The Difference Between DSS Tenants on Housing Benefit (HB) And DSS Tenants On Local Housing Allowance (LHA)

Paul wrote this on 2010-04-20 17:25:48 Likewise, well said my friend.
However, what I don't get about Nikki's situation is this; if she was renting and then found herself unemployed, housing benefit will cover the rent in full for 13 weeks, providing she had been meeting her rent liability before becoming unemployed.
This 13 week buffer should give enough time to find suitable alternative accomodation if the rent of the current property is so high that LHA will leave a shortfall between HB and rent. If she owned her property then lost it, well, that's a different story! 66

Emily wrote this on 2010-04-25 09:05:47 Dear 'landlord'

You should all be put into prison. I will not mince words. You are all selfish, heartless, non humans. How DARE you criticise ordinary (which is the majority of the population!) working people who are struggling to get by.
They cannot manage their money and that's why they are on benefits in the first place?! Try becoming a single parent because your husband abused you and being left with massive debts due to the divorce and not receiving a penny of what was supposed to be half of yours by law.
Then struggling to feed your child, much less have a roof over your head, in a place where the rent is so high, even middle class people cannot afford it!
You are sick.
Thank god people are campaigning to TAKE AWAY LANDLORDS OUTRAGEOUS POWER in this country so that tenants actually get stable and affordable accommodation. Bringing back the fair rent act allowing tenants to have a real home and no more 'assured shorthold agreements'. Believe me, change is coming because I'm personally involved in it and either you act like a decent human being or your precious property investments are going down the tubes which is all you rightly deserve pig. 67

The Landlord wrote this on 2010-04-25 10:09:10 lol @ Emily. 68

Airedale1 wrote this on 2010-04-25 10:11:23 Emily,

I'm not sure what power we apparently have that is excessive.
We are discussing benefits Tenants vs Private tenants.

It is simply that as an LHA claimant - neither you or I have any power whatsoever.

Your life and destiny is in the hands of the Governement and whatever they deem fit to throw at you is supposed to house you.

I didn't realise that £70pw could buy a house and maintain it forever.

If it did I would buy one a week.

You are obviously, upset over something that you have no control over.

When things go wrong, you are usually advised by your support worker to drag it out until your are evicted by a County Court.

Is that the power you are refering to?

Not very satisfactory is it?

And where is all the housing coming from at the moment?

It certainly isn't the government.

The fair rent act of any kind is no discouragement to me or anyone else. I would welcome it - but they are never resourced properly.

The current government have played around with housing for 13 years and they haven't got a bloody clue on how the housing market works.

It was a labour government that introduced the "Rent a room scheme" - is that as far as their imagination can go?

They introduced HMO legislation , that is flouted.
They introduced EPC's on all house sales or renters before they can be marketed.
They can be avoided by selling for cash or private sales.

They introduced HIP's - and took out the valuation bit to stop the surveyors from whinging.

Houseshares have now boomed and so after screwing that part of the market up and making many seaside towns into drug capitals of the World, they now want you to have planning permission for any more than 3 adults sharing a house that are not related.

But you don't need planning permission to convert a houseshare back into a single tenancy.

That means that Councils in the south of the country can no longer block a landlord from evicting a houseshare of say 5 people, getting an instant increase in capital value of 20%+ and then selling the house.

So a house with 5 adults now becomes 1, it has an increase in value, but 4 other people are now homeless.

Do you realise how many "Key Workers" this could affect?

It is the constant meddling that causes the problems.

Which way do you think rents will go?

Landlords simply look at the rules and work with or around them.

I would love to have more LHA claimants, but the government has made them a very bad risk.

If they hadn't, you would have more places to choose from.

I treat all my tenants with respect and I know my way with the system, but a new landlord can easily be destroyed financially by a non paying nutter or a slow benefits department.

There are 2 sides to every argument, I am concerned that your attitude is so appalling that you would draft legislation so that landlords are to be ruined - if they hurt your feelings.

No problem then - I will invest my family's hard earned cash abroad and house a Johnny Foreigner.

Ghetto's of empty houses, that councils have no money to spend on.
They are all over the country - just look at Anfield in Liverpool - it is a very scary place to walk through, even in broad daylight.

The rules that now govern that area simply mean that I would'nt even contemplate placing 50p in that Hell hole.

I cannot make any rent work in that area - it is a ghetto.
I didn't cause it - the local council did, by not allowing people to change uses of properties into what the market wanted.

