Activists protested at the weekend against letting agents and their alleged ban of tenants on benefits.
Saturday morning’s demonstration began outside the town hall but then moved to various agency branches.
The Hackney Digs group protest was after members approached 50 letting agents in the borough, claiming to be benefits recipients looking for a property.
According to Digs, almost half of the agents said they had a “no DSS” policy.
Digs used social media to organise its protest, saying on Facebook: “Letting agents refuse to house people on housing benefit.
“This is terrible for lots of people, from people claiming benefit to top up their low wages, to single parents, to disabled people.
“The number of people claiming benefits to cover their rent has soared recently because rent has gotten so expensive.
“And now more and more letting agents also refuse to house people who work part time, are self employed or don’t earn high enough wages.
“Where are all of these people supposed to go?
“With steep house prices and very little social housing, private renting is the last chance for more and more people in London to be housed.”
ARLA managing director David Cox said: “Agents must not discriminate on grounds of any protected characteristics.
“However, a letting agent is contractually required to find the best possible tenant for their landlord clients.
“The way in which housing benefits are paid, in arrears, does not correlate to rent payments, which are required in advance.”
We have just started lettings this year. We are happy to take DSS as long as they have a guarantor.
If they have a guarantor in place and you double it up with a rent protection policy with added legal cover why not?
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Smile Please,
I think others have said why taking DSS is not a great idea. Having experienced this myself with a landlord who specifically wanted DSS tenants as he felt he had a moral duty to help those less fortunate. I managed his properties for him and the rubbish I was told by the council was disgraceful all to try to keep the tenant is residence as long as they could. He no longer takes DSS tenants. I had a similar problem with one of my own tenants, a young lady who got herself pregnant and stopped paying her rent purely to get on the housing. Now I will not let to DSS as harsh as they is. Also many insurer’s do not accept DSS tenants so you should check to ensure your clients insurance will not be invalidated by taking DSS tenants, if not it could cost your PII negilgence insurers a big bill and your premiums may well rise if it all goes wrong. Getting court orders etc is costly yet ROGUE COUNCILS still lay the blame on landlords and advise tenants to go in comtempt of court by insisting they wait until the bailiffs turn up (ignoring a court order for possession). Still I guess that councils are political beasts whose policy is always to blame others, it is one area where they do have expertise!
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Will,
I don’t disagree the councils have it wrong.
BUT – If a tenants irrespective of DSS or Private rental has a guarantor, the landlord has rent and legal cover. They pay first month up front and they have a month and a half deposit. Why not accept them?
Just because they are DSS why discriminate? – Lots of good people on DSS that us it as a top up.
Two examples last week for us
1. £1300 per month property gets circa £650 per month H.B. her dad is standing guarantor and adding the top up. He is on a six figure salary with perfect credit score.
2. £950 per month property tenants fail on affordability (JUST) and have H.B. They work in a private surgery and the owner of the surgery again on 6 figures is standing guarantor. LL has also taken out rent and legal insurance.
Why would you discriminate against these two applicants?
Are they going to let their parents or employer down? – Even if they do we will chase the guarantor, are they not going to pay it?
You need to look at each case on there merits. Just saying no DSS is discriminatory, If they cannot afford the rent or deposit upfront or have a suitable guarantor then yes i would turn them away. But give these people a chance.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Smile you are new to lettings and have yet to discover the joys of it.
DSS tenants are great when everything is ok, a sudden change of circumstances will turn everything upside down.
Hopefully it will not happen to you, but, when you get arrears building up, landlords screaming at you, going to court to get an eviction date only to have it thrown in your face to be told to ‘we have to wait for bailiffs’ it gets pretty stressful.
I have never had a private tenant stay beyond a S.21
Your landlord will lose their minds, a testing time indeed
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
I fully appreciate its early days and touch wood no issues yet.
But again, if they have a guarantor and the LL has legal and rent cover, other than timescales whats the issue?
As with sales a lot of this can be managed by communication.
If the tenant is served two months notice, and you are helping them find another property and you highlight that they need a good reference thats half the battle won.
If you get wind they will ignore section 21, advise the LL of the possible delays but reassure them they are covered.
It little simplistic but i know from experiance of being a LL myself this is not always done.
I think the issue here is a lot of letting agents so no DSS and that is discrimination in my opinion. If you look at every case on merit that is fine. The two examples i have above are in my opinion ideal tenants and would welcome many more like them.
I would however not take a full DSS tenant with little rental history, failed a credit report and has no suitable guarantor.
And that is the thing there is a difference and agents should look at each let on its own merits.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
With regards to the rent guarantee insurance I would read the T&C’s chapter and verse, you will be amazed what they actually don’t cover in the small print. The majority, if not all, will not cover the first months rent arrears for example, so there is the first loss.
