UC housing cost suppport - no rental contract scenario

seatbeltnoob

Hello

Privately renting from a relative. They are trying to sell up due to them divorcing and having to sell the property we're renting.

They have informally asked us to leave and not pushing is to go - although we understand their situation and realise we need to go. We (me and my partner) receive Housing cost support. Had a contract that lapsed recently. So AST contract ended so we're in a periodic tenancy I believe??

Anyway, landlord will sell to a fellow landlord who he knows. The fellow landlord is likely to want us out to turn the property into HMO to get more rent.

Our landlord has got the prospective landlord to allow us in the property until we can find another place to rent.

I am unsure about the situation with regards to housing costs, new LL would like us to pay rent, but are not going to write a new AST for us. Does that mean it doesn't meet the condition of UC housing support (no contract)?

huckster

But your UC Housing has already been verified and included within the claim, so your question is really, whether you need to inform UC about change of circumstances, as the landlord has changed ?

I would argue that existing contract with you as tenant paying rent has (or will be ) transferred to new landlord, as you are tenants still legally occupying the property.  The new landlord, if they wanted you out of the property would have to go through correct legal process to force you to leave if this were necessary.

If you wanted to be pedantic, you could inform UC of the change and they may ask for written confirmation that you still had liability to pay rent, but given complicated situation, if the new landlord was daft enough not to want to confirm anything, then a UC Decision Maker could decide that Housing could no longer be paid, as there was no longer any verified liability to pay rent.

seatbeltnoob

huckster said:

But your UC Housing has already been verified and included within the claim, so your question is really, whether you need to inform UC about change of circumstances, as the landlord has changed ?

I would argue that existing contract with you as tenant paying rent has (or will be ) transferred to new landlord, as you are tenants still legally occupying the property.  The new landlord, if they wanted you out of the property would have to go through correct legal process to force you to leave if this were necessary.

If you wanted to be pedantic, you could inform UC of the change and they may ask for written confirmation that you still had liability to pay rent, but given complicated situation, if the new landlord was daft enough not to want to confirm anything, then a UC Decision Maker could decide that Housing could no longer be paid, as there was no longer any verified liability to pay rent.

I really wouldn't want to leave anything to chance. Becasse I am renting from a relative. I've made sure the landlord has done their job and crossed the t's and dotted the is.

Even though they weren't too fussed about it. I made sure they took a deposit from me and kept it on a DPS. They do annual gas safety checks, that they've given me a contract.

I suspect at some point they will pick my tenancy up for review and check for contrived tenancy scenario. Then the change of landlord issue will be discovered. If/when an investigation occurs, the issue of landlord change will come up. So this would open up a new can of worms.

I guess there's only one solution to this. new LL must provide me with a new AST and if they don't then I dont legally owe them any rent.

I was under the impression that there must be a contract in place for rent to be owed - or is that the case only for when renting from close relatives?

marcia_

seatbeltnoob said:

huckster said:

But your UC Housing has already been verified and included within the claim, so your question is really, whether you need to inform UC about change of circumstances, as the landlord has changed ?

I would argue that existing contract with you as tenant paying rent has (or will be ) transferred to new landlord, as you are tenants still legally occupying the property.  The new landlord, if they wanted you out of the property would have to go through correct legal process to force you to leave if this were necessary.

If you wanted to be pedantic, you could inform UC of the change and they may ask for written confirmation that you still had liability to pay rent, but given complicated situation, if the new landlord was daft enough not to want to confirm anything, then a UC Decision Maker could decide that Housing could no longer be paid, as there was no longer any verified liability to pay rent.

I really wouldn't want to leave anything to chance. Becasse I am renting from a relative. I've made sure the landlord has done their job and crossed the t's and dotted the is.

Even though they weren't too fussed about it. I made sure they took a deposit from me and kept it on a DPS. They do annual gas safety checks, that they've given me a contract.

I suspect at some point they will pick my tenancy up for review and check for contrived tenancy scenario. Then the change of landlord issue will be discovered. If/when an investigation occurs, the issue of landlord change will come up. So this would open up a new can of worms.

I guess there's only one solution to this. new LL must provide me with a new AST and if they don't then I dont legally owe them any rent.

I was under the impression that there must be a contract in place for rent to be owed - or is that the case only for when renting from close relatives?

 This is not true. 

 If you continue to live there you are a tenant if they give you a AST or not. 

Won't satisfy UC but will give you rights as a tenant and you do have to pay rent or risk being evicted. 

huckster

It would be much easier for everyone if new LL issued tenancy agreement. Suggest the complications are explained to them.

HillStreetBlues

seatbeltnoob said:

I was under the impression that there must be a contract in place for rent to be owed - or is that the case only for when renting from close relatives?

Yes, there must be some form of contract for claiming housing costs.

