Homeless Dilemma. Help.

lighting_up_the_chalice

BigAunty wrote: »

Except those on low incomes are a higher risk and claimants are subject to huge no notice cuts in benefits, including the change to the percentile to calculate LHA, cap on number of bedrooms, max Upper lha cap, age raise from 25 to 35 for 1 bed rate,overall benefit cap of £500 a week for workless households, etc etc

In all fairness, there was plenty of notice and, in most cases, transitional support. Certainly more notice than you would get from an employer wishing to cut your hours.

lighting_up_the_chalice

Rollingstart wrote: »

Not the OP given her full time job is in London. There's something very wrong with London if there's lots of full time workers having to claim housing benefit.

If all these people moved out, who wouod do these lower paid jobs, some of which help to provide essential services to Londoners?

Clearly the solution to this problem is not for people to move out of London.

Clearly the solution to this problem is not for WORKING people to move out of London. You can carry on your unemployment pretty much anywhere.

lighting_up_the_chalice

Deleted_User wrote: »

Also my exH won't be able to have as much contact if I move too far away and my daughter will lose out on a relationship with her father. So these are the 2 reasons that makes me wants to stay around here.

Perhaps he would like to contribute to you providing this convenience?

BigAunty

lighting_up_the_chalice wrote: »

In all fairness, there was plenty of notice and, in most cases, transitional support. Certainly more notice than you would get from an employer wishing to cut your hours.

Each cut, even with notice or transition, deters more and more landlords. The decision to pay the HB directly to the tenant (a move that I support) was also a big blow.

Letting is a business. Those on benefits are considered a higher risk (so too are students), notice or no notice about benefit changes, regardless of the fact that employed people can lose their jobs. What is so hard to understand?

Tenants on benefits have gained a reputation for being the hardest group to evict because councils routinely tell the tenants to stay put and ignore the notice, because they can't get the funds together to move, because the pool of available onward properties is so limited.

Private landlords aren't a branch of social services. They are a business.

If the OP was fully independent from state support, then when the landlord served notice, she would have had her pick of properties and no issue with getting the deposit and first month's rent together.

Instead, the landlord was frustrated to find that their notice was rejected and had to be re-served because the council wouldn't assist his tenant otherwise. A tenant not dependent on benefits would have moved out by now.

You think this landlord would ever rent to a HB claimant again? She illustrates why many landlords avoid HB claimants like the plague.

[Deleted User]

lighting_up_the_chalice wrote: »

Perhaps he would like to contribute to you providing this convenience?

he does contribute every month, calculate by the maintenance support agency,but remember he is paying rent in London too and his isn't receiving any benefits at all.

[Deleted User]

If the OP was fully independent from state support, then when the landlord served notice, she would have had her pick of properties and no issue with getting the deposit and first month's rent together.
I already have the deposit and 1st month rent in advance saved for when I need it.
If I move so far away, the probability of becoming self supporting one day will be slimmer than staying in my employment which I am doing very well. I started in Sep 2014 2 hours a day only (and had another job), now, I am full time and had to cut my other job hours to accommodate. I am clearly going in the right direction and would be a shame to lose it all.

Instead, the landlord was frustrated to find that their notice was rejected and had to be re-served because the council wouldn't assist his tenant otherwise. A tenant not dependent on benefits would have moved out by now.
The first notice was a talk over the phone telling me to move out in 6 weeks. Then he gave me a piece of paper telling me to move out in 8 weeks when I pointed out the clauses on tenancy agreement and the need of a written notice. The problem was that he didn't have a clue on how conduct his business. If he had served me proper legal notice from the get go he could be in his property right now.
Any tenant is entitled to legally stay until bailiffs not only the DSS tenants. But of course, for the professional tenants it is easy to move out when the LL gives them notice even if the LL gets it wrong. I could do it too. I am just not being accepted anywhere.

lighting_up_the_chalice

BigAunty wrote: »

Each cut, even with notice or transition, deters more and more landlords. The decision to pay the HB directly to the tenant (a move that I support) was also a big blow.

Letting is a business. Those on benefits are considered a higher risk (so too are students), notice or no notice about benefit changes, regardless of the fact that employed people can lose their jobs. What is so hard to understand?

Tenants on benefits have gained a reputation for being the hardest group to evict because councils routinely tell the tenants to stay put and ignore the notice, because they can't get the funds together to move, because the pool of available onward properties is so limited.

Private landlords aren't a branch of social services. They are a business.

If the OP was fully independent from state support, then when the landlord served notice, she would have had her pick of properties and no issue with getting the deposit and first month's rent together.

Instead, the landlord was frustrated to find that their notice was rejected and had to be re-served because the council wouldn't assist his tenant otherwise. A tenant not dependent on benefits would have moved out by now.

You think this landlord would ever rent to a HB claimant again? She illustrates why many landlords avoid HB claimants like the plague.

I said that benefit cuts don't suddenly come out of the blue with no notice. Why have chosen to post the above irrelevancies in reply is beyond me.

MissMoneypenny

Rollingstart wrote: »

Not the OP given her full time job is in London. There's something very wrong with London if there's lots of full time workers having to claim housing benefit.

The OP said she works as a teaching assistant in a school. Before Tax Credits were invented, TAs were usually part time jobs for mothers who had a partner who worked full time, as a bit of extra money for the household pot.

Rollingstart wrote: »

If all these people moved out, who wouod do these lower paid jobs, some of which help to provide essential services to Londoners?

There are lots of mothers who would like a TA job to fit around their children. If the OP moves out to a cheaper rental area, the position won't be hard to fill.

People who can't afford to live in London but earn too much to claim HB, commute to work. The trains are full of thousands of commuters travelling to and from work in London. Housing Benefit has helped to keep London's rents high.

NYM

deannatrois wrote: »

An awful lot of councils do NOT have lists of LL's who accept those in receipt of LHA.., and in boroughs where rents are high, and properties in high demand (more tenants than properties) the LL's who accept LHA claimants are far and few between. Take it from one who knows. This is why the OP has made the post.

The OP started this thread because she still hasn't had the answers that she wants. (this is possibly the 6th thread, each with numerous posts made by her) She is setting her expectations far too high for her circumstances.

I never suggested all Councils have a list,but from advice given by nannytone in yet another thread by the OP it would certainly appear that her Borough did have such a list....

nannytone's post...

many councils hold a list of landlords that accept HB.
how much have you got saved?
is it enough to pay 3 months rent in advance or more?
many LL will accept benefit claimants if they have pre paid rent

Deleted_User wrote: »

Ok. I got a list today of the LLs that accept HB. I will have to call around or visit them myself during the half term. They do not have websites.

The savings I have got is enough for perhaps 6 weeks deposit and one month rent in advance. I would have to scrape or borrow to cover agency fees/bills/removal man&van, etc.

I have UK homeowners guarantors who receive 3x the annual rental value of the a property on my price bracket. I have clean credit and current LL's reference and proof of stable employment. But the no DSS rule is being enforced very strongly with agencies and private LLs.

I appreciate it's frustrating and difficult, but when you don't have the income to support you, you do need to compromise. If she waits for the Bailiffs, she will probably be entitled to emergency housing, but that could be in a B&B possibly somewhere outside of her Borough. She is not the only single parent facing such a prospect.

sheramber

On a recent televison programme a mother with two young children from London was evicted. The council put her in B&B in Worthing.

She lost her job as well as her house, as she was now too far away to travel to it.