To think that if you commit to providing refugees with a roof over their head, you should not be allowed to sling them straight out again?

[IncompleteSenten]

tdpelmedia.com/the-identity-of-the-heartless-landlord-kicking-out-a-ukrainian-family-of-nine-has-been-revealed

Obviously there are situations where instant removal is required - abuse, assault etc.

But generally, if nothing has put people at risk, and particularly when the roof over their heads is actually a separate dwelling as in this case, you should not be allowed to give them a month to get out with no reason. Just - fuck off, we're turning off the internet, piss off out of that house.

There's clearly lots not being said, it doesn't appear that the newspaper that printed it researched the story at all

I would suspect there is Zero chance a Local authority would have agreed for 9 people including 4 adults to be housed in a 2bed bungalow. I think LL will be in breach of housing law once he found out they were overcrowded ... I wonder if they were approved for some of the family to live there and were give another property perhaps a flat or somewhere in an area they didn't like - but they all moved into this one without notifying anyone.

It's unfortunate but I doubt it's the LL heartlessly "kicking them out" a month in when the family describe how welcoming they were to them,unless it's an overcrowding housing breach - or some so far undisclosed antisocial behaviour that was serious enough for immediate seeking to end tenancy/ to evict notice.

It must be a confusing time for the family but they may already have been given advice and support, and instead went to the press.... £5,000 they've raised in a GoFund me.

It's a bit weird, the Ukrainian family even say the British family were lovely then just stopped talking to them. Very strange, and putting a family of 9 (although seemed like 7 according to the article, two parents and five children), into a two bed bungalow? That's way too small why was that allowed? And now the host family have just disappeared, although don't blame them, this article will have ruined their lives.

This is fishy.
Very one sided and vibes of a character assassination.
An obvious motive is the Go fund me but that doesn't explain why the hosts are being crucified.

That seems likely. I can imagine it could pass a council inspection for six. Kids in bedrooms, mother on a sofabed type stuff but it's much too small for nine.

this article will have ruined their lives

Why? Very poor jounalism (if you can call it that) to name the hosts. Nobody should be judging a family who've tried to help and it has not worked for whatever reason.

I think the host is very wise not to engage with the press. So much we cannot know.

i feel sorry for the land lord (at the moment) hopefully his side will come out.
still they have raised nearly 6grand so far so doubt they care.

HCC / the local housing dept have a responsibility to rehouse them and will be working with the family. They will be given offers as a high priority - reading between the lines they all want to live together.

What the newspapers aren't emphasising is that they are a multi generational family - including two grandparents- who could be offered separate housing so that nuclear families stay together - it is very hard to find properties big enough for 9!- and I suspect they were given separate properties and that it was their choice to move everyone in together

The LL has to evict them as potentially he can be fined up to £30,000 for continuing to rent an overcrowded accomodation under The Housing Act 1983 and The Housing and Planning Act 2016 -although latter was designed to tackle rogue landlords not ones that were potentially misled (or even duped if that was the case, and we don't know)

www.gov.uk/government/news/crackdown-on-private-landlords-renting-overcrowded-and-dangerous-homes

We’re only getting one side of the story.

I'm absolutely not unsympathetic to this family all wanting to be together. They have come through a frightening time leaving everything behind.

It's just that rental housing for 9 is almost impossible to find
Usually the local housing dept has to arrange and plan with HAs to knock together two next door properties and that can't be done in a few days, it's takes planning and planning applications and special cases argued.

No, I'm not being goady. 🤣
Eviction in this country is not a letter saying out in 30 days.

I'm well aware there are 2 sides to a story but the law should be consistent.

they won't need a sh house as they have raised loads by making this one sided story public.

No, I'm not being goady. 🤣
Eviction in this country is not a letter saying out in 30 days.

This is a placement under the Homes for Ukraine Scheme. It is not a tenancy (or rather if they have used a tenancy it is an excluded tenancy agreement that has been used). This means that the guests cannot be charged rent but can be asked to pay utilities etc.

Hosts can ask guests to leave at any time under the scheme. If they do then the guests are accommodated by the Council who will house them in a hotel or hostel until alternative sponsors can be found within the same local authority.

There are however various reasons why the Council can refuse to approve the accommodation. The main one is that the accommodation fails. In this case that is likely to be the reason since it looks like it would fail due to overcrowding. Other reasons include the hosts failing the enhanced DBS check (broadly that the host is not deemed a suitable person to host, particularly when there are children in the family). There are numerous examples (some of which have been in the press) of guests being removed from properties because they have arrived in the country before the Council has approved the accommodation and a clear DBS check has come through.

Likelihood is that this is a failed accommodation check case. However it could also simply be that the family is difficult. The fact that they've dashed off to the press might support this since in most failed accommodation cases both guests and hosts are equally upset by it.

Indeed.

Although I’d have liked to have heard both sides of this before my hand went in my purse.

A family of NINE in a two bedroom bungalow? Of course they are being moved! Not impressed with the family running to the media.

I always got told there were 3 sides to a story, one side's version, the other side's version and the true version.

I bet the poor bloke wishes he hadn't been so generous in offering his home. Try to help out and now public enemy number one. This is why I would never participate, as it always appears that when things go belly up, the ones trying to help are always the ones who are the monsters.
The refugee family won't be homeless, the local council will find them accommodation