Can A Landlord's Mortage Refuse To Rent To A Disabled Person On Benefits But Accept Retired People?

MEM62

davidmcn wrote: »

But disability is, and given that the disabled are more likely to be on benefits, I can see a case for it constituting indirect discrimination.

That is not a genuine argument and you would never be able to make that link as a legal precedent. There are many people with disabilities that work. Likewise, there are many that are able-bodied that don't.

davidmcn

MEM62 wrote: »

There are many people with disabilities that work. Likewise, there are many that are able-bodied that don't.

That's not how the concept of indirect discrimination works. Disabled people, as a group, are more likely to be benefit claimants than the non-disabled.

Think of another example - say, an employer imposing the same minimum height requirement for all job applicants. That's indirect sex discrimination, no matter how many tall women you can find who could comply with it.

There would need to be some sort of objective justification for having such policies. Which there may well be, but you can't argue that the whole thing is outside the scope of the Equality Act.

MEM62

davidmcn wrote: »

There would need to be some sort of objective justification for having such policies. Which there may well be, but you can't argue that the whole thing is outside the scope of the Equality Act.

There is, benefit tenants are higher risk. It is a genuine and provable justification for the policy. So again, you will not be able to twist this into a anti disability discrimination case. It won't wash not matter how you try to argue it because it genuinely isn't.

lisyloo

I presume a landlord can decide not to take a tenant without giving a reason.
Therefore unless they actually stated “no benefits” then this would be very hard to enforce?
I realise they stated it in this case but I’m suggested they would not state it if they knew it was illegal and just refuse the tenant anyway.

onwards&upwards

This might be of interest, there is an inquiry currently open and hearing evidence:

https://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/work-and-pensions-committee/inquiries/parliament-2017/inquiry18/


Also, report from Shelter:

https://england.shelter.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0009/1581687/Stop_DSS_Discrimination_-_Ending_prejudice_against_renters_on_housing_benefit.pdf

onwards&upwards

MEM62 wrote: »

There is, benefit tenants are higher risk. It is a genuine and provable justification for the policy. So again, you will not be able to twist this into a anti disability discrimination case. It won't wash not matter how you try to argue it because it genuinely isn't.

Where is the evidence for this (real, not anecdotal)?

-taff

kingstreet wrote: »

Which lender please?
Adverse publicity has convinced RBS Group (NatWest incl) to abandon this policy and others have/will follow suit;-
https://www.housingrights.org.uk/news/NatWest-ends-benefit-BTL-restrictions

Even if a lender removes this restiction do you really think a landlord who doesn't want someone on benefits will accept them. No-one has to provide a reason why they aren't renting to someone, they can just reject them with no explanation

Carrot007

theartfullodger wrote: »

Piffle: Of course the retired are benefits


Me, 71, on 6 benefits....
- state pension
- winter fuel allowance
- £10 Xmas bonus (bonkers, must cost that to run..)
- 'bus pass
- free eye tests
- free prescriptions...

You knew what I meant MR Pedantic ;-)

-taff

onwards&upwards wrote: »

Where is the evidence for this (real, not anecdotal)?

Well, this neatly explains why landlords in general are not interested in renting to those on benefits
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/775002/EPLS_main_report.pdf


There may be no statistics available for the reasons why those on benefits are either a higher risk beyond inflated or refused landlord insurance.

onwards&upwards

-taff wrote: »

Well, this neatly explains why landlords in general are not interested in renting to those on benefits
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/775002/EPLS_main_report.pdf


There may be no statistics available for the reasons why those on benefits are either a higher risk beyond inflated or refused landlord insurance.

Thanks, I do understand why, but I don’t believe that a disabled person on benefits represents any higher risk in reality.

After all, anyone can become disabled, or unemployed at any time.

If anything, if a disabled person finds a suitable home with a fair landlord, they are more likely to be a stable long term tenant I would have thought.

I do believe that ‘no DSS’ amounts to indirect discrimination and I don’t think it will be long before it becomes illegal.