NO DSS Letting Agents and Landlords

David2710

531063 said:

David2710 said:

So my question is this, why are landlords and letting agencies STILL despite legal precedent discriminating against sick and disabled people? Even Banks and Building societies have reversed the ‘NO DSS’ policies in light of recent court rulings and media pressure.

Because 95% of my tenants who don't pay the rent are on benefits, when you contact your MP ask him to go back to the old system and pay the rent money direct to the LL, then I will start taking on tenants who are paid via benefits.

Read my previous post. LHA can now be paid direct to the LL (upon request) or when rent is overdue by two calendar months. Universal Credit can be paid immediately via a loan. Legacy benefits such as ESA and PIP are paid immediately. As a matter of interest how many of your 'professional' tenants will be on the dole when furlough ends? What happens when your 'professional couple' split up and can non longer pay the rent? How many of your 'professional tenants' have provided bogus banks statements, pay slips and references? Being a LL is not an exact science and is not risk free. Understandably part-time Btl  LL's want their cake and want to eat it, they also want to hedge their bets, but there's no excuse for blatant prejudice and discrimination.   

David2710

GDB2222 said:

David2710 said:

Lover_of_Lycra said:

There was a similar thread the other week. 

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6252765/local-housing-allowance-renting-in-the-private-rented-sector

Yes thanks that was me again making my case. This is just a follow up before I put my case to my MP. 

I'm not sure what practical changes you want? 

Please read the OP I cannot be clearer. I'm old enough to remember when LL's left a sign in the window which says, 'No Irish, No dogs' and others even more offensive. Some LL's try to be clever by citing religion and certain foods as an excuse not to rent to tenants they don't like. I have written to my MP to  look into the situation and to reform the anti-discrimination act to include ALL groups including sick and disabled people. So in future if any LL or letting agency is caught refusing a property to tenants on benefits will be prosecuted, no ifs no buts. If a LL cannot afford to take a short term risk then IMHO they shouldn't be in the business. 

GDB2222

David2710 said:

GDB2222 said:

David2710 said:

Lover_of_Lycra said:

There was a similar thread the other week. 

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6252765/local-housing-allowance-renting-in-the-private-rented-sector

Yes thanks that was me again making my case. This is just a follow up before I put my case to my MP. 

I'm not sure what practical changes you want? 

Please read the OP I cannot be clearer. I'm old enough to remember when LL's left a sign in the window which says, 'No Irish, No dogs' and others even more offensive. Some LL's try to be clever by citing religion and certain foods as an excuse not to rent to tenants they don't like. I have written to my MP to  look into the situation and to reform the anti-discrimination act to include ALL groups including sick and disabled people. So in future if any LL or letting agency is caught refusing a property to tenants on benefits will be prosecuted, no ifs no buts. If a LL cannot afford to take a short term risk then IMHO they shouldn't be in the business. 

You seem to be denying the possibility that any tenants are terrible. You want landlords to have to take every tenant who applies, however awful they are? Have I really understand you correctly?

I agree that advertisements should not be discriminatory, but I don’t see what you do about landlords who say that they didn’t like a particular tenant? 

SpiderLegs

GDB2222 said:

David2710 said:

GDB2222 said:

David2710 said:

Lover_of_Lycra said:

There was a similar thread the other week. 

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6252765/local-housing-allowance-renting-in-the-private-rented-sector

Yes thanks that was me again making my case. This is just a follow up before I put my case to my MP. 

I'm not sure what practical changes you want? 

Please read the OP I cannot be clearer. I'm old enough to remember when LL's left a sign in the window which says, 'No Irish, No dogs' and others even more offensive. Some LL's try to be clever by citing religion and certain foods as an excuse not to rent to tenants they don't like. I have written to my MP to  look into the situation and to reform the anti-discrimination act to include ALL groups including sick and disabled people. So in future if any LL or letting agency is caught refusing a property to tenants on benefits will be prosecuted, no ifs no buts. If a LL cannot afford to take a short term risk then IMHO they shouldn't be in the business. 

You seem to be denying the possibility that any tenants are terrible. You want landlords to have to take every tenant who applies, however awful they are? Have I really understand you correctly?

I agree that advertisements should not be discriminatory, but I don’t see what you do about landlords who say that they didn’t like a particular tenant? 

