Advice please DSS tenent has never paid rent

clutton_2

i recently got LHA paid directly to me (horsey tenant as above) and the local council were very good. i sent a rent schedule showing date rent due, amount of rent due, and rent paid and arrears accumulated - this clearly showed a non-payment pattern.

council then wrote to her to ask her to prove she had paid by providing receipts of bank statements, and if she could not do so she should sign their form and agree to benefit being paid to me directly. She did do this. But, a really nasty tenant could refuse to do so, and that would delay it even more.

Geenie

Never mix business with pleasure. The fact that this was the daughter of friends probably means that no checks were done on previous LL and her payment history, and also her parents should have been used as guarantors. The DSS can be slow, I have had a tenant who didn't get hers for nearly 3 months, but her parents paid it until the money came through.

It is all too easy to grab the first person who comes along, not doing all the necessary checks, when often financially it would have been better to advertise the place, take longer to fill it, but have a tenant in who is reliable and will pay their rent on time.

tbs624

Mum_of_3 - it will be distressing for your inlaws to have found out the hard way that you cannot "play" at letting out property out, and this is especially the case when you have a T who, from the start, will be claiming LHA. I absolutely don't condone any T who does not pay their rent but your inlaws seem very unprepared.

Agree with Geenie- they should have got a guarantor in place for this T, preferably those "friends" who are the T's parents. They should have been on the ball from the moment the first rent payment was late. They should have insisted that the T sign the necessary forms to allow the LHA payments to be discussed with them. They should also have signed up to a national LL association, and then fully familiarised themselves with the workings of LHA.

Why you should think that Council Tax payers money should be spent on pursuing rent arrears on behalf of a private LL is utterly beyond me: that's just part and parcel of being a LL, whoever funds the actual rent.

In your in-laws' circumstances, they can ( & should) apply , as others have said, to have the rent paid direct to them. See here for an example form.

They should ensure that their solicitor serves properly dated Housing Act notices under S21 ( repossession sought at expiry of Fixed Term , plus S8, Grounds 8, 10 and 11 for rent arrears/persistent late payment/nonpayment.) What your in-laws do need to know is that if the T managed to bring her arrears below two month's worth (assuming rent paid monthly) by the time of any hearing then possession will not be awarded.

Receiving the notices may be the jolt that the T needs for her to get herself sorted out: as part of all this they should send the tenant a formal letter, setting out the rents due to date and the total of her arrears, and let her know that if/when she loses her home due to rent arrears she will be classed as having made herself "intentionally homeless"

That last point is why Jowo's comment:

Jowo wrote: »

The scenario has all the classic signs which show why tenants that belong in this category are deeply unpopular........
"*the gatekeeping policy of council housing departments who routinely tell tenants who have squandered the rent to stay in the property until the landlord has gone through an expensive legal process to evict them, even though its a foregone conclusion that the judge will find in their favour (they don't have any discretion when 2 months rent is owed)."

is totally irrelevant here. The Council have no need to "gatekeep" because they will have no obligations to rehouse this particular T in this set of circumstances.

Mum_of_3_3

tbs624 wrote: »

Mum_of_3 - it will be distressing for your inlaws to have found out the hard way that you cannot "play" at letting out property out, and this is especially the case when you have a T who, from the start, will be claiming LHA. I absolutely don't condone any T who does not pay their rent but your inlaws seem very unprepared.

Thanks for the constructive advice there tbs624 :rolleyes:

Agree with Geenie- they should have got a guarantor in place for this T, preferably those "friends" who are the T's parents. They should have been on the ball from the moment the first rent payment was late. They should have insisted that the T sign the necessary forms to allow the LHA payments to be discussed with them. They should also have signed up to a national LL association, and then fully familiarised themselves with the workings of LHA.

They should've got a guarantor in place I agree with you. But as far as getting S to sign any forms to guarantee payment direct to them , they were told by the DC that they couldn't do this!
Not much point with familiarising yourself with the LHA when ours seem to make things up as they go along is there! That's not a go at you btw, just making the point that the LHA seem to be giving out a lot of false info to my in-laws.

Why you should think that Council Tax payers money should be spent on pursuing rent arrears on behalf of a private LL is utterly beyond me: that's just part and parcel of being a LL, whoever funds the actual rent.

Becasue they are the ones that have caused this mess in the first place. If the money was given direct to the LL from day one, they may find they have a lot more private LLs willing to let to DSS. Win win situation all round then.

you don;t think that the Council Tax should be used to chase these repeat offenders, yet you are willing to have them take money out of your tax bill to spend on god knows what instead of paying their LL???

