Does anyone know about lanclord insurance?

[elephantscanring]

A friend says she's been asked to leave her privately rented flat at the end of her maternity leave because she's not working and claims UC, and this apparently invalidates her landlord's mortgage insurance.

Is this right?

Can someone explain this to me, please?

Not all policies do, but yes it is quite possible that the landlords building insurance or maybe rental guarantee insurance only covers working people

It could very well be. Landlord insurance can say that tenants should be in work, retired or long term disabled

It might invalidate the policy but rather than move, get her to ask the landlord if he'd accept a guarantor perhaps?

I'm sorry to hear she's having to deal with this, how stressful!

Yes. The permission to let I have from my mortgage company says I am not allowed to rent to someone who is not in work or retired.

It is probably his actual BTL mortgage that prohibits letting to benefits claimants as most do. The mortgage company can ask for payment of the loan in full.

it is quite possible, many policies especially rent guarantee wont accept this.

but that does not invalidate the proper eviction procedure, which in england begins with a two month notice of action on a section 21 form. she needs to read the how to rent guide on gov.uk and get informed. rapidly.

My landlord insurance prohibits it, as do the T&C of my BTL mortgage, so I would not be able to rent to anyone not working or retired, and I would have to give notice if a previously working tenant became unemployed.

Mines does both insurance and morgage

Wow. Every day is a school day. So what should she do? Will she be able to find another private rental if she's not working, or will all landlrods have this insurance?

The council won't house her as she's currently housed.

Should she wait to be evicted?

(And what's the risk to the landlord of letting to someone who's not working? If the landlord can be paid by UC/housing benefit?)

I'd recommend her start looking for somewhere as soon as possible. It took me over a year to find this flat, I'm disabled and used my entire savings to top up my rent where I was, to move and pay double deposit for this flat. It's a truly fucked system, all benefits are lumped into one category and just dismissed. I was lucky enough to find a landlord who would even let me look at the flat, no agency would even let me get close. I had to use a guarantor, was lucky that my parents are homeowners and could act as such.

She may have to wait to be evicted then get housed somewhere horrible, definitely don't leave as you won't get any help at all. The system is designed to be as horrible as possible to 'force' people back into work but doesn't consider the most vulnerable such as disabled and lone parents.

It could be difficult to find another rental while she’s not working. Unfortunately she will have to wait to be evicted and then go to the council

Not working and being on benefits will massively reduce her renting options but not remove them altogether.
She could choose to go through the eviction process which would mean she wouldn't get a reference from her old landlord. As she has a dc the council should house her but depending on area may only be b&b and she may be offered housing out of area. Shelter should be able to advise her.

to do for her -

• read how to rent and get informed. is she in a fixed term? is the landlord 100% on all the legals needed to make a section 21 work?
• does she even have the section21 yet?
• ask around for landlords that could take her. not all have mortgages. some insurance policies will accept her. no pets, non smoker and able to run a house are in her favour.

• find out council policy. is a section 21 enough or does she have to wait for the bailiff?

No section 21 yet. Thanks for all the advice.

This is an interesting one.

OP, was your friend working at the time of taking on the tenancy?

As PP have stated, some lenders do not allow buy-to-let landlords to rent to people on benefits therefore rendering their insurance void. Effectively this means that the borrower is in breach of their mortgage contract.

Therefore, should she sit it out and wait for the court to seek possession she is placing herself in a predicament.

In terms of the Housing Act, her landlord is required to serve the correct notice, which is a S21 and/or if she is in any rent arrears, a S8. (There are many grounds on a s8)

What I'm intrigued about here is the position of her local authority and how they are going to handle this one. She does need to explain the reasons her landlord has stated.

Many LAs advise the tenant to sit it out, in this case, that would be poor advice as if her circumstances have changed and she is now in receipt of benefits, and the owners lender stipulates that he/she is not allowed to let to people whom aren't working, there is a no-fault on either side.

How long notice has she been given? How was this served, is she able to speak with the LL?

Its not my landlord insurance but my mortgage company say that i can't rent the property to anyone on benefits

no sec 21 so no notice. hopefully tenant is getting informed and realising that 'asked to leave' is not how it works.

No, @Mc180768.

She had a partner who worked and paid the bills. But they have since split up. So she is living on her own with her dc.

She has about 6 months to move out. Not sure how it was served. Or if he’s just spoken to her informally.

What should she do? Could she get the ll to write to the council saying why she has to leave? Would that help?

Is she being asked to leave or just not having her contract renewed at the end of the lease?

@elephantscanring - if she has six months, then she needs to register ASAP on a choice-based lettings service and bid for a social tenancy. On those platforms she will be able to explain why she is in need.

I'd recommend that she asks her LL to write a supporting letter stating that due to a change in circumstances, his/her lender prohibits letting to someone whom is not working.

Now, many people see this as discrimination towards people claiming housing benefit, but in defence of LL, it is out of their control.

Her LL should serve her a S21 depending on where she is in her fixed term. If she is in a periodic term of her tenancy, then it can be served with a minimum notice of two months.

This is down to buy-to-let mortgage lending that is heavily regulated. Unfortunately, in our area there are a number of unscrupulous landlords whom do rent to people on HB as they are aware it's guaranteed income.

It sounds like her LL is being fair and if giving her 6 months, verbally, LL is not kicking her out on the streets.

Thank you very much, @Mc180768 - really useful. Will let my friend know.

not renewing a contract does not equal being given notice.