What the OP wants is a 1970s social housing model, which is fair enough I suppose but probably not that popular an opinion, even with their MP.

David2710

SpiderLegs said:

GDB2222 said:

David2710 said:

GDB2222 said:

David2710 said:

Lover_of_Lycra said:

There was a similar thread the other week. 

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6252765/local-housing-allowance-renting-in-the-private-rented-sector

Yes thanks that was me again making my case. This is just a follow up before I put my case to my MP. 

I'm not sure what practical changes you want? 

Please read the OP I cannot be clearer. I'm old enough to remember when LL's left a sign in the window which says, 'No Irish, No dogs' and others even more offensive. Some LL's try to be clever by citing religion and certain foods as an excuse not to rent to tenants they don't like. I have written to my MP to  look into the situation and to reform the anti-discrimination act to include ALL groups including sick and disabled people. So in future if any LL or letting agency is caught refusing a property to tenants on benefits will be prosecuted, no ifs no buts. If a LL cannot afford to take a short term risk then IMHO they shouldn't be in the business. 

You seem to be denying the possibility that any tenants are terrible. You want landlords to have to take every tenant who applies, however awful they are? Have I really understand you correctly?

I agree that advertisements should not be discriminatory, but I don’t see what you do about landlords who say that they didn’t like a particular tenant? 

What the OP wants is a 1970s social housing model, which is fair enough I suppose but probably not that popular an opinion, even with their MP.

I just want fairness so that any property advertised on Zoopla/Trovit/Right Move/GumTree etc., is open to anyone who can afford the rent. The latest trend is for landlords to 'consider' DSS on the proviso the rent is underwritten by a guarantor and the tenant is working a min 20hrs a week.  That's simply unacceptable because most people on benefits don't have that luxury. LL's know that and use it as a cover against a potential law suit for discrimination.

This whole problem stems from a complete lack of affordable social housing (unlike the 70's) as successive governments have prioritised home ownership over social rent and have stopped building social housing altogether. And by affordable and I don't mean the Tory definition of affordable (£400K), I mean three times average salary which is currently 3 x £25K = £75K per starter home. That wouldn't even buy a small parking space in central London.

The housing system and in particular the private rented sector clearly needs urgent root and branch reform because unless prices/rents are linked to average salaries, there will, I predict be a price correction like we haven't seen since the early 90's and the ERM crisis. Some people are already talking about CPO's (compulsory purchase orders) to rectify the housing shortage.

The current social housing model, or Home Choice Lettings, is also a major contributing factor in the housing crisis because demand far exceeds supply. Some people have been in temporary housing (B&B's Hostels, Mobile Homes etc) for over a decade and for many the private rented sector is the only option available. Sadly however, the only LL's offering properties to that particular cohort are the 'slum' LL's who charge extortionate rents for substandard housing. This 'greed is good madness' needs to stop.  

anselld

I would suggest the main reason LL do not like letting to benefit tenants is not anything personal against the tenants, it is because Councils have a long track record of making life difficult for benefit claimants which then has a knock on effect on their ability to pay rent.  Furthermore, Councils regularly advise tenants to stretch eviction to the full extent of the law.
Councils may be forced into this behaviour by the Government policy and social housing shortage, but none-the-less it makes it inevitable that Landlords will avoid operating in that environment if they have a choice.

SpiderLegs

David2710 said:

SpiderLegs said:

GDB2222 said:

David2710 said:

GDB2222 said:

David2710 said:

Lover_of_Lycra said:

There was a similar thread the other week. 

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6252765/local-housing-allowance-renting-in-the-private-rented-sector

Yes thanks that was me again making my case. This is just a follow up before I put my case to my MP. 

I'm not sure what practical changes you want? 

Please read the OP I cannot be clearer. I'm old enough to remember when LL's left a sign in the window which says, 'No Irish, No dogs' and others even more offensive. Some LL's try to be clever by citing religion and certain foods as an excuse not to rent to tenants they don't like. I have written to my MP to  look into the situation and to reform the anti-discrimination act to include ALL groups including sick and disabled people. So in future if any LL or letting agency is caught refusing a property to tenants on benefits will be prosecuted, no ifs no buts. If a LL cannot afford to take a short term risk then IMHO they shouldn't be in the business. 

You seem to be denying the possibility that any tenants are terrible. You want landlords to have to take every tenant who applies, however awful they are? Have I really understand you correctly?

