Reasons for "No DSS" in most private let's??

seven-day-weekend

brit1234 wrote: »

The housing benefit caps have put some landlords off whilst others don't like the payment going to the renter rather than straight to them.

Plus ther several months delay when no Benefits are paid, and hence no rent.:(

HappyMJ

jjj1980 wrote: »

Whilst I completely understand why some people would do this, I never could. I am admittedly honest to a fault. Would rather be completely honest with the agents and struggle to find somewhere.


I think stereotypes come into play for too often but totally understand the landlords fears re the amount of money involved. In a way, having an agent involved makes it harder as so much can be gained from an in-person meeting with a landlord. Such is life though.

That's just it you would be completely honest. You do not claim anything from the DSS nobody does and at the moment you do not claim housing benefit or local housing allowance to pay the rent for the property you are yet to live in. You need to move in first to be able to claim HB/LHA. So if your annual earnings are 30 times the monthly rent and you have enough money to pay the first few months rent then apply for it based on your own earnings and savings.

missile

jjj1980 wrote: »

Whilst I completely understand why some people would do this, I never could. I am admittedly honest to a fault. Would rather be completely honest with the agents and struggle to find somewhere.


I think stereotypes come into play for too often but totally understand the landlords fears re the amount of money involved. In a way, having an agent involved makes it harder as so much can be gained from an in-person meeting with a landlord. Such is life though.

It is very difficult to vet potential tenants. Most genuinely believe they are the ideal tenant. Sweetness and light until they move in and then somehow many morph into "I know my rights, you can't stop me keeping a Rotweiller".

shellsuit

I was a single Mum with 2 young children, when I moved into a private let in 1998.

The house was a mess, so I redecorated, I recarpetted throughout, I sorted out the back garden, which was full of overgrown bushes, and turfed it all and put up fencing all around. Oh, the outside of the house was even painted front and back too.

The landlady was thrilled with what I'd done with the place. The only thing she did at the time while I was there, was put double glazing at the front of the house, even though it needed a LOT of work doing to it.

I treated that house like my own, because it was my home.

12 years I stayed there and was the longest staying tenant on that particular letting agents books.

BigAunty

My friend who used to work as a letting agent said that lone parents on benefits generally made excellent tenants - they wanted long term tenancies and be close to their kids school. However, although I know this is what you don't want to hear, I've known around 4 landlords who have let to HB tenants who now rue the day - obviously they will have dissuaded any fellow landlords from letting to this group, so it is worth considering reputational issues (and yes, I know working tenants can be bad and HB tenants can be good).

Here is a summary I posted on another thread in the benefits board to this exact question:-

Loads of reasons why private landlords do not accept HB claimants.

Ultimately it's about risk - like students, HB claimants are also seen as a higher risk of going into arrears due to having limited savings and the fact that their claims can take ages to process, can change (lots of recent changes to HB that have reduced the amount) or be suspended.

With a working tenant who defaults, it's seen as easier to get the arrears paid back. For someone on benefits, it's seen as a waste of time to take them to court and get a CCJ - you can't get money out of someone who doesn't have it.

Housing benefit is now paid directly to tenants whereas in the past it could be paid to landlords. The rules changed a few years back and many landlords dislike it. If the HB does get paid to the landlord (it can in certain circumstances) it used to be the case that if the tenant had fraudulently claimed HB, the landlord had to pay it back to the council. Apparently that's not the case now but I expect many landlords don't know this.

Some buy to let mortgages/insurance forbid the landlord from accepting HB claimants.

Also, HB claimants have the reputation for being harder to evict in order to secure social housing. The main way now to secure social housing is for the tenant to present themselves as homeless to the local council which they can do if they are served notice by a private landlord. However, the council will often tell them to ignore the notice and this forces the landlord to have to take them to court for a possession order. A working tenant served notice would normally feel that the council won't help them so don't tend to bother.

So that's the practical side of why HB claimants are very unattractive to landlords - it feels personal to the claimants but it's about business risk.

