't have an income. With a working tenants you can sue and get money taken directly from wages.

If housing benefit went directly to the landlord, then the excuse of arrears would lose it's weight in "No DSS".

The problem (as many people on this thread have stated) is that if the council pays the landlord direct, and the council then decides there's a problem and either stops payment or reclaims it, the landlord loses out.

If the council pays the tenant who then pays the landlord, the council have to try to get falsely claimed money back off the tenant, and the landlord's money received from the tenant is safe.

(Also, hb is often less than the rental amount, so tenants have to make up the shortfall).

When I was a tenant on hb paid direct to me, I paid my rent on time even through delays in getting hb (taking the financial hit myself, putting everything on credit cards, barely scraping by without enough food til the payment eventually came) because having a roof over my head was important and I didn't want to risk being evicted (I also had a guarantor, and would have sooner starved then have them chased for money). Hearing all these stories of hb tenants taking the piss is really saddening.

I hated the 'no dss' thing. I had no choice but to get hb to survive, and I would never have dreamed of acting the way some hb tenants obviously do.

How dare a tenant consider having a pet?! How dare a tenant treat the place they're renting as their own home

Except it isn't that at all. The "no pets" thing is there to start a chat with the tenants about how they're going to ensure the pet doesn't ruin the property.

Those that say "we do this, this and this, we're happy to pay X deposit to cover this" are fine.

Those that don't seem to accept that pets CAN ruin property and don't want to deal with that are a red flag and I wouldn't have rented to them

Op, is there a good reason that you can't give up smoking?

I have property I rent out.

I'm not allowed tenants on benefits under my mortgage conditions (I keep small mortgages on them all for tax reasons).

I don't actually mind animals but don't want dogs left in the properties all day when people are at work - they bark and annoy other tenants/owners, they chew (frankly I think it's cruel). I tend to say small animals allowed.

I don't want smokers (well I don't care if they smoke outside the property) because of the discolouring of walls and upholstery and the smell (very hard to eradicate).

Like butterflies was, I am an HB tenant.

I am a disabled single mum to a disabled DC who works full time. My flat is cluttered, but clean. I've made improvements. I get the carpets cleaned twice a year. I don't smoke and we don't have pets. I have a guarantor and my rent has been on time every month for over 6 years. I have excellent references.

I've been there for well over 3 years. I've been made redundant and found work again, been on long term sick but then back in work again. I'm hoping this will be my last rented property before I can buy a house for me and DS. I intend to leave the place in the best possible condition considering the wear and tear for however long we end up staying there.

It's sad to hear so many with bad experiences of HB tenants. I know several and none of us take the piss with our homes - because we have to live there too!

Maybe it's because I'm from a 'naice' area though?

I can understand why LLs may be reluctant to rent to smokers, pet owners or whatever, but surely sometimes it's self-defeating? We're very lucky with our last two LLs as due to paying a larger deposit and having it written into the lease we will have the place professionally cleaned on departure, we've been able to keep our pets. Accordingly because we've been treated like the responsible adults we are, we're more likely to behave as such. We've settled here, think of the place as our home rather than a transient lodging and look after it as if it were our own. We're happy to stay here as long as the property is available to rent and we can afford it.

Surely that, albeit with the slightly increased possibility at the end of a several-years-long tenancy that a couple of items may need replacing because of pet damage/smell (which after a tenancy of that length they may well have done anyway due to wear and tear) is preferable to a LL than constantly having to find and deal with new, unproven tenants who don't feel inclined to stay because of the restrictions placed upon them or the assumptions made about them?

I assume the no DSS is because most are direct payment now.

Everyone seems to hate renting, the tenants, not much joy in it for the landlords either I honestly wondering who's winning here ?

I ask this constantly but haven't yet had an answer or figured it out.
When universal credit comes in (or for people who are on it now) housing benefit, tax credits etc are all lumped in together, so this will either be a wonderful thing as people who receive help with rent will no longer be penalised OR more people will be penalised as those who were on tax credits are now getting universal credit.
Anyone know?

Whilst reading this thread, I had a phonecall from a letting agent regarding a property I'd enquired about. He'll let me know later if the LL deems my circumstances 'acceptable.' I won't hold my breath waiting for a phonecall.

Yes, I receive HB to pay part of the rent whilst I'm retraining to become a Speech and Language Therapist but I also have two months' deposit, seven years worth of rental history with no late payments backed up by references, a guarantor and a decent credit score. What more can I do to make myself 'acceptable?'

Rental costs are so high in Greater London that even once I'm qualified and working in a Band 5 role, as a lone parent I'll probably still be in receipt of a small amount of HB. I could move out of Greater London to somewhere with cheaper rent and then avoid the 'no DSS' problem (I'm not sure if the DSS has existed in my lifetime but then HB has been Local Housing Allowance for years and I still revert to the former) but I doubt this would save the state a great deal of money as I would probably then need help to pay for childcare, whereas currently I have family around to help.

Agh.

I allow children and cats in my rental, but won't allow dogs, as we have patios and not a garden, so not dog friendly.

HB tenants prohibited by the insurance, and I am not willing to take any risks on that.

I am also a tenant abroad, and I look after the place that I rent very well, as there is no wear and tear here, and you have to hand the place back in the condition it was when you took it on. If we get out of here for less than £3k, we will be doing well! A friend recently moved, and her lad had left a mark on the laminate flooring. In the UK I got £40 for a tenant doing that...she got charged the cost of a new floor!

Surely even the universal credit will have 'components', after all, it's a formula with distinct inputs. It would be impossible to administer or account for otherwise.

We have a rental property and accept DSS and pets but not smokers. The last time we advertised it we got 50 applicants and a few people mentioned it was the only house in the area that accepted DSS and pets.

I don't let to HB tenants purely for the reason stated by a PP - the risk that tenants will be advised to stay put so they can be rehoused and then the hellish, expensive cycle of court, bailiffs begins.

If that changed then I would.

End of the day for most LL it is a business decision and they will go for the lower risk option. They might still get caught out but they will try to protect their asset and their income. Maybe it is their pension or covering their own rent?

Another issue re pets is this: my property is a leasehold, I do not own the free hold and the terms of my lease state no pets. So if I allow pets i am in breach of my lease agreements. I imagine this is also quite common.

I have great sympathy for many renters. Both my sons rent. A small minority have made many of us wary. The LL haters on this thread haven't actually addressed most of the valid concerns raised.

We were fine with all three but the mortgage company wouldn't allow us to rent to people on housing benefit. We really didn't care as the money would have come straight to us from the council but it was out of our hands. It must be frustrating to see it on all the adverts.