Tenant on Housing Benefit

clutton_2

Artful thinks he knows it all Sue.... and doesn't care who he upsets with his forthright language - in spite of your opening post "" please could you give me some GENTLE and constructive advice please, I am still very delicate physically, mentally and emotionally." He shows little respect for people in trouble.


I have been a professonal landlord for nearly 12 years and I used to post on here a great deal, to help both landlords and tenants who were in trouble, but i got so irritated by the onslaught of landlord-bashing - even when folks like yourself come here for advice and help and who are trying to put things right.

Feel free to private message me if you wish.

Do let us know how the solicitor gets on in court on Monday - are you going ?

Good luck

skintsue

Just got some more info!
Tenant hadn't been paying Council Tax either. That's it then - the Courts may, or may not not lock her up for Identity Fraud, etc etc, but if she hasn't paid the Council Tax she will be sent into exile for life, fed on bread and water, and her kids will all be sent to the workhouse and be forced to work in sub zero temperatures from 5am - midnight everyday with a bowl of gruel and a straw pallet to sleep on.

PLEASE NOTE. BEFORE ANYONE THINKS I AM BEING SERIOUS - THIS IS NOT WHAT I EXPECT, WANT, OR WOULD FIND IN ANY WAY ACCEPTABLE. It just seems that certain actions top trump others. Her behaviour is sometimes illegal, and others unfair. I have tried to play by the rules (okay I didn't know about the permission letter from the Bank, but that was accidental, not deception, and I'm putting it right), and I followed the LA's advice, for what that's been worth. she will no doubt get Legal Aid, while I have to pay for legal advice, and then use the HRA as her 'Get out of Jail Free Card' because of the children.

Clutton - thanks for your kind words. Yes I am concerned about the children. They are not at fault, but she should be the one concerned about their wellbeing, not strangers. It says more about her and her attitude than it does about the forum members that we are more worried about how her actions will impact on them.

Heathcote123 - totally agree with you. As soon as I can, IF I can, get her out, the house will be on the market, regardless of possible losses. As long as she leaves it in a marketable condition. That's the next worry! What will she do to it if she knows she is getting kicked out, and has the chance to return.

I totally agree with anyone who thinks I am not cut out for this. I never felt tough enough to take on trouble of any kind, and the last few years have proved it! What ever happened to 'do as you would be done by'?.

PLEASE - any posters don't do 'I told you so!'. I'm going to get enough of that from my Mum.

theartfullodger

clutton wrote: »

..........

Artful - whats it like to be perfect ? the rest of us would love to know

I have no idea: I'm not perfect, far from it, and am well aware I have many faults..

Cheers!

Artful

theartfullodger

skintsue wrote: »

Just got some more info!
Tenant hadn't been paying Council Tax either. That's it then - the Courts may, or may not not lock her up for Identity Fraud, etc etc,.............

I'm very sorry for the position you are in & likewise for the tenant's children...

However, and I'm trying to be helpful here - as usual.. - don't rely on council getting her out for you, pursue your S21/S8 whatever route with vigour...

I had tenants: They weren't paying rent: They were subletting (whilst still living there): to decent honest hard-working eastern europeans: Subletting for more than they should have been paying me, but weren't. And "he" was boasting about it round town.. I get them out (S21 equivalent in Scotland).

I get judgement from Sheriff court for monies owed & have recovered most via earning arrestment (= earning attachment). But the court writes to me in January saying council wants most of the money I've been getting: Why? Well, turns out they owe council also.

I object (expecting to lose but simply to delay matters & keep ££ coming in..) Court case 27th May. They owe £7.942:18 to the council.

Council knew before I evicted them why they were losing the place (I talked to the housing dept..). Yet the council re-housed them in a nice council flat. And the £7.942:18 is, according to the council solicitor, for council tax arrears.... They are still living happily in the council flat..


Best of luck to everyone! Cheers!

Oh, PS After they left I grassed them up to HMRC for the rental income they'd been getting.

skintsue

Been told she has been given a Caution. Is that good, bad, or irrelevant? Is that a slap on the wrist and a 'naughty girl. don't do it again' or something stronger? Will it help my situation, or make things worse?

Artful -Thanks for the very clear info regarding the clawback of rental by the Council. Maybe I should let the LA get the money from the Council, and send me the remainder after they have taken their cut. At the moment when, or if, she pays it, the money goes to their account,they take their cut, then electronically forward it to my account.

I'm interested to see what happens on Monday. I have a feeling there is going to be a lot of backheeling and buck passing going on as things crawl out of the woodwork.

Any ideas what I should be asking them for answers and comments on. So far the list is this -
1 - Why was I not asked for a copy of the Permission to Let advice from the Mortgage company. They knew it was my 'home' not a BTL.

2 - Who did the tenant checks, how far back, and who verified them as genuine.

3 - How proactive were they when they found out about the problems.

4 - Why did they not advise Ground 14 & 17 of Section 8 instead of me having to ask them.

5 - With a history of poor payments, and after telling me that it was possible to get the Housing Benefit paid direct to them under discretionary grounds why did they not do it, or at least start the proceedings.

6 - Very important under the circumstances. As they 'advised' the tenant that she needed her own insurance while in the house, does she have it? Have they proof it is valid, and what will it cover? Just her stuff, or damage caused one way or another to mine e,g, carpets, bathroom fittings, kitchen units, curtain poles etc.

Any more constructive advice and suggestions will be very welcome.
I'm getting in touch with the NLA on Monday when I have confirmation of the charges, results and any other information I can get to hand, so I can ask the relevant qestions.

Still confused, but feeling a slightly more happy misery.:huh:

jamie11

I'll repeat what I said a while ago, do the S8 grounds 14 and 17 and all the other grounds that apply, but do it yourself. Paying a solicitor to do it is wasting money, it's not that complicated. You just have to be accurate. Now that your !!!!!!!!!! has had a caution g.14 applies strongly.

