Fraud by landlord?

lil_me

tbs624 wrote: »

but the LHA figure is set at the median point for properties of the same size within the Broad Rental Market Area, so these LLs are not charging the highest market rents for a property of that particular size..

If that's the case, the average rent here is £446 PCM for a 3 bedroom, my rent is £625 and low for the area.....:rolleyes: In our area it wouldn't be so bad if they set the rent in line with LHA as it's actually nowhere near the average rent, would maybe reduce rental prices. I really wonder where on earth they get the figures from for LHA. However my observation is based on smaller properties and landlords in other areas who openly admit 'getting what they can' when it comes to LHA.

Bungarm2001

We have one tenant in receipt of LHA (actually going thru as I type...I hope...it's been 6 weeks now with the tenant living rent free all that time...:( )

The LHA people have set the local rents for this particular type of property at £110 per week. Since the previous tenant (not in receipt of benefits) was happily paying quite a bit more than this AND the previous rent was typical for this area for quite some time, I too cannot see how they calculate these limits.

OF COURSE we are going to get as much rent as we can. When we knew what the LHA rate was for this particular property, we set the rent at exactly that figure

I can't see any LL actually reducing rents to such a level where the tenant will be able to keep up to £15 a week. Most as far as I know are asking in excess of the LHA assessments. We actually aren't in this case mainly because we know the tenant simply can't pay anything on top. (We will revue it in a year though and the tenant is aware of this.)

mel19632

Sorry, I think a few people have missed my point/question entirely (or perhaps I don't understand how LHA/HB is set).

My question was (I will try and use example figures, although I don't know what actually they are exactely):

LL has told HB/LHA team that his new rent is £1,000.

LHA have said, ok, the LHA for the area is also £1,000, so if tenant was in full receipt of HB/LHA, the rent would be paid to LL in full (please don't start quoting new rules about LHA being paid to tenant first, I do know this!).

However, as tenant has a part time job, and has child support from ex-husband, she will only receive say £750 LHA and will have to top up by £250 herself.

Rents for this particular flat in the private rental market are more like £850, so LL, because tenant is nice, says they don't have to pay £250 top-up, just pay £100.

The question I have is that I believe the amount of HB/LHA that a tenant will receive is based on rent for property, income they earn etc. Therefore, by overstating the rent payable to the council, surely this will amount to fraud?

This is because, if the LL had set the rent at the private level; of £850, not the LHA for the area of £1,000, the LHA which the tenant would be receive would be less?

Again, if i'm not being clear, please let me know, but I am not suggesting the LL has reduced the rent to let the tenant keep £15 a week!

clutton_2

Rents are set by the rent offices throughout the country. Their staff visit letting agents, estate agents, write to Landlords, talk to tenants, read local newspapers etc etc before setting what they see as the average rent for the area. This figure is reassessed every month and new figures published ever month.

Since LHA came in many rent offices have shut - which means that several areas have now been lumped in together and so some areas have seen higher LHA than HB used to be - and some lower.

So LHA IS the average rent for the area.

A LL can ask whatever rent he chooses.

A tenant can refuse to live in an expensive house and live somewhere cheaper and make £15 per week profit on their LHA.

In this scenario - the LL is asking less of a top than the market rent demands - why is there an issue ?

CIS

The claimant should only receive the contractual rent + £15 p/w maximum - http://www.derwentside.gov.uk/index.cfm?articleid=12908

clutton_2

""the contractual rent" - ie the figure in the Tenancy Agreement

if the Department of Work and Pensions did not anticipate an increase in rents with an increase in rent levels as set by the Rent Office - they were naive in the extreme.

I was at a Landlords forum with a council to discuss Selective Licensing costs - £300-£800 depending on the property - and when a LL said he would be increasing the rents to help cover these costs the council staff looked gob-smacked - do they seriously think LLs have an unlimited pot of dosh ???

i see the new LHA rates as the first decent thing that has happened FOR landlords in a long time - it will help me pay for this nonsense re Certification re insulation etc etc

silvercar

Round here the LHA area has been widened to include two very different areas. In time the cheaper side will become LHA claimant dominated and the more expensive side will only have non-claimants, as the top up will be to great to make a benefit claimant have an affordable lifestyle. Wind forward 5-10 years and this will have an impact on house prices and the areas' desirability. By enlarging the LHA areas, benefit estates are being created that will cause social problems in the future.

clutton_2

i forsee that the LHA rates will cause such a huge increase in DWP spending nationwide on LHA (in some parts of the country) that about 6 months-12 months down the line, they will change the rules again - probably by bringing back all the individual districts which have now been amalgamated !!!

pickles110564

poppysarah wrote: »

Low rents are essential if the economy is to recovery.

:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

Hang on, just going to ring the council to tell them I am going to lower the rents I charge them so that I will save the economy. :rolleyes:

Bungarm2001

Hey Clutton...I think I was at that same meeting!

I remember very well the look on the councillors face(s) when that LL said he'd put rents up to cover the LL licensing [STRIKE]rip-off[/STRIKE] charge. It really brought it home to me the fact that councillors, along with most of the rest of the population (it seems) think we are all filthy rich with bottomless pits of cash ready to be milked by the next bit of spurious legislation that they can come up with. I think at that point, even the councillors realised what a bluddy big can of worms the LL licensing is/will be. Rents will HAVE to go up to cover it..I don't think anyone thought of that when they were cobbling it all together.

To the OP; any LL with any sense will find out what the current rate is for his property and pitch the rent accordingly. (if the LL is willing to take on tenants in receipt of LHA that is...)

If the LHA have got it right with rents for the area, then how can it be fraud to charge that rent? and/or more? I think you are possibly in a bit of a dreamworld if you think that LHA will ever be more than the current local rents except by maybe a couple of quid. Prove me wrong if you can...I'll happily apologise.