Landlords refuse any benefits claimants

julie777

Pixie5740 wrote: »

What about other social landlords such as Housing Associations? Have you registered with any?

A:>>>The housing association websites I found said you have to apply to the council in order to also join the HA lists. Council say we are adequately housed and not being evicted so we don't need council housing.


Why would being evicted ever count against you? A section 21 notice is a "no fault" notice. That won't ever count against you. Eviction for arrears on the other hand (section 8) probably would make renting more difficult in the future.

A>>> We'd never be in arrears but we gave notice because we don't want to be paying £1100 pcm after one son leaves home. We only then need 2 bedrooms. We haven't been sent a section 21 this time prob because we gave notice.

Your landlord cannot keep your deposit if you don't leave on time. What does that even mean anyway? The tenancy can only be ended by you, the tenant, serving notice or a court granting an eviction notice. The landlord cannot end the tenancy himself.

A>>> If all LLs refuse us we can either doss with family or stay at the house we are in - and continue to search. The Landlady is not re-letting immediately as it is due for some repairs they have put off then they are going to paint - at least the bits we haven't done. Our agreement does say we must forfeit deposit if do not leave on exit date! We rent through an agency who are pretty hot on grabbing every cent they can and even if the deposit doesn't get kept by them they will prob do what is best for their letter not their tenant.

Have you contacted Shelter to discuss your options?

I looked at their website but thought they would only help people who are much worse off than us. I may well call them in case they have more advice. :-)

I answered your other questions above.

cattermole

julie777 wrote: »

Thank you for your encouraging advice.
Ironically he only agency which has openly said they will not deal with tenants on benefits IS THE ONE WE HAVE BEEN WITH for 6 yrs!
I'm not going to upset them in case they also stop us getting the deposit back.
Most agencies say it is the landlords' instructions not to have DSS or HB.

Don't think like that re deposit if you are entitled to it back then you should get it that should not be a reason for not "upsetting" them re their policy. In my experience upsetting people is not a reason for not exercising your rights.

First check are they a member of the Letting Agents Ombudsman?

They know you are good tenants and pay your rent so what really is their problem?

cattermole

Floxxie wrote: »

1. Correct I agree that a landlord would not be justified in discriminating.
2. This is a direct discrimination which is not allowed and is made clear under current anti-discrimination law.

I also agree that there shouldn't be a difference between those claiming HB and those who don't, however until the political parties get involved to open up the BTL market to allow LL to accept HB tenants without extra costs, then the mortgage and insurance companies are justified in choosing their terms and conditions.

The difference is you can only discriminate in law against a "protected group" being on housing benefit alone does not put you in a protected group.

julie777

With widespread refusal to rent to benefits recipients surely there will be thousands more people having to live rough. Families with children may get help through social services but I can understand now how people can become homeless through no fault of their own! Some may even have money but if no-one believes you will pay your rent.....................................

Pixie5740

Shelter help all kinds of people with housing issues. I've contacted Shelter Scotland (since I'm in Scotland and we have different housing laws up here) and I found them to be very helpful. I wasn't homeless or under threat of imminently becoming homeless, my landlord was just a !!!!!!!! and I needed some advice.

cattermole

mrginge wrote: »

This is the part I can't comprehend. The suggestion that the policy is reasonably justified because the lender has imposed the restriction on the landlord. This suggests to me that -

1. A landlord without a mortgage would not be justified in imposing the same restriction.
2. A lender could theoretically freely impose other terms such as 'no blacks' that would then become reasonably justified.

As we all know, contract terms cannot override statute, so by definition if the restriction is in itself deemed as discriminatory, then the lender cannot enforce their term on the LL and the LL cannot then use it as a defence against a complaint.

I'd be interested to see any actual cases, but struggling to find anything. Of course without any to refer to this is jmo, just as the quoted comment and links previously are equally subjective.

A person after my own heart
Your point 2 really hits the nail on the head thank you We all know no way would any lender do this. But disability discrimination is less obvious until you start to think it through.

I tend to think the lack of a case is because of the reasons I gave before.

Most people are just desperate to find somewhere to live it says "no benefits" they accept this if they are disabled.

To get to the point of challenging the lender or insurance policy what is the likely hood of that happening when you are desperate to find somewhere to live? You would struggle to find legal advice for free and even if you did to get legal aid would be an upward and very difficult battle.

However someone who say wanted to borrow money specifically to let to disabled people (I might) would be in a very strong position to challenge such a lender/insurance policy.

I only know these things because on a personal level I have challenged it but on behalf of someone else. Including taking the government on for disability discrimination and winning. But it took 4 years and an amazing para legal in the voluntary sector to do it.

I couldn't do it now because there are no Law Centres left open in the whole of the West Midlands. Access to legal aid is basically impossible and who would want to take it on when they just want to find somewhere to live?

However I do believe by empowering people they can make a good case to say the agent as in this original post and it could change an outcome.

julie777

cattermole wrote: »

Don't think like that re deposit if you are entitled to it back then you should get it that should not be a reason for not "upsetting" them re their policy. In my experience upsetting people is not a reason for not exercising your rights.

First check are they a member of the Letting Agents Ombudsman?

They know you are good tenants and pay your rent so what really is their problem?

Exactly! But a member of staff has adopted this policy and his colleague told me this in an email. Their website has logos of NAEA and ARLA but no mention of the LA ombudsman.
Does that matter?

sniggings

julie777 wrote: »

MY particular council certainly IMPLIED we cannot get any help from them whatsoever but perhaps I should check that.

Yep, get asking, it will just mean you don't go into the top band but into one of the lower bands.

cattermole

julie777 wrote: »

Exactly! But a member of staff has adopted this policy and his colleague told me this in an email. Their website has logos of NAEA and ARLA but no mention of the LA ombudsman.
Does that matter?

I'm fairly certain that being a member of those organisations means they have signed up to the Property Ombudsman although it is not regulatory as such mores the pity but can have some influence on outcomes..

Quite interesting really on the Property Ombudsman website nothing what so ever about equality duties I could see from a quick run through!!! I feel a complaint coming on!

If it were me I would make an official complaint about this email from the agent saying you cannot let because you are on benefits. Make it to the Agent boss person in writing and say you believe it is discriminatory quote reasons why, also ask to see their official complaints procedure. State you have been a good tenant etc etc. Because let's face it the agent you are with now are best placed to find you another letting when you have been a good tenant and paid your rent despite being on benefits.


I did go to the Property Ombudsman once over not responding to requests to either dispute a return of a deposit or to put the pin in to refund. Anyway to cut a long story short it was the landlord who didn't want to refund basically because that's the kind of person he was and has been through nearly all the Letting agents in our town. The agent put the pin in and sent an extra cheque for £200 for inconvenience caused over delay.

So yes complain to them, it won't affect your current deposit because you have complained on a seperate matter,