Advice please DSS tenent has never paid rent

tbs624

silvercar wrote: »

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.

I agree with you - my thoughts were less of a "stash" than the possibility that the friends of the LLs, who are the Ts parents, may perhaps lend/give their DD the money once they realise the seriousness of the mess she is apparently in

tbs624

p00hsticks wrote: »

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 ?

Lights touchpaper and stands back?

Jowo_2

It is the case that the council will not rehouse them if the tenants are shown to have been able to pay the rent but have not done so (such as receiving the LHA and not passing it onto the landlord) as they will have deemed to have made themselves intentionally homeless.

However, it is still the practice of a number of councils to routinely advise tenants to stay put when they receive notice from their landlords. Perhaps they have the time to investigate the grounds for the eviction at the point of initial advice when notice is received and advise the tenants that they will not assist if it is due to rent arrears that they are responsible for or perhaps its simply blanket advice - 'come back when the landlord has got a court date'.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2008/aug/31/debt.renting

A section 8 that gives mandatory possession of the property back to the landlord if at the time of serving and the court case there are 2 months worth of rent arrears (or 8 weeks if paid on a weekly cycle) can be thwarted by the tenant paying down the arrears to just under 2 months at the time of the court case.

Geenie

p00hsticks wrote: »

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 ?

I think that all LL's should be contacted by HB people, to confirm who the tenant is and what they should be paying every month. I had to write a letter for this recently with a tenant, as they wouldn't get their benefit until I confirmed what they were letting and for how much.

As to claiming money back from the LL, if it was claimed dishonestly by the tenant! No I don't think it should be allowed. It is between the tenant and the HB office, and they should go after the tenant. The LL has provided what he was contracted to do, and is not responsible for how the tenant pays it.

silvercar

The sensible solution is for tenants who have failed to pay rent ,while in receipt of HB, to not be trusted with HB in the future and all HB paid direct to landlords.

p00hsticks

Geenie wrote: »

The LL has provided what he was contracted to do, and is not responsible for how the tenant pays it.

But surely the landlords contract is with the TENANT - they have no contract with the council, so surely it should be up to the tenant to pay the landlord.

silvercar

p00hsticks wrote: »

But surely the landlords contract is with the TENANT - they have no contract with the council, so surely it should be up to the tenant to pay the landlord.

Yes, its the tenants contract with the landlord. But the tenants HB claim says "I haven't got enough money so I claim HB to enable me to pay the rent." That is why the tenant gets HB - to pay the rent. If the tenant is not using that money to pay the rent then something is wrong. So if the tenant has been proved untrustworthy in not using the money given for rent in order to pay the rent, then it needs to be passed on, on behalf of the tenant.

clutton_2

""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 "

a situation in which a landlord has been granted direct payment of LHA and it is then proved that the tenant has been fraudulently claiming LHA (and i would ask any reasonable person to come up with some sensible ides as to how it is possible that a LL knows/does not know if a tenant is fraudulently claiming) will result in the payments being clawed back by the council from the LandLord .... the council does not have to provide ANY evidence that the LL knew of this fraud ... as the legislation is worded such that a council can choose to clawback from the person who received the benefit - OR someone else if they reason to think that person is culpable.


So stealing tenants get away with fraud and theft and landlords pay the price of having housed thieves for no rent.


Council lawyers will never waste money taking benefit tenants to court for reimbursement - as i think the most a court can order to be deducted from a claimants benefits ifs £5 per week - so, why not go for the landlord - after all - we are all filthy stinking rich scum ......
so ...


yet more reasons why LLs are not keen on LHA tenants

60% of National Landlords Association landlords have said they will not take benefit tenants any more

Mum_of_3_3

IMO the contact to house any DSS tenant should be between the LHA and the LL. After all if S's parent were to be the ones paying my in-laws would've drawn up a contract be with the parents & themselves not S.

Ok the claimant may physically handle the money, but it is in no way theirs! They have not worked for it, they are given it to pay their rent, so why not take the temptaion out of the way & pay it direct

The person living in the house should then sign a separate contact with the LHA to say they are claiming benifits that they should be claiming etc. If they are then found to be breaking the contract then they get kicked out. After all the tenant(s) have done wrong not the LL or LHA!

My in-laws said to the council that S's partner is living with her, how are they to know that he's not meant to be?? After all the LHA won't even tell them if they've paid her let alone more personal info such as what/who she is claiming for! He was sitting in on each meeting & they therefore assumed (like everyone would) that they were claiming jointly.

If the LHAs don't like the thought of policing whether tenants have paid LLs (which would be easily done by paying directly!) then why don't they provide more council housing to put all these people in?? Then they can get stung not some poor LL trying to mop up the government's lack of social housing mess.

All I can say is if I ever have enough money to do BTLs then there is no way I would ever contemplate renting to a HB claimant as as far as I can see in the eyes of the council it's perfectly ok for the tenant to steal public money and rip of LLs everywhere :mad:

M_o_3

Trollfever

some poor LL trying to mop up the government's lack of social housing mess.

Suggest that they take up these issues with their MP.


.