We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
The Forum is currently experiencing technical issues which the team are working to resolve. Thank you for your patience.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Private Landlords
Comments
-
Personally, benefits must be as good as not benefits. I mean, if you are only receiving benefits but can still afford the rent, it is not as though you can lose your job or something. It is the insurers that impose the restriction as they won't cover the rent if there is any benefits involved.0
-
Having seen the number of times a council can issue two letters on the same day to a landlord, one saying that the payment for a property will be £200 a week, and the next saying the payment will be nil, I am not surprised that insurers are cautious.0
-
The court case that @Jeremy535897 referred to earlier is a lower court decision. It is seen a persuasive but not binding on other courts. You do get some hype with these cases which are termed as a breakthrough or ground-breaking but in reality a landlord can choose who they want as tenants. There is a risk of a blow back but until, as has been suggested earlier, the insurance companies reflect the ground-breaking case then it is [discriminatory] business as usual.
- All land is owned. If you are not on yours, you are on someone else's
- When on someone else's be it a road, a pavement, a right of way or a property there are rules. Don't assume there are none.
- "Free parking" doesn't mean free of rules. Check the rules and if you don't like them, go elsewhere
- All land is owned. If you are not on yours, you are on someone else's and their rules apply.
0 -
Galloglass said:The court case that @Jeremy535897 referred to earlier is a lower court decision. It is seen a persuasive but not binding on other courts. You do get some hype with these cases which are termed as a breakthrough or ground-breaking but in reality a landlord can choose who they want as tenants. There is a risk of a blow back but until, as has been suggested earlier, the insurance companies reflect the ground-breaking case then it is [discriminatory] business as usual.
If NO DSS gets made illegal then LL's will stipulate an affordability check.
This whole situation regarding social house , has been made worse by the government stopping housing benefit going straight to the landlord. They no longer have good housing stock and are attempting to force landlords to provide social housing.
Already many LL do an affordability check. You will see Affordability checks more common place in the private rental market in the coming years,
0 -
They no longer have good housing stock and are attempting to force landlords to provide social housing.Social Landlords, the ones that have taken over council housing, have access to and use a wide variety of credit/affordability checks. It is in their interest to have tenants who can afford the rent and will be long term residents. It is called being professional.
Private landlords that can't run a business to a certain level, should not be in business. No point in blaming the tenants for the shortcomings in the business model.- All land is owned. If you are not on yours, you are on someone else's
- When on someone else's be it a road, a pavement, a right of way or a property there are rules. Don't assume there are none.
- "Free parking" doesn't mean free of rules. Check the rules and if you don't like them, go elsewhere
- All land is owned. If you are not on yours, you are on someone else's and their rules apply.
2 -
Galloglass said:They no longer have good housing stock and are attempting to force landlords to provide social housing.
Private landlords that can't run a business to a certain level, should not be in business. No point in blaming the tenants for the shortcomings in the business model.0 -
The real issue is that private landlords seek to manage their business risk by insuring and the insurers will not allow DSS. If the insurers change their policy terms, Landlords will be happy to let anyone who can pay rent.0
-
justwhat said:Galloglass said:The court case that @Jeremy535897 referred to earlier is a lower court decision. It is seen a persuasive but not binding on other courts. You do get some hype with these cases which are termed as a breakthrough or ground-breaking but in reality a landlord can choose who they want as tenants. There is a risk of a blow back but until, as has been suggested earlier, the insurance companies reflect the ground-breaking case then it is [discriminatory] business as usual.
If NO DSS gets made illegal then LL's will stipulate an affordability check.
This whole situation regarding social house , has been made worse by the government stopping housing benefit going straight to the landlord. They no longer have good housing stock and are attempting to force landlords to provide social housing.
Already many LL do an affordability check. You will see Affordability checks more common place in the private rental market in the coming years,
Don't want a DSS tenant? Just ask all applications to include income details, and bin the ones that include benefits.
Not something I'd do, not even something I'd endorse but there's zero way this can be enforced.
As I've said before, my DSS tenants were lovely.0
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply

Categories
- All Categories
- 350.5K Banking & Borrowing
- 252.9K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 453.3K Spending & Discounts
- 243.5K Work, Benefits & Business
- 598.2K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 176.7K Life & Family
- 256.6K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards