Would private landlord have a problem with this?

[Eatenbybabyagain]

Hello

We were looking at ways of improving our budget and found out that we are actually entitled to a substantial amount of housing benefit. If we could claim, life would be a lot easier. The problem is that we live in a privately rented flat and, like most flats, the advert stated "Not suitable for DSS". This was not a problem for us as I work full time and we receive working and child tax credits, and the letting agents were happy that our income was sufficient.

Given that we can afford to pay rent without housing benefit, is the landlord likely to have a problem with us claiming? On the housing benefit application form you got to choose whether you gave the council your permission for them to contact your landlord or not. Could anything bad happen if we don't tick this and don't tell our landlord?

We haven't asked the letting agents yet in case it would be unreasonable to ask and can't find much information about housing benefit while working.

I think I would apply and see what happens, you may not get as much as you think. I would also perhaps then just not say unless I was asked outright by the landlord or agent. As long as you are working still they would have no reason to ask or suspect that you have a claim.

It is illegal for the landlord to demand payment direct now isn't it? and I believe most councils wouldn't pay a landlord direct unless you had rent arrears, I would check with your council department before saying anything to the landlord and agent.

glad the OP is going to do the adult thing and be honest. Those who advocate fraud; may you reap what you sow. And I expect you not to mind about it if someone defrauds you.

there is no legal concept of 'kicked out' in England and Wales. If you stop paying the rent the landlord has a lengthy and expensive eviction procedure to follow. This is why sensible landlords have to have legal expenses insurance and rent guarantee cover.

as long as the tenant meets those terms and those of the rest of the tenancy, as agreed when signed and as legal, that is all that matters. The rest of his/her life is of no interest to the landlord.

The landlord is entitled to know if your are invalidating his/her insurance or mortgage conditions, or if you break terms listed in your contract. These are imposed because statistically, historically, tenants claiming housing benefit are of a higher risk to landlords- for example, if presented with an eviction notice, many councils will advise them to stay put until they are evicted by bailiffs, which increases the legal costs for a landlord and means there is very likely to be a period when no rent is being paid.

This doesn't mean that everyone claiming benefits is a bad tenant, just statistically they are more of a risk.

I think you should let the landlord know. If it's an insurance issue, for example, the landlord may be able to change his insurance in order to keep you on as tenants.

Im glad you're being honest about it, you should have nothing to worry about at all.

Agents when they write contracts can put anything they like into the contract, but unless its legal and reasonable, should it come to a court case, its not enforceable - insisting on HB paid direct to LL is no longer legal (unless the rent is 8 weeks late or the tenant is a vulnerable person).

Just a word of warning - should you end up being evicted and need to a find a new place to live nearly all estate agents (high st ones in London anyway) will not accept you on their books to search for a new property if you are in receipt of as little as £10 housing benefit. I know this because I have asked around as I found myself in a similar situation. Personally I wouldn't mention it.

I am a landlord. Apply, don't tell. I wouldn't care, and wouldn't want the obligation of telling my mortgage supplier.

It's not fraud and op the contract is illegal, housing benefit should never be paid straight to the landlord unless history of rent areas.

Arrears.

The contract is based on a very old way of delivering HB and assumes the tenant isn't making a contribution to the rent, from the sound of it. As I said, the main thing is that:

1. Rent is paid on time in full, and
2. You look after the property a little bit better than if it were your own home and don't damage anything, or if you do, you pay for it to be put right immediately.

Then nobody can evict you, and all the usual rights apply (usual caveats also apply as I am not a lawyer, but I am a landlord).

In my opinion, it is no business of the mortgage company how your money arrives in your bank account and from what source, as long as the above conditions are met. There are all sorts of benefits people are entitled to which is nobody else's business either. Also people's personal circumstances change and AFAIK you could not be evicted for, say, losing your job and claiming benefits during a tenancy unless you did not pay the rent on time in full. Otherwise if you lost your job and claimed benefits you could wriggle out an assured shorthand tenancy agreement before the end of its term, which of course you can't under civil law.

I can't see any court in the land supporting an eviction on these grounds. Of course if you are behind with your rent or have damaged the house that is quite a different kettle of fish and all bets are off (it still takes 3 months to chuck someone out however).

Personally, I would claim.