How the proposed changes may affect LHA tenants

Wee_Willy_Harris

I think you are confusing the months rent up front with the deposit. Many Local Authorities have a "Rent Bond Guarantee Scheme" where they will guarantee the amount of the bond to the LL if there are issues to be addressed at the end of the tenancy. No actual money changes hands at the outset and it isn't regarded as rent up-front so there cannot be an "overpayment".

If, however, you do secure funding for the first months rent in addition to any LHA payment, this would be reduced from the LHA claim at the outset as, effectively, your claim for LHA would have no rent liability for the first month (it having already been paid).

Even assuming there IS an LHA payment effectively paying the first months rent twice, I fail to see why the overall responsibility of rent payments should fall on anyone elses shoulders but the tenant. As a taxpayer, I certainly don't think it is my duty to carry out and pay for the administration of your responsibilities as a tenant.

Even under the old HB method, where the majority of rents were paid direct to the landlord, there was a mechanism in place where the tenant could get the payments made direct to them. Sadly, this was very rarely used and we got to the stage where tenants claiming HB had no sense of responsibility for rent payments. In turn this resulted in renewals of HB or requests for further information often being ignored as the tenants no longer felt that it was something that they should have to bother with.

EastMidsGal

I think my council must have a very unique way of carrying out the scheme as they were very clear the first months rent was a loan that had to be paid back. If their way of actioning the scheme is so different then it will give me lots of leverae with which to challenge them as I don't want to be caught between the council and the LL should the LL not return the overpayment

The housing officer was very clear and explicit with how it worked and I have relayed it here as clearly as I can. How I have conveyed it is exactly how my councils scheme works

Wee_Willy_Harris

EastMidsGal wrote: »

I think my council must have a very unique way of carrying out the scheme as they were very clear the first months rent was a loan that had to be paid back. If their way of actioning the scheme is so different then it will give me lots of leverae with which to challenge them as I don't want to be caught between the council and the LL should the LL not return the overpayment

The housing officer was very clear and explicit with how it worked and I have relayed it here as clearly as I can. How I have conveyed it is exactly how my councils scheme works

Then you would simply need to inform the LHA section when you put in your notice to leave the property (whenever that may be) that the last months payment should be made to you. Seems straightforward enough to me.

Jowo_2

EastMidsGal wrote: »

I think my council must have a very unique way of carrying out the scheme as they were very clear the first months rent was a loan that had to be paid back. If their way of actioning the scheme is so different then it will give me lots of leverae with which to challenge them as I don't want to be caught between the council and the LL should the LL not return the overpayment

The housing officer was very clear and explicit with how it worked and I have relayed it here as clearly as I can. How I have conveyed it is exactly how my councils scheme works

I do wonder how common your council's policy is as I got the impression that councils only guaranteed the deposit and the tenant had to apply for a loan from the DWP to get the first month's rent together.

Perhaps other MSE members have more experience of being an end user of the dual council payment that you speak of where they guarantee the deposit and pay the 1st months rent, too.

Jowo_2

property.advert wrote: »

...
What should be acceptable is for landlords to be able to request that HB is paid to them and not the tenant from the start.

The reason why the introduction to LHA overturned this was precisely to 'empower' the tenant and make them personally responsible for managing their own money. It was pitched quite explicitly for those reasons, and seen as ending the passivity where tenants weren't in control. It encouraged those without bank accounts to open them, for starters.

certainly I got the impression that under the old HB system, some landlord's were frustrated with some tenants who, as they never handled the rent money, saw payment issues relating to their HB as a problem between the local council and the landlord, rather than as a rent arrear issue that they should be actively resolving themselves.

sarahevie

Thankfully this situation doesn't apply to me, however, out of interest and by way of education.

Why would you be owed £1200? This is money surely to pay the rent, not your own money - please can someone explain?

EastMidsGal

otherwise the LL would be paid for 13 months tenancy on a 12 month tenancy otherwise. It's LHA that I would be entitled to. Because of the weird way my coucil does the rent deposit scheme the council pay the first months rent upfront of £1200, I pay them back monthly out of my ESA and then the final months rent reimburses me and the council should there be any outstanding payments to them

EastMidsGal

It does seem a very inconvenient way of doing it and the new changes enabling LHA to be paid direct to the LL make it open to exploitation. I think WWHs and Jowos suggestions are much more straightforward and I will be suggesting their ideas to the council should I find a private rent.

silvercar

In my area, the council provide a bond (bit like an IOY written on a scrap of paper) as a deposit for the tenant. So the landlord doesn't actually see any money as deposit.

EastMidsGal

That's how it works in my area too silvercar