Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

To accept tenants with DLA?

281 replies

thatverynightinmaxsroom · 14/09/2017 09:51

I'm a LL of an inherited property, not a professional landlord, and I'm really very ignorant about this.

I've been asked if I'd accept a tenant whose rent would be paid directly by DLA.

Is there any reason I wouldn't or shouldn't accept?!

OP posts:
Urubu · 16/09/2017 09:12

There's also the fact that if your tenants are found to be fraudulently claiming the rent money will be recovered from you rather than them
Just because of this, I would never do it!

stopfuckingshoutingatme · 16/09/2017 09:13

I think OP has inherited the property

My friend let to a LHA for a
Long term period

It's stable rent as paid by the Local authority

The challenge is getting people out . They need often to be declared homeless to get another place it's fairly standard in Londo.
Place . So you have to evict them

mirime · 16/09/2017 09:13

Just wanted to point out that the Equalities legislation does cover landlords. Refusing people on benefits may also be illegal, but there hasn't been a test case - I know some housing and homelessness organisations are keen to see one.

Notreallyarsed · 16/09/2017 09:17

There's such NIMBY-ism on this thread. We are in a massive housing crisis in no small part due to private landlords charging exorbitant rent, people are being forced to live in slum conditions, disabled people are being treated like absolute shit, and it's apparently ok to look down your nose at people who aren't as fortunate as you. This is Britain in 2017 and people are actually starving and have no access to affordable, clean, suitable housing. It depresses me beyond words to see some of the attitudes on this thread. Can't you see that you're part of the problem???

specialsubject · 16/09/2017 09:32

Lots of not listening on here.

Any tenant can stop paying rent due to job loss, sickness, benefits trouble ( or just not wanting to pay). As it takes months to evict non payers, landlords need rent guarantee and legal expenses cover. So a tenant has to be eligible for that.

Policies will cover benefits tenants, but not always. The mortgage company and buildings cover also need to agree.

Those are the issues.

Branleuse · 16/09/2017 09:46

Landlords who will only rent to already privileged people are arseholes really.

TheVoiceOfTreason · 16/09/2017 09:50

It's a difficult one.

As others have said above, DLA is not paid for the purposes of rent. It's to cover additional disability related living costs, such as mobility and careers. If they get HB as well, then that will be how they pay their rent.

Unfortunately, as others have said above, mortgage companies don't like tenants on benefits. Not so sure about insurance companies. If you've inherited the property though you may be mortgage free which could mean it's less of an issue.

Do they have the option of a guarantor? That might be a mutually acceptable solution here.

As horrible as this is going to sound - when I was a landlord, I had a "no benefits" rule. The letting agents I used had this for pretty much all of their landlords i believe.

I think when Universal Credit comes they will be doing away with direct payments to landlords. The full sum for all benefits will go to the claimants, who then will pay their rent to their landlords out of it. And that, for me, is part of the problem.

It comes down to basic affordability criteria. My letting agents only approved tenants whose income exceeded rent by 3:1 (or something like that). This figure wasn't plucked out of thin air. It's based on whether you can realistically afford your rent and other living costs. If you have a benefits claiming tenant, and their benefits are paid directly to them, and 50% of their total benefits is actually their HB (or equivalent), then they are going to struggle to cover everything. It's actually pretty hard to evict non rent paying tenants - takes ages - so there's a real risk that if other competing priorities are given priority by your tenants (kids need new school uniforms, unexpectedly large gas bill, whatever) they may start paying rent late and expect you to just lump it.

It's high risk therefore imo. I know that will upset some people, but I'm not saying it to be mean.

sashh · 16/09/2017 09:56

I am in a private property with XXX properties but need a bigger property. They receive their rent direct as I am in receipt of DLA. I was wondering if your company does the same.'

That probably means they get HB because they are on DLA and the HB is paid directly to the landlord.

All this shit about insurance and mortgage companies, turning someone down because they receive DLA is direct disability discrimination.

Eg two newly qualified teachers on the same salary apply for accommodation but one gets DLA on top of their salary how exactly are they a worse tenant?

OP

Adapted properties are as rare as hen's teeth, if you did put adaptions in you would never have a problem getting a tennant.

TheVoiceOfTreason · 16/09/2017 10:06

@specialsubject "a landlord that can't afford no rent should not be a landlord" - really?

What about people who have to move out of their own property - e.g. relocating for work - but cannot sell for whatever reason? This is what happened to me in 2008. Well, I could afford to sell, I didn't have negative equity, but it would have meant losing about £40k on my house. No thanks,especially when I wouldn't have been able to buy a house in the area I relocated to. I couldn't afford to keep paying my £850pcm mortgage on an empty house as well as rent in my new area. What should I have done then? I had a tenant lined up when I left. When he stopped paying his rent I was really in the shits for a bit, until he left and I replaced him with a lovely couple who always pay their rent on time, who stayed for 7 years, and then when they were ready to leave, I sold it, for a profit instead of a loss.

Private landlords aren't housing associations. We shouldn't feel obliged to keep a roof over someone's head who isn't paying their rent. It's a commercial arrangement, simple as that really....

Notreallyarsed · 16/09/2017 10:10

Private landlords aren't housing associations. We shouldn't feel obliged to keep a roof over someone's head who isn't paying their rent. It's a commercial arrangement, simple as that really....

Absolutely, what I'm Hmm at is the assumption that anyone who works will reliably pay rent, and anyone on benefits will apparently not pay anything and piss it all up a wall.

TheVoiceOfTreason · 16/09/2017 10:19

Noteeallyarsed - you are quoting me out of context. I was responding to the comment above about how people who can't afford to not receive rent shouldn't be landlords at all. It wasn't specific to benefits claimants. I guess it was therefore going off topic slightly, so apologies for the tangent!