Don't forget that it is not 2 months arrears but 2 months unpaid that counts, that means a month and a day if she hasn't paid anything. Don't concern yourself about what's going to happen to her children, that's for social services to worry about.

Keep on at the council until they're sick of you, they work for you as well.

That word filled with excl. marks should have been f r e e l o a d e r, what is it with this site? Are certain words banned?

clutton_2

Sue - a ll these questions do need answers, but the thing to focus on right now is getting the tenant out. You can haul the letting agent over the coals at any time later on.

Do make sure that the solicitor has ALL the relevant facts about the tenants behaviour. Are you going to court tomorrow ? I would if it was me. The solicitor will speak for you, but if the judge sees a professional, calm, landlord who does not get hysterical, as tenants sometimes do in courts for effect, they may be influenced.

Did you look at your agency agreement to see if the court costs for tomorrow are included in your agreement ?

HappyMJ

skintsue wrote: »

Been told she has been given a Caution. Is that good, bad, or irrelevant? Is that a slap on the wrist and a 'naughty girl. don't do it again' or something stronger? Will it help my situation, or make things worse?

Artful -Thanks for the very clear info regarding the clawback of rental by the Council. Maybe I should let the LA get the money from the Council, and send me the remainder after they have taken their cut. At the moment when, or if, she pays it, the money goes to their account,they take their cut, then electronically forward it to my account.

I'm interested to see what happens on Monday. I have a feeling there is going to be a lot of backheeling and buck passing going on as things crawl out of the woodwork.

Any ideas what I should be asking them for answers and comments on. So far the list is this -
1 - Why was I not asked for a copy of the Permission to Let advice from the Mortgage company. They knew it was my 'home' not a BTL.

2 - Who did the tenant checks, how far back, and who verified them as genuine.

3 - How proactive were they when they found out about the problems.

4 - Why did they not advise Ground 14 & 17 of Section 8 instead of me having to ask them.

5 - With a history of poor payments, and after telling me that it was possible to get the Housing Benefit paid direct to them under discretionary grounds why did they not do it, or at least start the proceedings.

6 - Very important under the circumstances. As they 'advised' the tenant that she needed her own insurance while in the house, does she have it? Have they proof it is valid, and what will it cover? Just her stuff, or damage caused one way or another to mine e,g, carpets, bathroom fittings, kitchen units, curtain poles etc.

Any more constructive advice and suggestions will be very welcome.
I'm getting in touch with the NLA on Monday when I have confirmation of the charges, results and any other information I can get to hand, so I can ask the relevant qestions.

Still confused, but feeling a slightly more happy misery.:huh:

A caution is good for her. It means nothing at all. It's an admittance of guilt but not much more than that. The offence she was given must relate to the property to be of relevance and it must be so serious that it must have been an indictable offence. Not many people would get a caution for an indictable offence so it was probably a summary offence (rather minor) and ignored.

Point 1 - The mortgage company give you the permission to let. It is their security so they want final say over their security. It's not illegal not to have it but if the mortgage company finds out they will demand the mortgage be repaid in full immediately.

Point 2 - Something for the letting agent. If they didn't do their job properly and you have suffered a loss as a result then bring a claim in court against them. You'll have to use a different solicitor to the one you have been using if you don't want to do that yourself. You really need to have your own legal expenses cover for this to be cheap or be willing to spend a lot and wait to see if you win or not to get your money back.

Point 3 - Again see point 2's answer.

Point 4 - Grounds 14 and 17 are virtually useless. That's why no landlord uses them. Ground 14 only really useful if they were convicted of growing or making drugs in the property but by the time they were convicted you would have got them out on Section 21 as it takes many months to bring to trial.

Not paying council tax is not an indictable offence.

Point 4 - Ground 17 - you will not be able to prove her references were fake. Not much you can do on that one as you should have cecked they were geniune before the tenancy started.

Point 5 - That's up to you to chase.

Point 6 - Insurance by the tenant is not compulsory. It's advised but can not be enforced. You also need your own building and contents insurance. Most landlords don't cover the contents as it can be prohibitively expensive.

clutton_2

""but if the mortgage company finds out they will demand the mortgage be repaid in full immediately.""

sorry i have never heard of one lender doing this.. it is an urban myth - they are really unlikely to do this - the most they are likely to do is increase the interest rate.

Whilst i appreciate all the advice given to Sue is well intentioned (mostly) i think she needs to continue using a solicitor in this case. She is a new landlord and i know she accepts this, a naive, landlord and does not understand how to evict people.

She is up against a professionally scamming tenant who knows all her rights, who will almost certainly have legal representation, and who can drag children into the court room for that extra piquancy of sob-storying to try to attack the judges heart strings. She is also up against an appalling letting agent who does not know the law. She needs proper help. sometimes you just have to bite the bullet and pay a professional to do it properly for you.

A caution may not be what is needed by Sue, but, it IS now on her police record, and will be seen by another officers arresting her in the future and will provide a fuller picture, and possibly a longer sentence when she ie eventually charged and convicted with something.

With regards to all the differing grounds which are discretionary when asking a judge for possession, the more the better, the more evidence the better, the more tenancy breaches the better. I agree that to apply for possession on a discretionary ground only is pretty well pointless.. But judges DO take note of consistently late rent paymente and arrears.

HappyMJ

clutton wrote: »

""but if the mortgage company finds out they will demand the mortgage be repaid in full immediately.""

sorry i have never heard of one lender doing this.. it is an urban myth - they are really unlikely to do this - the most they are likely to do is increase the interest rate.

Yes, I shoud have said "may". It is a term in the mortgage and "can" be used if they wish.