A contract can be written or oral,  just with the latter it can be harder to prove.
So if you agree to pay the new LL £x  then you are libel for £x ( don't matter if you can't claim housing costs from UC) (But there are extra rules for tenants & LL)

calcotti

HillStreetBlues said:

seatbeltnoob said:

I was under the impression that there must be a contract in place for rent to be owed - or is that the case only for when renting from close relatives?

Yes, there must be some form of contract for claiming housing costs.

To be clear - there is no requirement for a tenancy agreement in order to claim the housing element of UC (but it's a lot easier to claim if there is one).
https://data.parliament.uk/DepositedPapers/Files/DEP2022-0860/116._Private_Rented_Sector_V22.0.pdf

Evidence of rental liability is usually contained within a tenancy agreement, which are formal documents. Evidence of rent liability may also be established from handwritten letters or notes from the landlord, a rent book or rent receipts or invoices.

A tenancy agreement or evidence of rent liability should include the:

 - tenant and landlord’s name, address and contact details

 - address of the property rented

 - date the tenancy began and how long the term is for

 - amount of rent and how often it is paid

 - deposit amounts – this is usually mentioned on the tenancy agreement, but it may not be clear as to whether it has been paid

 - signatures in all relevant places by all tenants and landlord/agent

An expired tenancy agreement is also acceptable evidence. Once expired, they automatically convert to become ‘Statutory Periodic’ agreements’ or ‘Rolling Tenancy’ agreements if a notice to quit is not served.

HillStreetBlues

calcotti said:

To be clear - there is no requirement for a tenancy agreement in order to claim the housing element of UC (but it's a lot easier to claim if there is one).
https://data.parliament.uk/DepositedPapers/Files/DEP2022-0860/116._Private_Rented_Sector_V22.0.pdf

Evidence of rental liability is usually contained within a tenancy agreement, which are formal documents. Evidence of rent liability may also be established from handwritten letters or notes from the landlord, a rent book or rent receipts or invoices.

A tenancy agreement or evidence of rent liability should include the:

 - tenant and landlord’s name, address and contact details

 - address of the property rented

 - date the tenancy began and how long the term is for

 - amount of rent and how often it is paid

 - deposit amounts – this is usually mentioned on the tenancy agreement, but it may not be clear as to whether it has been paid

 - signatures in all relevant places by all tenants and landlord/agent

An expired tenancy agreement is also acceptable evidence. Once expired, they automatically convert to become ‘Statutory Periodic’ agreements’ or ‘Rolling Tenancy’ agreements if a notice to quit is not served.

I think we are in agreement but want to check.

A person to claim the housing element doesn't have to have a tenancy agreement (although as you said much easier if there is one)  but will have to show that they are liable for the cost of rent.

poppy12345

HillStreetBlues said:

calcotti said:

To be clear - there is no requirement for a tenancy agreement in order to claim the housing element of UC (but it's a lot easier to claim if there is one).
https://data.parliament.uk/DepositedPapers/Files/DEP2022-0860/116._Private_Rented_Sector_V22.0.pdf

Evidence of rental liability is usually contained within a tenancy agreement, which are formal documents. Evidence of rent liability may also be established from handwritten letters or notes from the landlord, a rent book or rent receipts or invoices.

A tenancy agreement or evidence of rent liability should include the:

 - tenant and landlord’s name, address and contact details

 - address of the property rented

 - date the tenancy began and how long the term is for

 - amount of rent and how often it is paid

 - deposit amounts – this is usually mentioned on the tenancy agreement, but it may not be clear as to whether it has been paid

 - signatures in all relevant places by all tenants and landlord/agent

An expired tenancy agreement is also acceptable evidence. Once expired, they automatically convert to become ‘Statutory Periodic’ agreements’ or ‘Rolling Tenancy’ agreements if a notice to quit is not served.

I think we are in agreement but want to check.

A person to claim the housing element doesn't have to have a tenancy agreement (although as you said much easier if there is one)  but will have to show that they are liable for the cost of rent.

Yes that's correct.

HillStreetBlues

seatbeltnoob said:

 LL would like us to pay rent, but are not going to write a new AST for us. Does that mean it doesn't meet the condition of UC housing support (no contract)?

You don't need a new contract the old one will carry on unless you both agree a new one (rules of taking on tenant in situ).
I can see why the new LL won't enter into a new one, as then you get a new AST then it's for a minimum of 6 months.
If the new LL wants you out then they can serve a Section 21 once they own the property, but would have to wait 6 months if new AST agreed.
 

HillStreetBlues

This bit I'm unsure of as more to do with UC., but these are my thoughts.

As the AST carries over, you are still liable for payment, as you have shown UC this I can not see why you would need to inform DWP about the change.
Your liability hasn't changed just who you pay.