BeBeatrix · 16/09/2017 10:53

When I let my home for a couple of years, I was keen to let to let to tenants who might face discrimination. I positively wanted to let to people reliant on housing benefit, and intended to keep rent as low as possible.

Sadly, when I looked into it, I just couldn't afford to. Insurance would have gone through the roof. And I needed to insure the rental income. I had saved up a buffer of 6 month's rent for empty periods or repairs, but was on a suddenly much lower income, and couldn't afford the risk any more than the insurance.

I can see that this might have come across as discrimination. But it wasn't, it was just me being realistic about what I could afford. I wasn't some millionaire multi-property LL - I could only afford to buy a home because I lived in a very poor area, and I only let it because I gave up my job to move in with a relative and care for them full time.

I dislike the "benefits recipients can't manage their money" cliches, but I'm not too fond of the "LLs who won't rent to HB recipients are prejudiced and discriminatory" line either.

Notreallyarsed · 16/09/2017 11:19

@TheVoiceOfTreason I didn't mean you were saying that, sorry, I didn't write it very well. It's a lot of other posters who seem to be deriding anyone on benefits that are getting to me.

wrenika · 16/09/2017 11:26

Check your LL insurance. We rent our old flat and don't accept tenants on benefits.

Urubu · 16/09/2017 12:54

Notreallyarsed
It is not the assumption that anyone who works will reliably pay rent, and anyone on benefits will apparently not pay anything
It is the assumption that they are more likely to reliably pay rent, as proven by statistics.

quercuscircus · 16/09/2017 13:23

OK so just to call out some misinformation here;

I have just spoken to Direct Line, one of the big LL insurers and who advertise frequently, and checked their website.

They do cover HB tenants who are on disability benefits and you can get the rent guarantee to cover HB tenants subject to full credit referencing etc (see their Ts and Cs).

They do not charge extra for disabled tenants as I quote "that would be discrimination" and "a tenant is a tenant". (the adviser was horrified with my question!)

Their website says:

"we don’t currently cover properties where all of the tenants are unemployed and claiming benefits. If the tenant(s) are claiming disability benefits we might be able to offer you cover.

We can offer cover if at least one tenant in the property, who has signed the rental agreement with you, is employed, retired, in full-time education or on disability benefits (subject to you also meeting our other acceptance criteria)."

So actually a lot of these comments saying insurers won't cover is actually bullshit and perpetuating prejudice

quercuscircus · 16/09/2017 13:24

link to webpage www.directlineforbusiness.co.uk/landlord-insurance/faqs

PigletWasPoohsFriend · 16/09/2017 13:28

If the tenant(s) are claiming disability benefits we might be able to offer you cover.

Clue is might so people on their own might get cover. Doesn't say they will.

quercuscircus · 16/09/2017 13:31

PIGLETThe lines below those you quote say how they will be able to offer cover - keep reading

DIrect Line website www.directlineforbusiness.co.uk/landlord-insurance/faqs
"we don’t currently cover properties where all of the tenants are unemployed and claiming benefits. If the tenant(s) are claiming disability benefits we might be able to offer you cover.
We can offer cover if at least one tenant in the property, who has signed the rental agreement with you, is employed, retired, in full-time education or on disability benefits (subject to you also meeting our other acceptance criteria)."

How did you miss that? Is it easier without a space?!!!!

PigletWasPoohsFriend · 16/09/2017 13:33

The two statements contradict themselves though.

Although my experiences with DL aren't good anyway.

TheVoiceOfTreason · 16/09/2017 13:34

Just read the full thread.

@Motoko , your post is ignorant and entitled. Not everyone chooses to become a landlord, some people have to relocate and can't sell, so need to rent out. This happened to me, as discussed above - it was either sell my former home for a £40k loss (back in 2008, bought just before the crash), or rent it out. It's not the responsibility of private landlords to continue to house someone if they aren't continuing to pay their rent, and the suggestion that if we can't afford to have someone in our house rent free for a period of time we shouldn't be landlords at all, simply because there isn't enough social housing, is ridiculous. I was a private landlord. I'm not a housing association, there was no moral obligation for me to allow someone to live rent free in my house whilst I continued to pay the mortgage on it as well as my own rent. What a ridiculous suggestion.

TheVoiceOfTreason · 16/09/2017 13:36

I think @silkybear said it best when she said "it's easy to take the high ground when it's not your money and it's someone else's risk to take". Spot on.

quercuscircus · 16/09/2017 13:39

No, they are not contradictory; the first part says that they might be able to offer cover to HB/unemployed tenants, and the second part says under what conditions they would offer cover which includes being an HB tenant in receipt of disability benefits.

It might not be what some LLs want to hear (so they can go on discriminating against the disabled but blaming it on somone else) but is it the truth.

TheHungryDonkey · 16/09/2017 13:44

DLA isn't meant for rent. Of course not. But in my experience it is paid every month without fail and not suspended for willy nilly reasons like housing benefit. It's money that is intended to cover the excess costs that being disabled can lead to.

The tenant is trying to reassure you that they have a guaranteed income of sorts. They could be professionals or could indeed being entitled to housing benefit. They are dressing it up without lying because it's almost impossible in some places find anywhere that accessors HB.

Some of the responses on here are wrong and narrow minded. The tenant is also unlikely to be trying to rent a property that isn't suited to their disability.

quercuscircus · 16/09/2017 13:45

thevoiceoftreason you and people like you are unfortunately the exact reason why we need to have laws against discrimination.

Because you take the worst possible scenarios and stereotypes and apply them to certain groups in ways that will restrict and damage their lives.

No one is suggesting you should give your house rent free and suggesting that in your arguement is absurd.

Swipe left for the next trending thread