Private investors need a chance to be creative to do something with it - but people want to "Control" things that they do not own. You want to add more rules so that people are treated in a better fashion.

A good sentiment, but where is the money coming from to both police it and make it happen?

It's a shame.

What a pathetic, spiteful attitude towards a simple supply and demand business.

If you want to raise standards - no problem - but someone will have to pay for it.

If its a landlord - they will want a return on any investment.

If it is a pension fund - they will want an even higher return and the rents won't be cheap.

I think you had better look after the people who are prepared to invest money into a market that will never go away.

Stop being bitter and bent and fix the governments silly benefit rules and just watch things improve.

It wouldn't cost much and the housing supply would increase big time.

A good analogy would be if in an attempt to house an LHA claimant I also had to receive a poke in the eye, I would soon learn that it was painful.

Take away the poke in the eye bit and I would take money from anyone who wanted my product or service.

Or is that too complicated for you? 69

Nikki wrote this on 2010-04-25 11:31:39 Hi Airedale,

Thank you for your reply to my posting.
I joined this forum to try and get some insight into the problems surrounding the whole rental market, as I am trying to understand it from both sides of the fence...ie the problems of the landlords and the tenants.

I have no immediate answers to many of issues raised on this website, but I am quickly learning that there are some severe problems which need tackling, especially when it comes to DSS tenants and the views many people on here seem to have of them.

I fully appreciate and understand every thing you have said and I take on board the fact that you have had problems with DSS tenants by not receiving rent on time etc...but like you also mentioned, this can mainly be due to the people who control the benefits payments and not the DSS claimant themselves!
You stated to Emily, "I would love to have more LHA claimants, but the government has made them a very bad risk". I am not going to try and argue against this, as My original argument was not to do with money, but more to do with the general attitude a lot of landlords have on here regarding the fact they assume that because someone is a DSS tenant, they are more likely to smash up the property or be completely untrustworthy! In other words be viewed almost as a criminal, without any real justification, other than a deluded view which immediately classes them as nothing more than a drop out, Wayne & Waynetta Slob type!

If anyone looks back at my own rental history, they will see I certainly do not fall into that catagory. I have never once damaged a property, unless I am to blame for all the flooding which occurred several years ago, where the house I occupied ended up with three feet of water throughout it!
Nor have I ever faulted on rents or caused any trouble for anyone. In fact, it is me who has ended up taking the landlords to court for their failures, which has been the closest I have come to causing any problems for landlords. Three individual landlords who were the ones who caused me problems and three cases won out right!

In answer to Paul's statement as to why he doesn't understand my current housing situation, I have already given a full answer in another posting on here, which more than explains how I have ended up in the situation I now find myself in. Please do not be offended when I say I am not up to constantly typing it all out again. Its bad enough being in my situation, without having to repeatedly explain it to everyone.

Although I am not interested in becoming part of a campaining group, I am interested to know what the group is or what she is involved in, that Emily has mentioned. I do agree that a lot of changes need to be made to the market, but if they are going to be made, then they need to be done in such a way, that it benefits all parties. It actually requires something to solve the issues for both sides and not just focus on giving more rights to one group than the other! 70

Airedale1 wrote this on 2010-04-25 13:07:56 Hello Nikki,

I started renting property about 4 years ago and I was warned off DSS tenants by the letting agents I used.

They told me about the problems that I would have and they said that they would not entertain such clients.

As a newbie, I wasn't going to go against them as I didn't have a clue on how to get tenants etc.
So I left it to them.

As renting a small 2 up, 2 down end terraced worked - I then borrowed £250k and bought 4 flats and 2 semis in Liverpool.

My wife thought I was nuts - but as the properties were no longer in my own town - I now had to find a different letting agent.

They were a bloody disaster! (they were a national chain)

They took on HB claimants and they were simply chasing commission.
They never did inspections, chased missing rent unless I chased them and charged me a great deal of money in set up fees etc.

From this I learned that the only person who looked after my interests was me!

So I then had to get debt collectors etc, - they are just the same - ie: hard bloody work!

To avoid going bust, I had to get help and fast - so I started networking with other landlords at local monthly meetings etc.

Then while I was trying to get my business back on track by borrowing more money for the missing rent that I hadn't received from the DSS tenants - the government changed the rules and started calling HB LHA.

I had no idea that I could have had direct payments until I was told that with the new LHA this option was to be abolished, unless a tenant was over 8 weeks in arrears.

