Blanket ban on renting to tenants on benefits in rental property ads - lawful?

Red-Squirrel_2

Cakeguts wrote: »

I think what you mean is that everything should be the same as in a communist country and people shouldn't be allowed a choice in where they live?

They probably just mean there should be more social housing for those who need it rather than having to rely on small time private landlords.

Which is right.

SmashedAvacado

buglawton wrote: »

Curiously, the lease on a BTL I manage states black on white no subtenants to be allowed to begin a new tenancy if claiming benefits.

If there is new legislation banning this policy, can someone post a link to it?

English law doesn’t work like that. - we don’t codify all rules. It’s been held as potentially indirectly discriminatory by a court. That decision is potentially binding on all lower courts.

The clause in your lease sounds unworkable and almost certainly wouldn’t stand up to scrutiny.

Comms69

buglawton wrote: »

Curiously, the lease on a BTL I manage states black on white no subtenants to be allowed to begin a new tenancy if claiming benefits.

If there is new legislation banning this policy, can someone post a link to it?

There is no such legislation, nor case law, at present.

SmashedAvacado

you're right. it was settled out of court. but the principal is that this has the potential to be unlawful. you don't want to be the defendant in a funded test case

Comms69

SmashedAvacado wrote: »

you're right. it was settled out of court. but the principal is that this has the potential to be unlawful. you don't want to be the defendant in a funded test case

Conversely EVERYTHING has the potential to be unlawful.


I get your point. But on a matter of principal I stand by mine. Just be upfront with people.


The market will sort itself out.

Cakeguts

Red-Squirrel wrote: »

They probably just mean there should be more social housing for those who need it rather than having to rely on small time private landlords.

Which is right.

I agree there should be more social housing but attacking an individual on here won't achieve that aim because they aren't letting social housing.

Crashy_Time

How long would a void need to be before the OP drops the rent?

Pixie5740

There are some strange ideas about who can claim housing benefit in this thread. Not everyone who claims housing benefit is down on their luck. There are working people who are entitled to housing benefit. Many people claiming housing people are in the private rental sector. Those who live in social housing are not necessarily claiming housing benefit, many work are not in receipt of any benefits at all.

Crashy_Time

Pixie5740 wrote: »

There are some strange ideas about who can claim housing benefit in this thread. Not everyone who claims housing benefit is down on their luck. There are working people who are entitled to housing benefit. Many people claiming housing people are in the private rental sector. Those who live in social housing are not necessarily claiming housing benefit, many work are not in receipt of any benefits at all.

Very true. Where sentiment in the country is heading though (or has already arrived) is that anyone who puts in a 40 hour week should be able to buy a property, or rent a decent property at a decent price, hence the reason that Corbyn is heading for number 10, and the Tories are tinkering around with minimum wage and tax allowances.

Teamocil

Cakeguts wrote: »

I agree there should be more social housing but attacking an individual on here won't achieve that aim because they aren't letting social housing.

It's a battle on many fronts. One of those fronts is actively discouraging the parasitic buy to let brigade wherever the opportunity arises.