I would rather public money was spent chasing these people than public money given to them to defraud LLs in the first place!

In your in-laws' circumstances, they can ( & should) apply , as others have said, to have the rent paid direct to them. See here for an example form.

As I have said before their solicitor & the DC have never said this was possible. I have now told them & this is what they are going to do.

They should ensure that their solicitor serves properly dated Housing Act notices under S21 ( repossession sought at expiry of Fixed Term , plus S8, Grounds 8, 10 and 11 for rent arrears/persistent late payment/nonpayment.) What your in-laws do need to know is that if the T managed to bring her arrears below two month's worth (assuming rent paid monthly) by the time of any hearing then possession will not be awarded.

They have served a S21 and hopefully she will be out in 6 months.

Receiving the notices may be the jolt that the T needs for her to get herself sorted out: as part of all this they should send the tenant a formal letter, setting out the rents due to date and the total of her arrears, and let her know that if/when she loses her home due to rent arrears she will be classed as having made herself "intentionally homeless"

She has already received the forms & hasn;t said a thing. Which leads me to believe she's a repeat offender.

That last point is why Jowo's comment: is totally irrelevant here. The Council have no need to "gatekeep" because they will have no obligations to rehouse this particular T in this set of circumstances.

I still can't get my head around why tenant like this aren't put on some sort of blacklist. After all if people like S had their HB removed there would be more money for genuine claimants to have towards their rent.

Believe me they have learnt their lesson & they will not be "playing" :rolleyes: at being LL anymore. The house is going on the market at the end of this 6 months. It's just a shame that a small minority of DSS tenants like S have to spoil it for the majority of honest claimants.

Thanks for all of your replies, you've been a great help :T

M_o_3

Mum_of_3_3

Geenie wrote: »

means that no checks were done on previous LL and her payment history

I think that our LHA must be playing to their own rules as they told my in-laws they couldn't pass on the name of her previous LL (again due to the DPA) :rolleyes: The LA she went through said the same thing.

As her last tenancy was done through a LA so she had no name or number for her landlord and if she had any problems she was told to go through the LA.

At least they will be shot of her in the next few months and they can get on with putting it on the market.

Thanks again for your replies

M_o_3

lemonjelly

Becasue they are the ones that have caused this mess in the first place. If the money was given direct to the LL from day one, they may find they have a lot more private LLs willing to let to DSS. Win win situation all round then.

you don;t think that the Council Tax should be used to chase these repeat offenders, yet you are willing to have them take money out of your tax bill to spend on god knows what instead of paying their LL???

I would rather public money was spent chasing these people than public money given to them to defraud LLs in the first place!


I'd argue that it is not a good idea to always pay direct to LL. It is the LL's responsibility to collect rent. A tenant can meet their rental liability by claiming hb/LHA, however it is still the tenant's responsibility to claim this, and make payments.

In my line of work, I have encountered many claimants who will state that they "don't pay rent". They have to, by claiming the benefit. There is a bigger picture about people lacking financial skills, and taking responsibility for their liabilities.

I think really it should be the landlords responsibility to chase up any arrears/non-payment etc.

My feeling is that payment direct to landlord should only happen in extreme cases of vulnerability where the individual is incapable of understanding and/or manging their own affairs.

Mum_of_3_3

Yeah I do understand where you're coming from Lemonjelly and I know from past experience that not every LL has butter melting in their mouths.

I also agree that the LLs should chase up arrears, but as our DC/LHA is being very obstructive about information they can give out it's not very easy to see if S is telling the truth about not receiving HB or whether she is spending it on other stuff.

I guess I see HB as not belonging to the tenant, I see it as the LHA paying the LL as it's public money not the tenant's personal money. Unlike when I rented years ago & had to take it out of my wages.

Also I just see that there is more scope for failing to pay the rent if the tenant get it handed to them. this is turn gets the tenant thrown out. The tenant then has to fill in more forms for their next rental and the LHA has to process these forms which is again at more expense to the taxpayer.

M_o_3

silvercar

clutton wrote: »

i recently got LHA paid directly to me (horsey tenant as above) and the local council were very good. i sent a rent schedule showing date rent due, amount of rent due, and rent paid and arrears accumulated - this clearly showed a non-payment pattern.

council then wrote to her to ask her to prove she had paid by providing receipts of bank statements, and if she could not do so she should sign their form and agree to benefit being paid to me directly. She did do this. But, a really nasty tenant could refuse to do so, and that would delay it even more.

Snap. (but without the horse.)

