To think it's disgusting the amount of landlords who won't accept DSS?

[7hup]

My friend is 36 and just been kicked out by her boyfriend because she had a mental breakdown and multiple suicide attempts .

She's just been released from hospital and has been given a B&B room as temporary accommodation.

She has to claim universal credit as she is in no fit state to work.

Council said if she can find private housing they will cover her first month's rent/deposit/fees.

No where takes housing benefit.

It's unfair.

There's no council accommodation and no private landlords will accept it.

She's 36. No children. No pets. Doesn't drink. Doesn't smoke. Is quiet and polite. Keeps to herself. Clean and tidy. She just needs a home :(

Its working people too. My Dsis has a kid and can't move out of my mums because she works only 16 hours because of her son so would receive housing benefit. So she can't move either.

Even on Spareroom. Co. UK in our area there are 674 rooms.

ONE takes DSS. And is dou le the price of similar rooms

It's so unfair :(

Rents are potentially going to rise post 1st June tenancy Fee ban. The costs will go to the landlords who are likely to factor this into the rents.

Although most people (especially people who have no choice but rent) are only too happy to see landlords suffer financially they need to remember that if things change too quickly and too harshly, the short to medium term outcome is a lack of houses in the rental market. That does nothing but push prices up and make it easier for landlords to be picky about who they take. Of course there will be more houses on the market for potential buyers but that only helps the people who are in a position to be buyers. Many many people aren't and will probably never be.

Be careful what you wish for.

There are numerous people currently renting who earn enough to service a mortgage

when landlords are forced to sell up at at a reduced price all they will need is a loosening of lending criteria and they can be owner occupiers

When tenancy fees are banned this will affect the profits of letting agencies
there is no reason for landlord to increase rents

It was thatcher that implemented right to buy, it was new labour that instigated rules of social housing on new developments. Whilst right to buy exist there is no point in district councils rebuilding and they don’t have the money as right to buy money goes to central government- not into their own coffers

Rents in the area I’m in are not rising, as supply outstrips demand.

A two bedroom apartment averages around £900 per month, there are 151 to choose from in a 3 mile radius, some let’s are being reduced

When tenancy fees are banned this will affect the profits of letting agencies
there is no reason for landlord to increase rents

Are you acting stupid or is it the real thing?

@Wordthe
You do talk a lot of nonsense.
My tenants don't pay any fees at all, just a deposit and rent - I don't use an agent. I pay for all of the reference checking.

My rent still goes up in line with the market. It was £675pcm in 2013. £750 by 2015, £850 by 2017 and next time it becomes vacant it'll likely be on at £900+.

I am sure there is a ceiling on the rent, and it might go down in a few years, but I am always going to keep it in line with the market. What on earth has that to do with fees?

If you are a landlord it is in your interests to try and persuade people that any sanctions against landlords will only hurt tenants

I'm a landlord and our landlord's insurance doesn't allow for tenants that are receiving benefits (those that couldn't afford the rent otherwise). We literally can't rent to them.

My parents own two houses in the midlands (ex council) and have rented to DSS tenants plenty of times. They had eight tenants in a decade that all used the eviction system to avoid paying the last three months of rent (apparently it's a well-used scam) two that used the property to deal drugs from (raised by the police), one who used it as a brothel and one who left a leaving gift of shit smeared over every wall in the house.

They no longer accept DSS.

when landlords are forced to sell up at at a reduced price all they will need is a loosening of lending criteria and they can be owner occupiers

My experience of ftbs are it wouldn’t matter if the place came gift wrapped with bells and whistles and a prize Mercedes parked outside when it comes to signing in the dotted line you wouldn’t see them for dust.

Example of a 1 bed garden flat I was selling in a very nice North London postcode. Under 5 minutes walk to transport and shops, tucked away down a quiet side street with view over London.
The flat was completely renovated. New white shiny kitchen with quartz work surface, limestone tiled bathroom, white walls, oak flooring and bifold doors out to a nice sized garden (not too big and not too small).

First person (ftb) who saw it wanted it. Offer was made and I accepted. 3 months to get the mortgage and other things done then a few days before exchange he pulled out.

He got cold feet.

Up it goes for sale and the first person who sees it loves it. Ditto ditto ditto....

She got cold feet

I put it up for sale again. Ditto ditto ditto

He thought if he saved more he could afford better.

At this point it is 9months after I started to sell this place. So I stick £20,000 on the price. BTL landlord comes along and cash is paid within the week.

Ftbs do have the chance to get a mortgage and buy. It is just that they don’t when the opportunity comes up.

