Landlords refuse any benefits claimants

Pixie5740

Nice try Lord B

Lord_Baltimore

Pixie5740 wrote: »

Nice try Lord B

You do me injustice. For the forum to be of value, it is important that contributors stick to facts (which, usually, you do) :cool:.

AlexMac

Sympathies OP; let's hope some of the advice above is effective.

Stepping back from the specific (and while admitting this is maybe an issue for another forum) the presumption against claimants is just part of the selfish 'demonising of the poor' by government, businesses and society generally which seems a trend since the late 20th Century.

The glint of light at the end of the tunnel is the remark by the RLA that Government is being forced to rethink a separate but equaully opressive initiative;

The West Midlands pilot of using landlords to ID check tenants has shown that rather than deterring illegal immigrants, this is much more likely to discriminate against, and add to the problems in finding a home by, the sizeable minority of UK Citizens who don't have photo ID in the form of Passports or DLs.
http://news.rla.org.uk/limited-evidence-proves-need-to-think-again-on-migrant-rental-checks/

Given that this may well correlate in part with not being able to afford overseas travel or a car, you'd have thought that the Home Office geeks could come up with an anti-economic-migrant strategy which doesn't just bash the indiginous poor?

cattermole

I have successfully argued in the past on behalf of my daughter that it is Discrimination on behalf of the Agents if they exclude you from renting when you are unable to work because of severe disability and therefore have no choice but to claim benefits.

Agents also have a duty to work with the Equality Act 2010 the same as anyone else does.

https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/discrimination/about-discrimination/equality-act-2010-discrimination-and-your-rights/

It means that they have to make reasonable adjustments, therefore excluding someone from renting when they are disabled and have no choice but to claim housing benefits would be discrimination. As disability is a protected characteristic. As long as you can demonstrate you can pay the rent with your benefits if you have a disability this should not exclude you from renting.

A larger Agency would probably take it on board if it was pointed out to them, if they didn't except it verbally a letter might do the trick.

cloo

Yet another sad fallout of government policy.


Some may decry landlords for greed or cruelty, but given that, stupidly, the system has evolved so that most are private, and most of those own just the one property that they may be heavily reliant upon income from, I can see why they're reluctant to take on those on benefits. If the gov't gives the message 'Benefits are bad, we'll cut them and cut them and cut them again', someone who relies on their rental income will understandably not want to take on a tenant whose income may suddenly dry up or gradually be withdrawn. Which is of course totally unfair in so many ways, but who cares about that, The Mail is busy painting a picture of a majority of benefits claimants as lazy or 'pretending' to be ill and people are swallowing that line.


I hadn't considered the mortgage lender line as well - so another reason it's not just about landlords being b*st*rds.

princeofpounds

Well, some banks were bailed out not most.

Depends what you mean by banks. The shareholders of the banks that got things wrong were not remotely bailed out.


They lost a lot of money, some of them lost all of their money.


Even those that pulled through the situation are still well down - Lloyds shareholders, for example, are still ~70% down from the 08 level.


Many staff (many of whom had nothing to do with any of the excesses) lost their jobs.


I say that not to inspire sympathy. Simply to point out that when most people talk about banks that got bailed out, they actually have totally the wrong image in their heads.


The people who really got bailed out were the debtholders of the banks; regular depositors are also debtholders of banks. So are big pension funds. Doesn't make such a good story - all those greedy grannies wanting public money to preserve their savings.


And there were a few senior people who had awarded themselves so much money over the years they could walk away from the smoking wreckage without significant pain and with no comeback. But they didn't get bailed out, they had already furnished their golden parachute before this all happened. But the number of these people is pretty small, maybe a dozen per bank.

Lord_Baltimore

All good points above eh Pixie?

Pixie5740 wrote: »

Given that most of the banks had to be bailed out with tax payers' money due to their own stupidity it seems they are biting the hand that feeds by then offering BTL mortgages that exclude benefit claimants as tenants. Gits.

sniggings

lonestar1 wrote: »

As you have given notice most councils will deem you as intentionally homeless Im afraid

that doesn't stop them going on the list.

it only means the council doesn't have to rehouse them immediately.

LittleMax

Pixie5740 wrote: »

Since that the Department of Social Security was dissolved in 2001 (except in Northern Ireland where it is still alive and kicking apparently) it makes it pointless advertising with no DSS.

Not pointless as it has become a generic term that everyone understands, much like calling a vacuum cleaner a hoover.

thesaint

cattermole wrote: »

I have successfully argued in the past on behalf of my daughter that it is Discrimination on behalf of the Agents if they exclude you from renting when you are unable to work because of severe disability and therefore have no choice but to claim benefits.

Agents also have a duty to work with the Equality Act 2010 the same as anyone else does.

https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/discrimination/about-discrimination/equality-act-2010-discrimination-and-your-rights/

It means that they have to make reasonable adjustments, therefore excluding someone from renting when they are disabled and have no choice but to claim housing benefits would be discrimination. As disability is a protected characteristic. As long as you can demonstrate you can pay the rent with your benefits if you have a disability this should not exclude you from renting.

A larger Agency would probably take it on board if it was pointed out to them, if they didn't except it verbally a letter might do the trick.

There would be no way on earth would I rent to your daughter after receiving a letter like that.