Housing benefits paid to landlord, i top it up. what about the '13th' payment?

tokenfield

Marisco wrote: »

Right, I'll reword it then! The rent is getting paid in full, so as far as the LL is concerned that should be it!

It's not obvious at all, unless of course you're saying that all those who claim HB are low lifes who won't look after the property.

Would you be saying the same thing if the shoe was on the other foot, i.e the tenant was taking advantage of the system? I think not. More likely the tenant would be slated for "benefit scrounging"!!

Yep the landlord is quite happy that the tenant is keeping to his side of the agreement and that the rent is being paid in full.

It's a well known fact that HB claimants have a lot more difficult time in finding a landlord that will accept them.

If the landlord allows a tenant to try to take advantage then there is one option - eviction and a refusal to give a good reference to the next landlord.

I have a landlord friend who owns well over 550 properties. He has a policy that arrears of over 2 months - eviction process starts.
And with all of his tenants, he charges a flat £2000 fee for cleaning and redecoration for every room that is not up to standard when they leave - he has no qualms in getting a CCJ for these 'fees'. He refuses to let to anyone that cannot prove that the rent is covered by salary or wages - if he suspects HB being claimed - he refuses to let the property to them. He lets his properties for 6 months then will not issue another contract - it becomes, you pay a month - you live a month. Any suspicion that they claim HB after the 6 months they get 1 month's notice to quit.

tokenfield

inklove wrote: »

I don't want to be evicted,
at the moment in my area there are only three properties for rent on rightmove, two of which are with a agency that has a strict no HB policy, the other is a one bed flat.

I work part time and although I am trying to find more work it is difficult because there is no childcare in my area, there are waiting lists for all of the nurseries and childminders, even in the nearby villages, and most will not do school runs, so I, and many other parents in my area, have no option but to claim some benefits to top up our incomes.

When I found this house I had to convince the landlord to rent to me, I had to pay a ridiculously massive deposit and agree to have the HB paid to him, he also insisted that I pay the top up amount each month to make the monthy payment 'whole'.
I did explain that HB is paid four weekly, not monthly, so it would not be on the 1st of every month, but he said that didn't matter as he wanted me to pay it a month ahead, so each month he will receive the HB payment on a random date so he will already have it for the 1st of the next month and when I pay the top up it makes the rent payment full. If that makes sense.

When I told him that £146 was not right and it should actually be less due to the 'extra' payment he said that wouldn't work as he needed the full amount each month or he wouldn't be able to pay the mortgage.

There you go then - you pays your money and you get your choice - a roof and four walls V a cardboard box in a subway!!

lighting_up_the_chalice

inklove wrote: »

When I told him that £146 was not right and it should actually be less due to the 'extra' payment he said that wouldn't work as he needed the full amount each month or he wouldn't be able to pay the mortgage.

In that case, on the one month a year he receives 2 of the 4 weekly payments, one of those should be yours. Perhaps that would be easier for him?

lighting_up_the_chalice

tokenfield wrote: »

I have a landlord friend who owns well over 550 properties. He has a policy that arrears of over 2 months - eviction process starts.
And with all of his tenants, he charges a flat £2000 fee for cleaning and redecoration for every room that is not up to standard when they leave - he has no qualms in getting a CCJ for these 'fees'. He refuses to let to anyone that cannot prove that the rent is covered by salary or wages - if he suspects HB being claimed - he refuses to let the property to them. He lets his properties for 6 months then will not issue another contract - it becomes, you pay a month - you live a month. Any suspicion that they claim HB after the 6 months they get 1 month's notice to quit.

Then your "friend" is a clueless numpty. His cleaning fee is unenforceable and S21 is a minimum notice period of 2 calender months (almost 3 depending on when served). If your going to just make things up, at least do a little bit of research first.

lighting_up_the_chalice

tokenfield wrote: »

Errr the landlord made the mistake!!!!

The tenant made the mistake, not the landlord. The landlord probably knew what would happen and he would have no responsibility in law to advise the tenant.

It is up to the tenant to satisfy themselves that what they are signing for is fully understood.

If they can't do simple maths, then they leave themselves wide open.

It's the landlord who cannot do the simple maths. That's why the tenant is being asked to over-pay. Did you not read the OP?

Nada666

tokenfield wrote: »

Errr the landlord made the mistake!!!!

The tenant made the mistake, not the landlord. The landlord probably knew what would happen and he would have no responsibility in law to advise the tenant.

It is up to the tenant to satisfy themselves that what they are signing for is fully understood.

If they can't do simple maths, then they leave themselves wide open.

Utter rubbish. The contract is for £xy00 per year. The landlord has no right to charge an extra four week payment every year. It does not matter that the extra money has been paid - the account is in balance and the landlord may not keep it indefinitely.

Where you are correct is the tenant's choices are limited.

Nada666

Also, do not forget that LHA is paid in arrears so he may well have not received an extra benefit credit yet. But, of course, that should be covered by the month's rent in advance you paid when you signed up in addition to the deposit - the landlord may not be including this first month's payment in his head.

Ask what happened to your inital deposit - was it all put aside as a deposit or was the first month's rent taken out?

I agree that it is more reasonable for your top-up to be the top-up to make up a calendar month's rent and for you to then claim the extra four-week payment back after thirteen months have been paid. (Or, as just mentioned, you may have to wait twenty-five months if the deposit did not include the initial month.)

Anyway, if the flat is decent and desirable you should stop and calmly verify the situation before you automatically lump the landlord in with one of Tokenfield's buddies.

notanewuser

Amend what you pay him taking account if the £400 extra he's trousering per year.

If he attempts to evict you, file a court case. He won't be keen to go because the court will see exactly what he's been doing (and possibly not just to you).

You're not likely to lose this one!!

lighting_up_the_chalice

notanewuser wrote: »

Amend what you pay him taking account if the £400 extra he's trousering per year.

If he attempts to evict you, file a court case. He won't be keen to go because the court will see exactly what he's been doing (and possibly not just to you).

You're not likely to lose this one!!

Unless he uses S21 for which, as long as the deposit is protected, there is no defense and possession will be granted.

tokenfield

lighting_up_the_chalice wrote: »

Then your "friend" is a clueless numpty. His cleaning fee is unenforceable and S21 is a minimum notice period of 2 calender months (almost 3 depending on when served). If your going to just make things up, at least do a little bit of research first.

You may be right technically about S21, but I can only tell what he tells me. He serves notice to quit at the start of the month (after he has been paid the rent for the month) and expects possession at the end of the following month.

As for his fee being unenforceable, I know that that isn't correct. He makes a claim in the county court and 9 times out of 10 no one files a defence. He obtains judgement by default and takes action to secure the debt.

He was once described by the BBC Watchdog programme as Britain's worst landlord.

http://www.propertytribes.com/next-round-bmv-properties-distressed-sellers-will-landlords-t-7270-2.html