Good luck getting any money out of a guarantor too 🙂
You have a lot to learn young Jedi
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
You could be right, But i do believe in giving everybody a chance.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
As do I, as do my Landlords, but once bitten and all
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
I was the same, always wanted to give everybody a chance but you quickly learn that many people will take advantage of that. It’s not just timescales that’s the problem, in fact that’s minor. It’s the cost of loss of rent and court action. I have not found many insurance policies that would guarantee a rent that relies all or partly on benefits. Like has already been said the small print may say different. If you are happy it’s cast iron then great and I hope it works with no problems but I would act cautiously. It sounds like you are putting in place everything you can to protect your client but guarantors are notoriously difficult to get anything out of.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
The main problem are local councils. They will advise DSS tenants to remain in situ and ignore a Section 21 Notice. They simply won’t accept an application to rehouse the tenants unless they have been physically evicted (at great expense, lengthy delay and enormous stress) as they would have made themselves ‘voluntarily homeless.’ As an ARLA agent myself, I believe I would be failing tioact in teh best interests of my clients if I were to not advise them of this when considering DSS tenants – Back to you David Cox!
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
You are right that the council will advise DSS tenants to remain in situ and ignore a section 21 but this is also true of private renters who have fallen on hard times and need to be homed by the council.
If more letting agents / landlords accepted DSS they would not advise it.
I do not agree with councils advice for renters to stay put, but to just blame DSS is wrong.
As i say above if you have guarantor, and legal cover really should not be a problem.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Smile, the reality is that if a tenant starts out life on DSS payments and is in the system as it were, then they will almost certainly always go back to the council and will be advised to remain put until the eviction has taken place.
Private tenants can apply for housing benefit if things go wrong and as long as they have an understanding landlord, then all should be fine.
Private renters tend to go out and get another property when they are served notice. They don’t go down to the council and ask for a property.
Other issues surround the payment of the money as it goes to the tenants directly, a change in policy that has led to an increase in rent arrears for DSS tenants. You can have the payments switched to the landlord or agent but that’s after 8 weeks of arrears has built up.
The main issue here is when the landlord requires their property back regardless of the tenants financial situation, they have an increased risk of a protraction eviction, just when you don’t need it, if you have a DSS tenant.
Also watch out for a tenants change in circumstances, if a tenant gets work or their benefits change for whatever reason, then the council can ask for all the rent back they paid over whatever period of non-entitlement. That could be thousands and here is the kicker, they don’t ask the landlord, you have to pay it back and you can’t get out of it. So you will have to ask the landlord, nice conversation, or chase the tenant, good luck! Oh and they can go back years.
Remember, you need to know your tenants and their current financial situation.
I agree that people on HB payments should not be shunned or demonised; they have every right to a home as the next person.
So rather than picket outside Estate Agency offices, go stand outside local councils and ask them to change the way they operate.
Stop telling tenants to stay put when a section 21 is served. Re-house them, its a legal notice and the landlord will get possession, so why prolong it, house them!
Stop telling tenants to stay put when a section 8 notice & ground for rent arrears is served, all that happens is more costs go to landlords and more rent is lost. (Bearing in mind one of the policies they stand by is not housing tenants in arrears!).
Sort out all your empty homes and house people who need it.
Make it easier for landlords to take DSS tenants, not harder or more risky.
Build more homes.
Stop housing people that don’t need it and have resources of their own.
Stop paying gazillions of benefits to people that should not be getting it, then you can use that for housing.
I’ve seen first hand elderly people told to walk the street and turned away at the councils housing office door, yet people less deserving, more able to deal with their situation better, are being housed because they know how to play the system better than others.
Rant over!
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
SP Sorry you have a rude awakening due anytime soon. It will only take one bad tenant to convince you. The letting agent has a duty to protect the landlord (your client) and while there are good tenants on benefits, the main reason for the NO DSS, is generally pointed directly at those DSS tenants from hell that invariably are rejected and kicked out by councils. No matter how much protection you have, it doesn’t stop the tenant from hell destroying and not paying rent and the work involved and heartache for the landlord to put it back. Renting is a high risk business for agent/landlord and generally in favour of the tenant ……. never for get this.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
I would suggest their time is better spent at the job centre looking for a job so they can contribute to society instead of protesting against those who are already contributing just a thought thats all.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
I had one of our current DSS tenants walk in this morning and said that housing are halfing her benefit, something to do with a £23,000 benefit cap now in place.
She said she will no longer be able to afford full rent. I will now need to call the landlord and let him know this, then I will have to tell him how long this process will take and what needs to be done and when.
Already looking forward to the call.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
If the local council followed the Secretary of States guidelines in the Homelessness Code of Guidance
for Local Authorities issued by DCLG they might take a different view of automatically telling tenants to stay put. Most councils I’ve dealt with aren’t even aware of it, much less follow the guidelines.
A small snippet from chapter 8 –
The Secretary of State considers that where a person applies for accommodation or assistance (from a local authority) in obtaining accommodation,
and:
(a) the person is an assured shorthold tenant who has received proper notice in accordance with s.21 of the Housing Act 1988;
(b) the housing authority is satisfied that the landlord intends to seek possession;
and
(c) there would be no defence to an application for a possession order;
then it is unlikely to be reasonable for the applicant to continue to occupy the accommodation beyond the date given in the s.21 notice, unless the housing authority is taking steps to persuade the landlord to withdraw the notice or allow the tenant to continue to occupy the accommodation for a reasonable period to provide an opportunity for alternative accommodation to be found.
Typically councils will say they have nothing available, even in areas where they have property sitting empty.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
So these protesters as the type of potentially trouble making tenants they think landlords should accept as tenants? I am sure the agents and landlords of Hackney and surrounding boroughs will give “the Lord Mayor of Private Renters” a warm reception if she shows up at their offices!
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
ON A SIDE NOTE: Here is one for the DDS lobby. Tenant not paid for over 12 months (DSS paying portion), landlord been to court with Sec 21 and Sec 8 etc. The foremost rejected for incorrect dates. It didn’t make the tenant sit up and start paying rent. Police raid found cannabis factory, also lodger in property contravening tenancy agreement. At the Sec 8 hearing said he had found a job (not told DSS) and would agree to pay areas at £5 per week (LOL) and adjourned for 6 weeks. £30 paid but not his monthly amount. Shelter represent him and during the adjourned hearing came out, without warning that a previous landlord at another property had taken a deposit from the DSS and no record can be found that it had been protected. Consequently the penalty of 3 times the deposit is due to the tenant. Here is the killer ……..Even though the deposit had ben paid to a previous landlord at another property (totally unknown to the new landlord at his property) a high profile “stated case” said that the deposit was for the tenant not the landlord and that the original landlord was duty bound to have forwarded the deposit when he changed property/landlord. He didn’t but the new landlord incurs the liability and has to credit the statutory penalty of 3 times the deposit to the tenant and with some money he has found brings the outstanding rent below two months rent. The argument was that Sec 8 was invalid and possession order issued as the judge disagreed. Guess what, it is now going to court of appeal. Shelter has arranged legal aid, and the appeal papers have asked for sufficient time for a QC to go through the case before they announce a court hearing …. months later? Meanwhile the tenant isn’t paying any rent, and advised not to leave by the council and shelter. A new Sec 21 was issued but now looks to be invalid due to the deposit fiasco.
The landlord is beside himself, running up debts through no fault of his owen. Try telling him to accept DSS ever again.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Awful case and heart goes out to LL as sounds a real nightmare.
I would ask though, did he have rent and legal cover? – Would not be anywhere near as bad if he did.
Sounds like inexpeianced LL and maybe the Letting agent did not offer him the right advice & products explaining the benefits.
Sounds like a lot of issues not just that it was a DSS tenant.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
LL did it himself until he came to me for help. Missing the point here, the tenant won’t pay and using property (was) for illegal purposes. The LL has to go to court for a possession order no matter what. Meanwhile the system is against the landlord, he can’t claim on his insurance without the possession order and if DSS find out he was not entitled to the housing benefit they will ****** that back from the LL not the tenant. Both the council and Shelter know what the tenant is doing. The tenant has no money, the landlord will incur QC fee’s (no cover for that), already has string of court fees and rent unpaid and not a cat in hells chance of seeing any of it from the tenant. If the appeal succeeds it is forecast it will take months to get back to court and a Sec 21 will always be invalid. The judge made it clear that they are not willing to give a possession order for discretionary grounds. We are awaiting a call to say the boiler is on the blink!!!!!
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Looks like I’m going to be controversial here (now THERE’S a surprise…)
Okay – here’s the thing – I ran a Lettings Company some time ago.
One of the first questions I was asked on a regular basis, usually quite sheepishly and expectant, was ‘Do you take DSS?’
My answer was always, without question or hesitation ‘No…’
Which was IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWED by
‘we take people.’
Most of us are our next paycheque away from being benefits claimants.
We deal with people first and foremost.
The label they wear tells you little or nothing.
There are good and bad in every walk of life – I try to seek out the good wherever possible.
I’ll do the honours and ‘Dislike’ the comment myself – get it off to a start, shall I…?
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
I have a list of bad tenants that are not DSS. I have a list of DSS tenants that would give you the shirt off their back. Benefit Street has highlighted the stero types that no landlord wants. So the question may need asking who do landlords consider are the greatest risk DSS or not to be DSS. At least the latter are normally employed and can be chased for money owed while you haven’t a hope with many DSS?
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register