When I approached Liverpool city council over some of my tenants, it wasn't long before I realised that I was on my own.

The help to me as a landlord was pitiful or non existant.

They were quick enough to tell me if I had broken any rules, but when it came to them processing a new LHA claim - they would drag it out for about 11 weeks.
The tenant would make an excuse of receiving no benefit - but I still had mortgages to pay.

It was a bloody nightmare! - I thought I would be repossessed.

I only survived, because my mother-in-law loaned me several thousand pounds.

Do you have any idea how stressful it was? - The interest rate was a lot higher than it is now.

So I made a decision, which was that all my tenants would have to have guarantors who were working or owned property. (See earlier comments).

I still get problems,but the biggest are from LHA claimants - they have no feedback from the LHA department, they have little or no progress reports and I have to threaten their guarantors.

It doesn't set up our relationship off to a good start, but it is so simple to fix!

But neither I or the LHA claimant have any control.

All that you can do is fight the department by threatening them with a complaint to the Local Government Ombusdmen.

They are quite surprised that I know the system.

They will either take you seriously or tell you to piss off and get another department to give you a hard time.

On the other hand - my tenants who are not on any benefit, move in, pay the rent and move out at a later date.

Now which type would you choose?

Have I criticised any benefit claimant yet?

No - but I have whinged a great deal about the system.

Now lets move on to me insuring a property.

I have found that over the last 2 years that if your insurance company does not know that you have a claimant - they will refuse to pay out!

This is discrimnation - I agree it can be a higher risk - but they need a severe beating for this.

Then what about the banks?
- If I told them I was buying a house for housing LHA claimants, they will not make you a mortgage offer. So you have to get the tenants in later and not disclose it, (Some may call it mortgage fraud).

So the whole system is designed against the landlord.

That is why you cannot get us to take you on.

But we also know about professional landlords that now specialise in LHA claimants... they tend to buy low quality housing, tart it up a bit and convert to a HMO.

It generates good cash flow, but they are hard to insure and tend to drop in value by about 20% to 30%.

That drop in value, has to be gotten back and hence remedial works can take time to accomplish.

All the faults stem from not listening to professional landord groups - they want to have a sucessful industry, clean standards and a vibrant market, but the Government keeps listening to protest groups, introducing another load of red tape and you simply get the duckers and divers flouting the rules, whilst the landlords who follow the rules are weighed down by more and more admin.

The pension companies will be the next lot to move into the market - then it may go very wrong indeed! - they will not take on excessive risk and certainly won't put up with rent defaulters.

They have a much louder voice and influence on Government - so lets watch this space. 71

Nikki wrote this on 2010-04-25 15:05:37 Hi again Airedale,

The reality is that the whole system is a complete mess! This is something which is all too common in many areas of business these days and is only being made worse with the poor standards of Government policies and departments which this country relies on.

I completed my degree in law many years ago, but I decided not to follow that path, as my heart wasn't truly into it. I worked in the Public Relations department of a large, very well known company in Leeds for 14 years. After suffering the prejudices and discrimination, which lost me my job there (caused partly by the management completely failing to act on any of the policies they were supposed to have in place to protect staff) I made the decision to return to studying law.

I decided the area I was going to concentrate on would be property law, as I see this as being an area where there is the potential to gain good employment, once I complete my studying.

What the discovery of this website has done is open up my eyes to a whole new avenue, which I believe needs addressing, not only on here in a heavily biased (no offence meant) landlord forum, but also in the whole industry itself. I have read virtually every page on this website and I have been taking notes of many of the complaints, arguments and discriminatory comments made from both sides of the argument. Having discussed this website with many of my peers where I am studying and also with a series of legal professionals, I am looking at using the possibility of quoting some of the arguments on here, in order to develop a strategy which will possibly help change the system.

I may not be successful, but I am in a very good position and in contact with some people in influential positions which may just benefit me should I come up with a strong enough strategy to take on the government. I have a long way to go with this and in time I will be seeking meetings with people from both the government and landlord associations in order to seek a way forward.

Let me make it clear, I am not they type of person who is going to come on here and call all landlords the scum of the earth, nor am I the type of person who claims the time will come when you will all burn in hell for your sins of trying to make a living by renting out houses! I am not that stupid and I am certainly not that ignorant either!
What I am though, is someone who is more than capable of tackling a tough situation with an open mind and clear head, something that 14 years in PR and a law degree has taught me well how to handle and something I dealt with all too often with in my last job!

