Facing eviction, a few questions

Delree

silvercar wrote: »

To be evicted, solely for rent arrears, you would need to owe 8 weeks rent on the day that the notice is served and at the court date. So you have some time to consider your options.

This is not quite correct. At our association we issue notices on four weeks then a further four have to pass before court action can be applied for.

From this point until then pay what you can (even if it's a fiver here and there until your benefits kick in), the judge will look much more favourably on you for doing so.

Talk to the association and keep them informed of everything you are doing. Do not go missing.

When court comes (and you must attend) you will be able to say that you are sorting out benefits and paying what you can. This should be enough to get a suspended possession order subject to a payment arrangement. As long as you keep to the arrangement you can't be evicted.

An option on benefit would be to look into discretionary housing benefit.

You have options and it's not certain you'll be evicted, engage with your landlord, they should be able to help (yes help) you as it's not in their interests to evict you. Much better for all that you get benefit and pay back the arrears. Which when you get back working will no doubt do.

emmadk22

Ive been through this. Its actually a long process to evict you. Once i had my evicrion date for rent arrears i went to the court to apply to stop it this you will be able ro do for free with proof if benefit. You will then attend court and the judge will find in your favour and you will be asked to pay £5 per week ( due to your benefits) housing assosiations are not helpful but surprisingly the judges are and are very understanding. Pay what you can in the meantime, dont worry and consentrate on trying to find a new job you wont lose your home :-) x

Delree

emmadk22 wrote: »

housing assosiations are not helpful but surprisingly the judges are and are very understanding.

I actually resent that statement. People seem to think that social landlords should simply accept when people don't pay and wait for their money.

Here is the deal, social landlords borrow money from banks to invest in more housing and maintaining the current stock. As part of their covenant with the bank they must must demonstrate robust income collection.

That means when people stop paying (and rent is in 99% of cases their only source of income) for whatever reason the landlord is dutybound to act as a responsibility to all their other tenants who do pay. The consequences of not acting could mean banks pulling the plug and associations potentially going under.

If you can't pay you will have time to sort it but to suggest that whilst not paying and the association wanting payment and not letting up as being "unhelpful" then you have a very strange view of the world.

Tell me, should associations ignore people who get into arrears, allow them to run up many thousands of pounds in arrears and forever bar themselves from renting (private or social) ever again because the arrears are too high to ever pay back? Is that your idea of helpful?

dodger1

MrPrinny wrote: »

I have been renting at my current appartment for six years without any problems through a housing association.

Recently the work with my company has dried up and as a result I have no income.

I have applied for Job Seekers Allowance and housing benefit.
I was told that if my housing benefit is accepted then it will be £98 a week when my rent is around £125.

So every penny of my housing benefit and JSA (assuming they are both accepted) would only just cover my rent.
This would leave me with no cash left over for food/bills etc.

Sorry if I've missed something but isn't JSA £71 a week for the over 25s. If so you will have HB £98 plus £71 JSA for a total of £169 which would leave £44 per week after paying your rent for food and bills, not a lot but better than nil. Also look at pmlindyloo's post.

moneyistooshorttomention

dodger1 wrote: »

Sorry if I've missed something but isn't JSA £71 a week for the over 25s. If so you will have HB £98 plus £71 JSA for a total of £169 which would leave £44 per week after paying your rent for food and bills, not a lot but better than nil. Also look at pmlindyloo's post.

I was wondering that - having done a quick bit of mental arithmetic - but have assumed that OP is under 35 or maybe even under 25 and therefore having "cuts" because of their age. I may be wrong on that.

Though - having said that - my hair would turn white overnight (if it wasnt white already) at the thought of even trying to live/eat/pay bills on £44 a week and I would decide it was literally impossible/so "where do I go from here":eek:

I think the point being made about expecting Housing Associations to be more sympathetic/helpful (eg than private landlords) is something most of us would expect - as the whole basic purpose of social housing is to ensure that even the lowest-paid can be decently housed. Though I'll admit that it would take the wisdom of Solomon in their position to see who had ended up in that position due to no fault/choice of their own and was being a good tenant of themselves and therefore deserved every bit of sympathy/help possible and who was telling "a pack of porkies" and could have avoided losing their job/could have got another job and generally could manage if they put themselves out a bit.

My personal take is that OP comes in the "couldnt help this situation - it was just landed on her" position and I would be checking out to see if that is the case and, if it is the case, then being as sympathetic/helpful as possible.

tim123456789

Delree wrote: »

I actually resent that statement. People seem to think that social landlords should simply accept when people don't pay and wait for their money.

Well actually, in the short term, yes they should.

It is clear that the OP has zero chance of finding a private rental that he can afford so once he is evicted the council will have to put him up in B&B, which will cost them even more

tim

t0rt0ise

tim123456789 wrote: »

Well actually, in the short term, yes they should.

It is clear that the OP has zero chance of finding a private rental that he can afford so once he is evicted the council will have to put him up in B&B, which will cost them even more

tim

No they won't. The ex tenant will be classed as having made themselves homeless so the council need not help.

Delree

tim123456789 wrote:

Well actually, in the short term, yes they should.

This attitude is extremely frustrating. People like you know everything of your entitlements (except you don't, read below) and none of your responsibilities.

But in a way you're right, because they actually do, most court cases take place weeks after the arrears start and most of those end up in a suspended order giving the tenant lenient repayment terms.

But they have to go down this route early because it takes so long and if the person never pays then they're already able to evict, cut losses and house another family.

I assume you think that's a good approach Tim?

t0rt0ise wrote: »

No they won't. The ex tenant will be classed as having made themselves homeless so the council need not help.

That is absolutely correct, eviction through rent arrears is seen as making yourself homeless and therefore the council has no duty of care.

BitterAndTwisted

The OP will have to find £27 a week out of their JSA of £71 to pay the balance of their rent. Depending on their other obligations, that will leave them £45 a week to live on. This won't be easy by any means but it is possible because I've had to do it myself.

If the OP pays absolutely nothing out of their benefits and HA do apply for possession based on rent of two month's owing at time of service of documents and the OP owes two month's rent at the time of the court-hearing, it is going to take them about THIRTY-SEVEN weeks to accrue.



In 37 weeks the OP could have found another job, who knows?

Delree

I don't wish to cause an argument Bitterandtwisted but where have got this two months thing from?

It's not true, I know because we serve notices well before two months and have a legal team to ensure we are acting correctly.

Please check this fact because it's not true and you're offering bad advice to people who need only good advice at this stage.