I agree that advertisements should not be discriminatory, but I don’t see what you do about landlords who say that they didn’t like a particular tenant? 

What the OP wants is a 1970s social housing model, which is fair enough I suppose but probably not that popular an opinion, even with their MP.

I just want fairness so that any property advertised on Zoopla/Trovit/Right Move/GumTree etc., is open to anyone who can afford the rent. The latest trend is for landlords to 'consider' DSS on the proviso the rent is underwritten by a guarantor and the tenant is working a min 20hrs a week.  That's simply unacceptable because most people on benefits don't have that luxury. LL's know that and use it as a cover against a potential law suit for discrimination.

This whole problem stems from a complete lack of affordable social housing (unlike the 70's) as successive governments have prioritised home ownership over social rent and have stopped building social housing altogether. And by affordable and I don't mean the Tory definition of affordable (£400K), I mean three times average salary which is currently 3 x £25K = £75K per starter home. That wouldn't even buy a small parking space in central London.

The housing system and in particular the private rented sector clearly needs urgent root and branch reform because unless prices/rents are linked to average salaries, there will, I predict be a price correction like we haven't seen since the early 90's and the ERM crisis. Some people are already talking about CPO's (compulsory purchase orders) to rectify the housing shortage.

The current social housing model, or Home Choice Lettings, is also a major contributing factor in the housing crisis because demand far exceeds supply. Some people have been in temporary housing (B&B's Hostels, Mobile Homes etc) for over a decade and for many the private rented sector is the only option available. Sadly however, the only LL's offering properties to that particular cohort are the 'slum' LL's who charge extortionate rents for substandard housing. This 'greed is good madness' needs to stop.  

Yep, sorry I was generalising a bit with the 1970s comment, but essentially I meant what you’ve put above, I.e. -
Rent controls and taxpayer funded public sector housing.

theartfullodger

Please read the OP I cannot be clearer. I'm old enough to remember when LL's left a sign in the window which says, 'No Irish, No dogs' and others even more offensive. ...................

I too, sadly, remember such signs.

I grant there are many who might say there are more offensive signs than "No Dogs", but could you clarify (without examples preferably) what sort of thing would be more offensive than "No Irish", please?

Best wishes to all, whoever you are, wherever you come from, whatever your background, faith(or none), disability, ethnicity, age, gender, state of pregnancy, orientation ....

David2710

SpiderLegs said:

rik111 said:

You really want to force Landlords to accept tenants they don't want .? Why not go the whole hog and make it illegal to refuse any tenant that applies.
The fact is that, it is a huge risk to rent anything these days. It could take a year to get them out with no rent coming in and you could be handed a trashed property, cost can tun into 10's of thousands.
At least if you have a working couple with good credit you might have a chance of recovering a debt but no point even trying to go after anyone on benefits.

The govt have already made an unprecedented intervention in the rental market by banning evictions and forcing LLs to take a continuing hit on non-paying tenants.
I am not suggesting whether that was a good or bad policy given the pandemic, but regardless it demonstrates that there is a willingness to load more risk/cost onto LLs which will inevitably result in them looking to mitigate through higher rents or by tightening up on requirements.

You are referring to a temporary measure introduced to protect tenants during the pandemic. I am referring to a practice that has been in operation for years. The NO DSS clause has only been brought to the media's attention because of two recent court cases setting legal precedent. Lenders promptly reversed the NO DSS clause so there really isn't any excuse for LL's not to follow suit. You say LL's will recover losses by raising rent but there must a threshold and I think that threshold has already been breached. Keep this up and the government will have no choice but to cap rents. As said previously LL's who cannot afford the short term risk or a hit to their personal finances during what is a record period of low interest rates really shouldn't be in this business.

David2710

All these replies and I still haven't heard one good reason why the vast majority of LL's reject LHA claimants. I've just searched for Studios and 1 bed properties in London and I discovered hundreds of studio flats at well below LHA. So let's just look at this for moment. There's no problem with affordability, there's no problem with a deposit, there's no problem with references, I can even pay 6 months rent in advance no problem (if the option were available), so give me one, just one reason why a LL would require a guarantor or that I work for 20hrs a week?. It's a total nonsense and can only conclude this is all based on prejudice and snobbery. Do they really think all LHA tenants are like the White Dee character from Channel 4's Benefit Street? I hope not.