Many tenants feel that there is social prejudice against HB claimants, some kind of snobbery.

I'm not sure this is the main driving factor but there are bound to be some landlords who feel that if a tenant isn't actually paying the rent through the fruits of their own labour, then they develop a negative attitude.

Because their accommodation is free, because they don't 'earn' it, it can develop within them sense of entitlement or attitudes that don't make them ideal tenants. This includes not taking care of the property (because some tenants have borrowed the deposit from the council or relatives so it's still 'free', because they've not invested a penny of their own money in it).

Also they have a reputation of not dealing with arrears (because they don't pay for it,they feel that any rent issues are between the council and the landlord to sort out, they don't take any ownership over debts - "it's not my problem you are owed rent, blame the council" etc) so are not proactive.

There may be other reasons but these are the main ones.

jjj1980

Thank you everyone for your honesty and comments.

I probably should have given further details earlier but wanted honest, non-biased answers.

I am a lone-parent with a toddler, just filed for my decree absolute. I am currently working part-time until my daughter starts school. And then will be increasing my hours. So yes, I do claim Housing Benefit.

This time in 2009 my life looked quite different, I was living in a nice private rental, earning over 20k a year with a pending promotion subject to changes within the company. Then I was made redundant four days before my wedding and at 20 weeks pregnant with my little girl. Due to complications with the pregnancy, I was repeatedly in hospital and later found out my now-ex had been forging receipts to make me believe he had paid the rent. He had taken this bill from me to allow me to try and put some money aside for baby things. I then also found out he had worked out the pin number on my bank card and emptied my redundancy and savings out of my bank account.

I have since paid all the arrears he caused back and have obtained references from both the landlord and estate agent that they would be happy to rent to me and daughter if a suitable property came up. I also have a guarantor in place, with a second one if needed.

I am trying to get my daughter and myself back into the type of area we should have been and originally were, in.

Just wish I could come up with a light-bulb moment of how to do it.....:(

Werdnal

Very biased view there! I have let a flat for 12 years, and had 4 different tenants, 3 of whom were on HB. Only had a problem with 1 - later found out my agent had not been totally honest and this guy was a serial offender. However, to blanketly accuse MOST DSS claimants as being scum and likley to trash your property is totally OTT.

There are a minority (as in all things) who spoil it for the majority of good honest benefit claimants. Obviously LLs who have suffered as a result of this minority will have a very one-sided view of the whole benefit culture, but there are many people in our society like the OP, who through no fault of their own have little option but to claim benefits to keep a roof over their and their child's heads.

OP, just try to be open and honest about your intentions. A prospective LL might request a guarantor to secure your tenancy, so if you have someone who would be willing to do this, it may well help you in your property search. The guarantor must meet certain criertia - usually needs to be a homeowner and earning, so they would have sufficient income and/or assets to cover their own living expenses, and yours should you ever default on your rent or leave the property in a mess. If you can offer a guarantor when you apply for a property, you may find the LL/LA much more willing to take you as a reliable tenant.

Are you also in a position to provide a good cash deposit? This is also a "selling point" for you.

Also, I assume your child is your ex-partner's offspring? If so, they should be contributing some cash towards you providing for their needs, and that includes helping keep a roof over their heads!

Good luck, just be as honest as possible and I am sure you will find somewhere.

Incidentally, as you have a young dependant child, have you approached your local council/housing associations, as this should make you more of a priority for them to house you?

HB58

What a nasty to thing to say! Yes, some recipients of beneifts are 'scum' - just the same as some business-men are. Honesty, respect and kindness are found in all walks of life too.

inmypocketnottheirs

I will let to anyone providing they clear the Let Sure referencing procedure.

katejo

I can see why a private individual would be reluctant to rent to someone on DSS because of problems with the tenant's entitlement to housing benefit or the council telling someone to stay in a property as long as possible. However i do think that professional lettings agencies should not be allowed to say "no DSS". If such a lettings agency kicked someone out/refused to renew a contract simply because he/she had lost their job, surely the tenant would have a case against them?