Paying housing Benefit Rent to Private Landlords

RomansProperties

Bibbitybob wrote: »

As far as I'm aware with my local council (N.E.Lincs), if the tenant can be proved to be at risk of not passing on their rent money (eg. drug, alcohol abuse are the ones I've come across) then the rent can be paid directly to LL.

We have a few tenants with these problems. The rent comes direct to us and they spend their JSA on what ever they want.
Normally get support workers for each person to ring if they are becoming too much of a problem.
We have 20 tenants now which have come from the Homeless and Prevention Team its called in our local Area (Leeds)
18 Ok, 2 Bit of trouble but not too much

RomansProperties

KeepYourChinUp wrote: »

The only problem with the LL being paid directly is that if the tenant commits any fraud its the landlord the council chases not the tenant. I didnt know you could be paid directly if you are accredited I will have to look into that as we are accredited. Incedently how do you get round the wait while the tenants claim is processed or do you take people who are already claiming it? You wouldnt want to wait 6-8 weeks and find out they can not get HB and you end up with a tennant that cant pay.

The scheme we deal with arranges a meeting with the Claimant and then checks through everything to make sure all is in order. Then they call us to say the benefit will be paid and its ok for them to move in.
We do sometimes have to wait between 4-8 weeks for the money but then it comes every 4 weeks.

RomansProperties

socrates wrote: »

Are you sure this is not for a situation where the council leases the property which would be different to people claiming LHA. The big difference between LHA and HB is that there is no need to inspect the property.

I do not doubt what you say I have heard similar stories for Brighton BUT in London the HB Depts. are determined NOT to pay LL directly other than in the extreme cases mentioned.

The schemes called Homeless and Prevention, its basically people down on their luck who need accomodation ASAP
We mainly rent them 1 bed and studio flats.
When we get a flat available we ring the team, they arrange an inspection of the property to check for things like Fire Doors, Alarms, Door Closers etc.
Once the property has passed it gets added to their lists.
They arrange viewings, normally get about 10 calls per property.
Once you have agreed with someone to move in, give them a contract, they go back to the team.
All paperwork is checked and they give you the all clear, tenant can have the keys and you just have to wait for the money.

I personally think the council introduced this scheme to get a better working practice with Landlords. It works very well and they keep you informed of how everything is going along.

Hope this clears it up

fishtastic

bluejake wrote: »

I would guess if the taxpayer subsidy in the form of housing benefit was removed from the market the price of property would fall and rents would fall.

More empty properties for rent would be chasing fewer employed would be tenants. There would be fewer employed tenants because lower property prices mean more would buy rather than rent.

Taxpayers do not owe property speculators a living.

Housing benefit is claimed by and paid to tenants.

Taxpayers are not rent collectors for landlords. It is a landlords job to collect rent or they should pay for agents to do it on their behalf.

Stop feeling sorry for yourself. It is the taxpayer who should feel sorry for themselves.

I think you should read what I wrote as you have clearly misread/not understood, "feeling sorry for myself" I really have no idea were you are coming from on this as this seems to be unrelated to anything I have said.... Care to explain your logic?

That is unless that wasn't meant for me in which case you should address you comment to them, not straight after quoting me, a BOLD @person would do that....

As for the 'do not owe property speculators a living' I totally agree, if the landlord chooses a tenant it's their problem. If they don't want DSS fine, if they do it's fine too. It's called Risk management, any time a business, and landlording is a business, gives use of money (in the form of a loan etc.) or property to another person or business there is a chance of a loss. That may be default or bad debt, it may be damage. And for our landlording friends, it's the cost of doing business, if that's not for you then don't become a landlord.

Fish

clutton_2

of course it is a risk - that is my risk as a LL to choose which tenants i have - but the unfairness of all this is that

Councils and Housing Associations get their rent directly from the public purse

Private landlords dont ..........

where is the equity in that ??

fishtastic

clutton wrote: »

of course it is a risk - that is my risk as a LL to choose which tenants i have - but the unfairness of all this is that

Councils and Housing Associations get their rent directly from the public purse

Private landlords dont ..........

where is the equity in that ??

There is no equity and that's because landlords do not treat those on benefits and those who are not equally as any look at the back of a newspaper or on gumtree will show....

PasturesNew

The rent would be paid out and back into the council, generating an entire unnecessarily costing system and department to receive back from council tenants money that the person at the next desk paid them yesterday.

It'd be nuts.

People in council houses are more likely to stay put and councils know who is in their property. There are no controls, checks or information of that sort for private rentals, so it has to be paid to the tenant and it is their responsibility to pay the landlord ... you know, like proper adults.

socrates

fishtastic wrote: »

There is no equity and that's because landlords do not treat those on benefits and those who are not equally as any look at the back of a newspaper or on gumtree will show....

But for a LL who does - there is none!