Everyone has seen the property programmes where ftbs have viewed 2000 properties over 14 years and although they have offered they never quite follow through. Most run either because of cold feet or they see the survey and instead of looking at it pragmatically and using it to renegotiate the price they run away.

Most don’t seem to realise that unless they are buying a brand new house they are not going to get a house built to conform with building regs.
The 16th century cottage they have fallen in love with wont have foundations or the Victorian terrace with sash windows isn’t going to have perfectly sealed triple glaze windows.

Remember that a lot of the ftbs of today were around and looking prior to the lending criteria being changed.

Why didn’t they buy then

I would never ever buy a property to rent out. Even if I had the cash outright. I've been in the rent trap before and it's depressing, so many buy to let landlords (and shit ones at that) just adding to housing crisis. Not a nice way to make money (rich taking from the poor, as always, flame me)

post june 1 tenancy fee ban - i imagine that LLs are going to get even more picky about who they lend to after this and are less likely to consider housing benefit applicants. I guess its the LL who is going to end up paying search fees and agency fees and therefore they are not going to risk checks on people that dont look like they will pass with flying colours

nothing LLs are doing by excluding DSS tenants is illegal. There is no 'have to' about it.

@PinkGin The law was very nearly tested on this point. One of the campaigning organisations (think it was Shelter) started an action that this practice amounted to indirect discrimination. The defendant was a letting agency and the plaintiff a female single parent. Their cas was that, as single parents are one the groups most likely to be on benefits and 90% of single parents are women, the prohibition on housing claimants disproportionately affected women, who are a protected group.

The case was settled out of court, so the law wasn't tested.

Imo (and hope any lawyers will correct me as I'm quite probably wrong), there is indirect discrimination but it's harder to establish because it's at one remove, so to speak, and requires two connections to be made between the group nominally affected (claimants) and the group discriminated against.

I think it would be better to bring a case for discrimination in the name of a person with disabilities on benefits, as they are less likely to be able to work and the link with them being on benefits is more straightforward.

Anyway, another case is likely to be brought some time, so hopefully we'll all get to know what the legal position is.

Quizzly, there are insurance companies that will cover tenants on benefits but for a slightly higher premium.

My colleagues who liaise with landlords will often recommend them and the tenants are often happy to pay the extra on the premium if it guarantees them a home. The difference isn't huge, either, the last time I got someone housed that way was only last summer and it was around £6 or £7 a month.

Why didn’t they buy then
they know that property is over priced
they know that the writing is on the wall for BTL and soon BTL will have to sell at a reduced price to avoid financial ruin

I would never ever buy a property to rent out. Even if I had the cash outright. I've been in the rent trap before and it's depressing, so many buy to let landlords (and shit ones at that) just adding to housing crisis. Not a nice way to make money (rich taking from the poor, as always, flame me)

same here
it's a parasitic existence

As I stated earlier, my landlord insurance covers a tenant on disability benefits, including unpaid rent clause

My properties are owned outright. None of my tenants would be able to buy at the moment, if ever, properties are already cheap in the area so can’t fall much further. Where would they live if not in a private rental?

Our places are well maintained, re decorated between tenants, repairs carried out promptly, as necessary, and they’re paying market rent or slightly below

What about people who don’t want to buy?

None of the people who rent my flat stay more than a year as that’s the duration of the training they do locally.

Where would they go if no one rented to them?

Their cas was that, as single parents are one the groups most likely to be on benefits and 90% of single parents are women, the prohibition on housing claimants disproportionately affected women, who are a protected group
Adverts don't say 'single mum, dont apply though'. I would have no issue letting my property to a professional single mum who earned enough to meet the financial criteria. They do exist.

@Exfury, I dont think anyone is suggesting that there is no need for a rental market
what we need is housing that is secure, affordable and appropriate to the needs of the population
as it is govt polices have provided strong incentives to invest in property, prices have risen to levels which are not affordable, this is damaging to society as a whole

swingofthings.....but the argument is that most people on benefits are female single parents and therefore its indirect sexual bias....in much the same way it can be tricky to ban PT workers because they tend to me female.

i too have had some great professional single mums. We all know that if they trash my place or are behind with rent i will do an attachment to earnings order, so they tend to look after the place

i will do an attachment to earnings order

no hiding place for the single mums, you really own them dont you...their wages can be funneled directly into your pocket
if they want a roof over their heads then they better damn well pay into your pension fund

If they want a roof over their head they need to pay, rent, mortgage or buy outright - no one gets accommodation for nothing