To be fair to the council, once notified they acted quickly.

tbs624 wrote: »

They should ensure that their solicitor serves properly dated Housing Act notices under S21 ( repossession sought at expiry of Fixed Term , plus S8, Grounds 8, 10 and 11 for rent arrears/persistent late payment/nonpayment.) What your in-laws do need to know is that if the T managed to bring her arrears below two month's worth (assuming rent paid monthly) by the time of any hearing then possession will not be awarded.

The chances are that the tenant will not be able to find the money to get the arrears down. Rent is due in advance. On the day the second month's rent is due, the tenant owes 2 months rent. As LHA/ HB is paid in arrears, tenant needs a lot stashed away unspent to retrieve the situation.

tbs624 wrote:

Receiving the notices may be the jolt that the T needs for her to get herself sorted out: as part of all this they should send the tenant a formal letter, setting out the rents due to date and the total of her arrears, and let her know that if/when she loses her home due to rent arrears she will be classed as having made herself "intentionally homeless"

Really landlord needs to decide whether they want the tenant out or whether, once rent is paid direct, they are now in a good situation.

Personally, I think keeping the tenant increase the chance of getting the arrears paid back. If the tenant leaves there is no incentive to find the money.

Putting the arrears aside (difficult I know), do you want a new tenant or one where the council pays you rent direct?

It is all about where you are now and where you want to be. You can't undo the past.

tbs624

Mum_of_3 wrote: »

Thanks for the constructive advice there tbs

May I suggest that you take that para in with rest of my post rather than getting huffy. Your OP IMO presented your inlaws as some kind of hapless victims - - the point I am making is that it’s no good simply blaming the LHA system or the tenant when things go belly upwith a tenancy , if those who are the LLs have failed to do their research on what’s involved.

Mum_of_3 wrote: »

They should've got a guarantor in place I agree with you. But as far as getting S to sign any forms to guarantee payment direct to them , they were told by the DC that they couldn't do this!

Read again what I said - a LL getting a T to sign allowing the LHA office to discuss the claim is separate to trying to get the rent paid direct.

Mum_of_3 wrote: »

Not much point with familiarising yourself with the LHA when ours seem to make things up as they go along is there! That's not a go at you btw, just making the point that the LHA seem to be giving out a lot of false info to my in-laws.

The rules governing LHA are freely available on the internet and more experienced LLs who are members of the local/national LL associations can offer much useful support on how to interpret the rules correctly.

Mum_of_3 wrote: »

Becasue they are the ones that have caused this mess in the first place. If the money was given direct to the LL from day one, they may find they have a lot more private LLs willing to let to DSS. Win win situation all round then.

No, the LHA officers are not “the ones who have caused this mess”: their delays have contributed but your inlaws failed to get a T properly checked, failed to get a guarantor in place, failed to fully research the LHA rules and failed to chase the rent at the earliest stages.

Mum_of_3 wrote: »

you don;t think that the Council Tax should be used to chase these repeat offenders, yet you are willing to have them take money out of your tax bill to spend on god knows what instead of paying their LL???

You have extrapolated with your own interpretation there - my personal view is that any T who fails to pass on their apportioned rent to their LL should be disbarred from personally receiving rent payments for any future rental.

I do not, however, think that Council Tax payers should fund debt collection on behalf of private LLs. The tenancy agreement is between LL and T, the agreement to pay LHA is between T and LHA office. If the T doesn’t pay the LL then it’s up to the LL to try to recoup it from the T through the courts, likewise if the LHA office wants to reclaim they have to pursue the T. Simple.

Mum_of_3 wrote: »

(TBS: )”In your in-laws' circumstances, they can ( & should) apply , as others have said, to have the rent paid direct to them. See here for an example form.”

As I have said before their solicitor & the DC have never said this was possible. I have now told them & this is what they are going to do.

I suggest they get a solicitor who is au fait with LL& T law and the benefit system: not all are.

Mum_of_3 wrote: »

She has already received the forms & hasn;t said a thing. Which leads me to believe she's a repeat offender.

Or she is in genuine financial difficulty and is hiding her head in the sand.

I hope that your inlaws manage to get some resolve,and are successful in regaining possessionof their property with the minimum hassle. I also hope that the thread may provide some insight for other “amateur“ LLs.

p00hsticks

Out of interest, to those of you who think that Housing Benefit should be paid directly to the Landlord, would you expect the landlord to immediately pay the money back to the council if it comes to light that the tenant wasn't actually entitled to the benefit ?

And if not, how do you think such a situation should be handled ?