Would social services really say this?

[Rogerroger744]

My friend told me that her social worker advised her to stop paying her rent and to get herself evicted to get a council house because she is struggling to pay her rent. She's known for being very loose with the truth, would a social worker really advise that?

Another thing sometimes professionals do give terrible advice. My sister is in the situation above due to being forced to give up her council house by her violent controlling partner. The housing officer told her to sublet and room and not declare it to the council so she still gets full HB. She questioned this because a) its not her property to sublet and b) it'd fraud not declare all income to the council but was told oh no you won;t get caught you just have to do what you can.
I didn't believe she had been told this as she has form for getting things wrong the then the housing officer repeated the same thing to be. I was gobsmacked she could end up in court if she took that advice!!!

I work in this area, I have heard this advice given by the housing department as well as social services. If she cannot pay her rent, she is best off being evicted as she will then be counted as homeless and they will have a duty to house (however unpleasantly or unsuitably!). I wouldn’t assume she is lying. It’s also not necessarily immoral. It’s about the practicalities.

If your friend is already in arrears and struggling to pay private rent, she could very well have advised what's claimed. This is not uncommon advice given by council housing officers. When a tenant is evicted with dependents they are automatically given priority emergency housing.

I worked for a local authority for many years until very recently, I've heard this is standard practice. It's bloody awful on the private landlords within the authority that top up the much needed rental stock though and shockingly bad imo.

My understanding (could be way of the mark here tbh) is that they have a duty to house the children not the parent. By placing them in foster care or with their other parent that duty would be fulfilled. Hence single adults finding themselves way down the list.

I was told by the council that to get put on their list , I would have to refuse to move after the landlady gave us notice and get an eviction notice from her going to court. But then we would have to accept whatever the council offered, including hostels etc.

I'm a SW but not in children and families and not in the UK. As much as you think someone has understood what's been said, misunderstandings do happen. I feel awful if someone misunderstands what I say, so I would want to know in order to correct it. I think you should strongly advise your friend to call her SW for clarification.

I suppose if she is already in arrears and can't afford her rent then she has no choice but to get evicted. If she hasn't got the money, she hasn't got it.

I'm not sure why she has a social worker but if she's a vulnerable adult or has difficulty with budgeting for rent then as a friend perhaps you could sit down with her and calculate her incomings and outgoings? It may be possible to make some savings with energy providers for example or simply sticking to a weekly strict budget. No fun at all but surely better than the trauma of being evicted.

It is just possible her SW did say what your friend claims.

A friend of mine has (according to her and she may have got confused) been given similar advice by her SW about "gaming the system" as the SW put it. It didn't sound right to me, but I don't know that much about social housing. My friend was advised to get herself evicted as soon as possible, while her DC is under 2 years old, as this would give them priority.

Yes.

If this person is evicted she would have to apply to the council for re-housing and as others have said she would be deemed to be intentionally homeless BUT if she has children she would be in priority need and the council would be duty bound to find accommodation for her.

Housing depts are as you know horrendously short of council house and houses sub let to housing associations. Some 80% of people who don't have their own accommodation on mortgage or own outright are housed by private landlords. Someone above (I think) said it was landlords that had to top up the rent but this is not the case - they are allowed to charge extortionally high rents and the rrent (or top up) is paid by Housing Benefit which comes from taxes (so you and I) are lining the pockets of the landlords. There should be a sealing on the amount of rent a landlord can charge but the govt won't take this step.

Back to the unfortunate woman in question - she will be told that any accommodation provided will be temporary but in fact they can't evict her when she has dependent children. The children certainly would NOT be "put into foster care" because of a housing problem. The woman will probably be put in a hostel or worse still a B & B.

As for the social worker (I am a retired one) I can see where she's coming from and I think is being merely pragmatic.

Longtime, just recently a Homeless Man, in my City, died of the effects of exposure, because of the circumstances that you describe, he was 52.

The child/ren would be placed in Foster Care, as said, but there is no duty for the Adults to be helped and that also applies to Homeless charities. Even if they are refugees, after a certain time period there is sometimes no duty to give assistance.

As I said I may have been way for the mark, and I was. It’s been several years since I was made homeless (twice) and I had so much information from all angles and that was obviously incorrect information that I made the mistake of not confirming.

Oh crossed posts with Birdsgottafly I’m genuinely confused now.

Catrina123, the Foster Care comments were to Longtime's question. It was a different set of circumstances than the OP. They can evict when a person has children. The accommodation provided can be one room in a shared property.

Bumbumataloo, that wasn't in answer to the OP. That was for a different set of circumstances.

Op do make sure your friend is armed with the facts and knows what to expect after eviction.
I have a feeling she has a romantic idea of being placed straight into a house? As pps have said, emergency accommodation is generally bloody awful. Stuck indefinitely in a cramped hostel or similar full of drug addicts and alcoholics could be the reality.

OP, to answer the qiuestion, I think that you would find that the truth lies halfway. Your friend made the suggestion, asked questions and the SW advised her what would happen. But didn't suggest it.

I was a CP SW, we didn't get involved with rehousing, that was for a Parent to show that they could do that as it is their duty to see that their children have somewhere secure to sleep. The child being on a CP plan would put the Family in priority housing need, to prevent removal. But that was for the Social Housing provider to decide. We would go Guarantor in some cases, or find a Charity that would.

SW's have for many years signposted benefit issues.

I have actually heard of this happening, so sounds entirely plausable to me.

A friend of mine is a private landlord. She has had a few tenants do this, apparently advised through SS.

Ah okay Birdsgottafly I’m confusing myself.

It's normally can anyone help you pay ? Etc then if they was to try evict they would say to stay there after the eviction date as I was told. Otherwise I made my self intentionally homeless leaving befor the date, not sure how that make sense But council lady said itwe never got evicted In the end was empty threats but making Your self intentionally homeless is a no go for the council. They will turn her away. Regardless.

I work in social housing. I think it quite plausible the SW did say this. It sounds like your friend is stuck in a private let and not coping. That situation alone will not get her enough points (ie priority) to get to the top of the LA list and be housed. It is possible (saying nothing about the ethics) for her to build up rent arrears by failing to pay her rent top-up. She might then get evicted by her private landlord and then she can present to her LA as unintentionally homeless. (She couldn’t afford the rent which is different from wilfully withholding it, which would be intentionally homeless). If she was here in Scotland in that situation, the LA have an obligation to rehouse her. Given she has kids and is presumably vulnerable (has SW) she would be offered a secure permanent tenancy with the LA or a HA under homeless legislation. I’m afraid I don’t know quite how much things differ south of the border. Where does she like be OP?

Sorry where does she like live?

Erghhhh

Every social worker is different, some will do things by the book and some won't. The social worker may of said it with the best of intentions but you're right she'd be classed as intentionally homeless.