Tenants - are you happy for your personal data to be shared ?

dacouch

As LRS are a owned by a limited company they are bound by the recent Consumer Protection Law which makes it a specific offence to pretend to be a (satisfied) customer on web forums if you are associated with the company. If you feel a certain person posting on this thread is breaching these. Feel free to report them to their local authorities Trading Standards who are supposed to investigate thoroughly (See page 2)

http://www.n-somerset.gov.uk/Contacts/contacts-tradingstandardsservice.htm

http://wck2.companieshouse.gov.uk/2adaafb56d8af993a4babba6ad9a0705/compdetails

Here is a summary of the relevant law, see rule 18 http://www.oft.gov.uk/shared_oft/business_leaflets/cpregs/oft979.pdf

tbs624

clutton wrote: »

""Is there anything empirical to suggest increased theft and damage suffered by LLs? ""

NLA do quarterly surveys on rent arrears, possession cases, LHA clients, and other current issues.. they publish the results

Certainly since LHA went directly to clients, arrears have shot up......

I believe Julie Rugg also found a significant increase in rent arrears also

I quoted one of the NLAs recent surveys on rent arrears earlier in the thread:

tbs624 wrote: »

As the possession cases will usually have an element of rent arrears involved , these figs may be of interest: the NLA has recently carried a report which says:

A fifth of private-residential landlords have had tenants in rent arrears over the last three months, according to new research published today by the National Landlords Association (NLA)
.
During Q2 2010, just over 21 per cent of landlords experienced rental arrears. This represents a small improvement on the previous quarter when 24.5 per cent of landlords reported the same.

However, the average amount of outstanding rent arrears has dropped significantly from £978 in Q1 to £799 in Q2. This could indicate that financial pressures on tenants have started to ease as the fragile economic recovery continues.

(Let’s remember that that means 21% of LLs , not 21% of all Ts)

(Edit - I should add that it is 21% of the LLs who responded to the survey, rather than 21% of all LLs everywhere)

neverdespairgirl

petits_filous wrote: »

Neverdespairgirl - I respect your determination to not be counted but honestly..how do you resist the points, i.e. free stuff??

I mostly shop at places which have "offers" such as that included in their prices, rather than seeking to gather info on their customers.

neverdespairgirl

ali_pasaul wrote: »

I find your comments about an area of professional people and how you don’t trust any of them (landlords) unreal and one of the most disgraceful exhibitions of prejudice I have seen for a long time.


You seem happy that because you cough up the cheap rent regularly and he does all the right things for you at a discount you are able to tolerate this one off scum in this breed!!!

Mmm, I wonder just how happy you landlords are maybe he would be happier with the right rent; I think you are probably the happier one in that business deal.

Don't be so silly. I do not loathe landlords en masse. I have never said that I do. Most are honest people running a business. I don't think all LLs are scum at all, that's something you've come up with entirely off your own bat.

"Cheap" isn't exactly the word I'd use, our rent is £1,650 a month. "Below market rent" is the phrase I used. Our flat might be advertised at something like £2,100 a month, I suppose.

If our LL (a woman, not a man) wasn't happy with the arrangement that's developed, it would be open to her to seek to raise the rent or serve us notice. She's not chosen to do so. There is probably, from her point of view, something to be said for long-term tenants who take over a lot of the hassle, pay regularly etc. Paying to get new tenants in every 6 months would cost more, as would any voids.

The aggressive way in which you try to defend the site makes me yet more suspicious of it.

clutton_2

""Don't be so silly. I do not loathe landlords en masse. I have never said that I do. Most are honest people running a business. I don't think all LLs are scum at all, that's something you've come up with entirely off your own bat.""

of course never despairgirl did not say all landlords are scum - Ali - try not to over-react ....

LittleMissAspie

So does anyone know how I can get my details taken off of this database, if indeed I am on it? Do I need to contact my current and past letting agent and tell them I don't give permission for my details to be uploaded there in the future?

Ulfar

petits_filous wrote: »

I just fail to see what is so wrong with being listed on a site for over 10,000 landlords to see that I am a good tenant?

Little Miss Aspie – you are clearly a bad tenant!!

The thing that is wrong with this is that if you are a past tenant you had no say in your date being shared. You also have no control over who has access to what information and what controls there are over that data for how long it is stored.

