To think that landlords shouldn't be discriminating against people on benefits?

[Asha0med]

I'm a lone parent with a disabled child who requires me to care for him full time, for this reason I'm unable to work.

It's not that I don't want to have a job, I've worked full time since leaving school but when my child came along my circumstances changed beyond my control.

I'm trying to move as our current home is no longer suitable and keep coming up against the blanket "no DSS" policy when reaching out to letting agents.

I feel ashamed and embarrassed when I'm repeatedly turned away on the basis I receive housing benefit, despite the fact I can provide a glowing reference from my landlord of the past five years. It's humiliating.

Without wanting to sound dramatic I feel discriminated against. It's as though people on benefits are automatically though of as lazy scroungers who just sit on their arse all day or withhold the rent / damage the property. Unwanted tenants. A liability.

I'm a good tenant and a good person. Is it right that I be refused housing on the basis I receive financial support form the government?

An article which echoes exactly what I'm going through.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-53391516

This Woman’s Hour podcast also explains the new law

www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m000kv6q

Asha from what I understand there are many insurance/mortgage providers that don't stipulate this. I'll give the pp's here the benefit of the doubt that they probably don't realize this yet and with a little search they could find their finance and insurance through more socially-aware companies, or those more with their finger on the 'pulse'.

Unfortunately, many are still reliant on EAs, which are pretty archaic in their setups (eg: NoDSS in adverts - DSS hasn't exiisted for decades!) or over-reliant on Credit Check Apps etc.

So, I think there's still a great deal of subconcious discrimination going on with regards to BTL Property Owners and Tenants who receive Benefits of some sort.

the law hasn't changed, it is Shelter propaganda.

some insurance policies and mortgage companies do allow benefits tenants. As Shelter hate landlords not insurance companies, they don't campaign to change what will ACTUALLY make a difference.

and for the blubbering who don't understand why landlords need rent guarantee insurance, here's the scenario: tenant moves in having paid first months rent. Tenant pays nothing else. Courts are at total standstill at the moment. When they restart, landlord finally gets proceedings issued for eviction. Tenant does not leave (perfectly legally). Landlord joins queue for bailiffs. Eventually bailiffs arrive and tenant leaves.

time elapsed - six months or more with no rent. That's why you need RG insurance.

RE the librarians analogy, that's discriminating though isn't it.

Landlords shouldn't make sweeping generalisations. It should be judged on a case by case basis. Credit checks are helpful in this scenario.

What about an army veteran who's served his entire adult life and has an exemplary record of honesty and honouring financial obligations, he is injured in combat and can no longer work due to loss of limb?

Or as per the previous page, a nurse working for the NHS or in the private sector, whilst caring for three children single handedly, who just happens to get a little help from UC to supplement her hours?

The countless other parents of disabled DC like myself?

It's appalling.

I think a lot of landlord insurance will not allow them to rent to people of benefits.
I also don’t think it helps at all that the council tell the tenant to not leave the property until a bailiff comes.

Yanbu it is discrimination the landlord or agency should interview the tenants on the basis if they were a goob tenant based on their previous reference.
It is against the law in Ireland to ask a tenant, discrimination still happens but if the tenant doesn't tell them for a month there's nothing the landlord can do.

• MoistMolly A single parent getting a council home is allowed to meet someone you know, it could be I do in years to come he may or may not move in but the house is in my name and it’s my security

This is the attitude that prevents someone like the Op getting a council/ha property.

How is it fair that you could have a partner move in earning £50k + and still be entitled to a council property?
You’re not entitled to a council home in that situation.
@GrumpyHoonMain of course you are , and for many HA properties you have to be in employment.

I’m a landlord, my insurance allows me to rent to someone who is disabled or a carer, so I would be able to rent to you op. Maybe if you explain your situation you’d have more luck?

Sadly, the only dss tenants we had in our one property were terrible. The council give tenants the rent and some don't use that money to pay the rent. If the old system was in operation, where rent was paid directly to the landlord, this couldn't happen. We ended up very stressed, massively out of pocket and with a wrecked flat. I would now be more cautious

It's not discrimination, because being on benefits is not a protected characteristic. I cannot see into the future and know whether someone I've just met is going to be a good tenant, so will have to rely on the facts to make a decision.

When you've had your house trashed causing thousands of pounds worth of damage and not been able to pay your mortgage due to people withholding rent, you are unlikely to want to risk that again.

I could also rent to someone in work and receiving top up benefits

Hatels... thank you I am glad you found a way through. I too did in my time.There are good people out there doing the right thing. I hope the OP comes across one soon.

Very dodgy landlords do this as they are unwilling to engage with any sort of oversight or quality control. Proper pond scum.

