Renting - "no children" discrimination

barnaby-bear

JustJewels wrote: »

to idiophreak and others who bring up the question of discrimination - I do think it's genuine discrimination - defined as "unfair treatment of a person or group on the basis of prejudice". Who is to say that I will be more trouble as a tenant just because I have a baby? I have been and intend to continue to be an exemplary tenant.

I don't think it's discrimination any more than car insurers because it's assessed on the basis of statistical risk; statistically it takes longer to evict where kids are involved and statistically those tenants who are forced to be formally evicted so they can access social housing are those with the highest priority for housing and hence those with kids. YOU may not be more trouble but the probability that you are in the tiny minority of problem evictions which although rare are VERY costly is increased because of the child. Car insurers charge more or refuse to cover certain risk groups e.g. 17 year old boys with chav-mobiles is that discrimination - surely some of them are excellent drivers?

barnaby-bear

sooz wrote: »

Why don't you view without the baby, & mention him/her direct to the LL once you have viewed. Offer to pay a slightly larger deposit, & point out that at this age they do b*gger all damage. Most of the time they just lie there . It's the bit between 1 and a half and school when they are little monsters & drive cars over the radiators, 'practise' of that pen you just put down, play torpedoes with tampons in the toilet etc.

Often the viewer wil have no contact with the LL only the LA and the LAs will be clued up of the eviction problems involving kids so warn the LLs off.

sooz

barnaby-bear wrote: »

Often the viewer wil have no contact with the LL only the LA and the LAs will be clued up of the eviction problems involving kids so warn the LLs off.

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

barnaby-bear

silvercar wrote: »

Families with children generally make more stable tenants as they want the security without worrying about moving home every 6 months.

If a tenant has been in a property 5 years it will need a repaint anyway, whether from general grubiness or crayon on walls.

Exactly but some LLs want to cash the asset in easily and a family who wants stability and seeks council accommodation because they've been bu&&ered about by a string of BTLers may sit put and wait for eviction to get out of the private sector...

barnaby-bear

sooz wrote: »

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

won't know a flying duck about managing property but credit checking and blanket bans they can do....

JustJewels

(TIC) Perhaps we could go down the ultimate 'user pays' route - tenants get an extra charge per child, graduated according to likely damage with an insurance premium to cover eviction costs...remember, you saw it here first...

Seriously, all I can say is I have been very naive to think that I could find a suitable rental property for my family in the south east of england - and I am a landlord too! Would not have thought of making no children a condition of tenancy until it happened to me.

I think it's sad

JJ

sooz

JustJewels wrote: »

(TIC) Perhaps we could go down the ultimate 'user pays' route - tenants get an extra charge per child

Did you come up with the Poll Tax idea too?

JustJewels

sooz wrote: »

Did you come up with the Poll Tax idea too?

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

My name is not Margaret!

Captain_Mainwaring_2

sooz wrote: »

Oh dear....I finally agree on something with you! Mine are not allowed outside on their own, but do get smacked on rare occasions.

I am off to have a stiff drink.

So am I, a nice Thai brandy and soda, though it is just a little later where I am.

Have a couple of Gins and give the kids a right good pasting......

baby_boomer

This discrimination is on the same level as "no Irish or Blacks" IMHO and might be worth a challenge in the courts?

It certainly makes a mockery of the government's preference for "mixed" housing.

I totally disagree with barnby bear's comparison with legitimate risk assessment on car insurance. It's not right for society's laws to allow a landlord to equate having children with drink driving.