I own a property now and have done for the past year, prior to which I was a tenant. Under data protection there is no longer a valid reason for that information to be held, I certainly did not give permission for it to be shared ( I still have my copy of tenancy agreement and there is no clause).

I have in the past disputed the deductions that the LA tried to make from my deposit and they backed down as they were trying it on, does this mean I would have been blighted when trying to rent in the future due to a disgruntled LA/LL.

Not all landlords are good, bad or otherwise but would the landlords on here like to post on this forum the information that the website shares about a tenant.

I see they charge a fee for a subject access request, they are of course aware of the law that this charge must be only what is necessary to cover any associated costs. I would also like to know what the procedure is for correction or removal of details where appropriate.

Svenena

What about my suggestion that any references passed about behind the scenes between the LLs using this system are also made available to the tenant as a matter of course? In the same way that we can check our own credit reports, and add notes of explanation, this would allow the other side of the story to be put forward (if necessary), and allow Ts the access to their data which I thought was allowed under data protection rules. Would this be workable?

tbs624

ali_pasaul wrote: »

Part of this duty is, diligence, this thoroughness includes taking every possible check on an applicant tenant’s history so that they do not knowingly stick a drug dealer into his property next to a nice family and any professional and/or good landlord carries out these checks to the limit.

I wonder what would happen if that happened, I bet my best biro the objectors on this site would be the first to throw their arms in the air shouting their landlord was negligent in his duties, especially if the landlord gave a tenancy next door to them to a crack dealer and all because their landlord couldn’t do a thorough reference .

Paul/Ali (my, your written English *has* come on since post 178. You must have a top rate tutor;))

Please stop trying to use scare tactics to garner support. MSE readers tend to be a little more savvy than you give them credit for.

How ever many gossipy chats you may have with fellow LLs/LAs you could still end up letting your property to a drug dealer, just one who hasn't yet been caught out.

May I further suggest that LLs concerns about a drug dealer moving into one of their properties has very little to do with their "concern" for the "nice family next door" ?

The scheme is not about protecting neighbours or tenants: it's about a LLs attempts at self protection at the expense of the data privacy of thousands of law abiding decent Ts, who are likely to be unaware that their details are being passed around in this manner to unqualified, unregistered, unmonitored, anonymous individuals who happen to be LLs.

millym

Hi folks, I couldn't come back on yesterday as I had to go to bed (chronic illness).

I really can see this whole thing from both sides, and I've been trying to think of a way to make the system fair for LLs and Ts, but can't see how, when a LL basically has to take the word of another LL. To me, that is the fundamental weakness of the system.

For instance, when my parents were LLs, they had one tenant who was very untidy. My mum, who is practically ocd about cleanliness/tidiness, was considering giving her notice(!) until I pointed out that I'm not the tidiest person in the world! Tenant left the place as they found it, but I'm sure if my mum was asked, would say the person was v untidy to a prospective LL.

They had another T that my mum was very fond of(!), who painted the living room orange without permission. My mum was like, ah well, we are going to redecorate anyway soon. I'm sure this person would be given a better reference than the other T, because they were tidy.

I think what I'm trying to say is that the system, while trying to protect LLs from bad Ts, could inadvertantly harm the reputations of good Ts.

I completely trust my current LL, who is everything a LL should be and more. I felt the same about my last LL though, and when it came to giving me a reference, he let me down.

The LL I had before that was the proverbial LL from hell. Left me with no heating for 6 months, until I finally sent lawyers letter. Next time it broke, I paid for it myself. I was very ill and off sick, so I had to pay my rent a week late, as I was only getting about £65 SSP a week. He phoned me threatening to come and throw me and all my possessions out on the street if it ever happened again. I sought advice and was at the point of getting an injuction against him, but we agreed that his partner would visit instead if anyone needed to come round. That was the first and only time I have ever had problems paying my rent. I had many other problems with him too, including stuff at work.

Do you think he would give me a good reference? The council were aware of all the problems I had with him, and I'm sure would back me up if I found out he gave me a bad ref, but by the time all this happened, I would have lost the tenancy I was applying for.

I think the site needs to have info in a more concrete form. If I were to SAR LRS, they probably only have my name, DOB, NINO, previous addresses. The potentially harmful info is not recorded is it? Therefore it's unchallengeable.

As a LL, if something about a prospective T doesn't add up, it's simple, don't give them a tenancy!

Sorry if my remarks are upsetting LLs. I really would like to see a workable system, as it would have protected my parents when they were LLs.