@Costacoffeeplease

I’m a landlord, my insurance allows me to rent to someone who is disabled or a carer, so I would be able to rent to you op. Maybe if you explain your situation you’d have more luck?

I do explain my situation and that I'm a carer to my disabled child. I always include that information in the hope it will make a difference but sadly it doesn't.

I was cautiously optimistic about one agency I spoke with today whom I mentioned in my earlier post, the gentleman who said he would email the landlord today and see whether there's a possibility he will consider me, but I'm not going to get my hopes up.

One of the agencies (of many) gave me some speal about how they don't accept DSS because "The rental market is very competitive at the moment"

Shelter Propaganda? Bloody hell - I need to look into that.

All those families in desperate circumstances at the mercy of an EA keen to produce 'results' as well as fees from Tenant Turnover, as the well-paid buy their own homes rather than paying for someone else's investment (just as I eventually did).

Who would have thought the desperate families actually have the time, funds, intelligence and inclination to prefer to produce 'propaganda'?

I await advice.

www.threshold.ie/advice/seeking-private-rented-accommodation/can-a-landlord-refuse-to-rent-to-me/
Is there any protection for renters in the UK. The laws in Ireland are very focused on protecting renters and landlords.
My neighbours pay €1900 cash/bank tranfer to their landlord, there is probably 20 men living in it, it is trashed I've reported to environmental health as they were storing bin bags.
Lots of tenants disrespect the house regardless of how they're paying.

Having been both a (former) private landlord and an officer for a housing association I’m not at all against renting to anyone on HB/UC but would say it’s more about risk assessment and getting a good feel for people.

Of course there are plenty of good tenants who would be happy anywhere but the bad ones are very difficult indeed to manage and a HA is far better placed to deal with such tenants in terms of support and finances than a private landlord who could find themselves in real difficulty after a few months of non payment, damages, neighbourhood relationships etc. Of course this can happen with independently paying tenants too. When things are fine there’s no issue, when they go wrong, nobody would want to take the risk and a small part of that is understandable from experience.

I voted yanbu because I don't think you are. My first tenant arrived from abroad with no credit reference but I liked her and it was fine. Our later dss tenants turned out to be a nightmare. It does make things worse when tenants are getting housing benefit in addition to other benefits and spending it, in our tenants case, on drugs and booze. I would offer a property to someone like you Asha as you are reliable. Have you approached any housing associations. Some are dodgy, but some are very good.

Does the tenant have the option for the rent to be paid directly to the LL? Or is gone due to UC.
UC sounds like a nightmare if your no good with organising outgoings.

People are less likely to look after things when they haven't had to earn the money to pay for them. We all know this. It's a shock when you go from spending your parents to spending your own. We dont let to non-workers, not everyone is the same but they're less likely to respect your property.
I once had a woman tell me I didn't own my property, the council did, while damaging my wall.

Gutentag you may believe that being on benefits is not a protected characteristic and hence this is not discrimination but I’m guessing you’re not a judge.

The actual judge in this recent case found that it is unlawful indirect discrimination because women and disabled people are more likely to be on benefits. It’s only county court but it’s a start.

I'd like to think I come across well, I'm presentable and reasonably intelligent. I have an undamaged credit score and no CCJ's/debt. No criminal record. I'm a quiet tenant and have never caused any landlords any problems whatsoever. I've worked my whole life until having my disabled child and could provide many legitimate character references.

Factors like those should be taken into consideration before making a blanket "no DSS" to applicants.

I do understand and sympathise with landlords who have been bitten after giving people a chance. Having your property trashed or rent withheld is abhorrent and I can appreciate how something like that would make you reluctant to trust somebody in similar circumstances again.

However that's when the case by case basis should come into play.

Somebody like me (or the nurse earlier on in the post) are very different to, for example, people who display antisocial behaviour or are on record for failing to honour financial commitments.

I don't think we should be tarred with the same brush.

Coincidentally, the most unreliable and dodgy person I've ever had the displeasure of knowing has a salaried job and has been moving from pillar to post because he prioritises gambling above his rent.

I'm a much safer bet than he would be, yet landlords would take him in an instant and not give me the time of day.

I can understand

Landlord/ can apply for direct payment and even third party deductions towards arrears but the tenant has to be 8 weeks in arrears and have an additional reason (e.g. issues with drugs, mental health, previous homelessness, severe debt problems) to apply. Lots of private landlords might not have the level of engagement with their tenant to necessarily find out about their history etc though whereas HAs will get a potted history through the LA when accepting a tenancy and do all the follow up.

Can't understand that*

Other than the obvious conditions of btl and insurance, it’s also important to remember that btl properties are investments. In a way it’s much more convenient to rent to young professionals who tend to stay for a year or a couple as then you have the flexibility to sell the place if you want to invest elsewhere.

For people who need help with long term rental, it’s probably best to try for a council property.