Ignorance, discrimination, prejudices and arrogance are all things which are currently in vogue as far as the law is concerned... hence the reason why so many cases are around where people are suing each other for the slightest little thing and compensation culture seems to rule!
I do not like this culture, I think it is damaging to society, but like most things these days, it is clear that the law will always frown upon clear cases of such injustices and compensation will be paid to those it offends.

As part of my strategy will be to highlight the discriminatory and prejudiced attitudes of many of the landlords and associated businesses, such as agencies, banks and insurance companies, in order to show what poor government policies have created, I know that I will find more than my fair share of such things on this website. I also know I will find my fair share of people who are equally as peed off with the landlords etc, who are voicing their opinions in an arena where they are more than likely to be shot down by the majority of users of these forums...hence the reason why I am not going to get involved in petty slagging matches, which achieve absolutely nothing other than to cause stress and upset.

I thank you for your comments Airedale, as I find what you have written to be very informative and I have learned a bit more, regarding a genuine view of someone on your side of the fence.

Nikki 72

Airedale1 wrote this on 2010-04-26 11:25:56 Nikki,
It's nice to know that there can be a balanced viewpoint.
But lets just ask a few fundamental questions.

This forum page comments deal with LHA claimants vs Non Benefit Claimants and peoples opinions.

But there is a reason why this has arisen.

Lets assume that a landlord agrees to rent a property in return for either cash, benefit payments or a combination of both.
The landlord agrees to mainatain the property and deal with concerns etc according to the H&S scoring system.
(That's the first government department gobbledegook)

In return the prospective tenant agrees to look after the property and pay the rent on time.

If the landlord breaks a rule - the tenant can ask the landlord to sort it. If they do - great! - if they don't then a simple visit to a local council and a complaint should be sufficient.
(A simple system).

If the tenant breaks a rule - its not quite that straightforward.

If it is not rent arrears related, the landlord issues a letter and a follow-up call. If that resolves the issue - great!

If it isn't resolved you then issue a final warning or section 8 notice.

The section 8 notice can only be acted upon after a notice period and it must be "served" in a particular way. Depending on what the breach of tenancy determines the amount of notice period required.
The deemed date of service of notice is determined on various factors such as what time of day, method of delivery etc.
(This is the next hurdle of knowledge for a landlord)
A law degree.

After the notice period - the landlord has to decide on whether to proceed further will a legal request to a Court for repossession or judgement.

If the landlord does not have such knowledge, they can make a mistake and be charged with harrasment or worse.

So the landlord decides to follow the law and now pays a Court Fee and then waits for a Court Date.
(up to 3 months in Liverpool).

The tenant goes to the Council and says "My landlord is trying to ~~~~~~ me".
The housing department of the council will actually advise the tenant to hang in there until they receive an eviction order.
Then they can be classed as homeless and get placed on a housing list.

So this means that we have now got 2 more bodies involved. (Council and the Courts system).

At the court hearing the landlord has to prove the grounds written on the section 8 notice. (Quite rightly so), innocent until proven guilty etc.

Certain grounds of that notice allow mandatory repossession, but they are extremly limited, but the rest are discretionary and up to the mood of the judge and whether the case isn't adjourned at the request of the tenant over spurious grounds dreamt up by the council worker advising the tenant.

So the case is adjourned. The case is then reset 6 weeks later and this time the judge asks the landlord to prove that the notice was "Served" in the correct manner. The landlord produces a postal receipt issued by Royal Mail - but the judge dismisses this unless the landlord makes a "statement of truth".
The case is adjourned again for another 3 weeks and the statement of truth is produced.
The judge then hears the reason for the request for repossession.
The landlord produces a Police Crime Certificate stating that the tenant had been arrested for stealing the landlords fixtures and fittings and smoking weed and supplying drugs from the property.

The judge asks why he should grant repossession as it may cause hardship for the tenant.

The landlords jaw hits the floor and he insists that repossession is granted on mandatory grounds.
The landlord explains that he has not received any rent for 11 weeks because he eventually found out that the LHA for the tenant was suspended by the LHA department, because he failed to attend an interview.

The tenant is asked to explain why this was so.

The tenant explains that he was sentenced to prison for 12 weeks for burglary, possession of drugs and was available on the early release scheme. He had served 6 weeks and had now been let out.

The landlord could not discuss the case with the LHA department because of Data Protection.
The LHA allowance is still outstanding, but the landlord has been given back his property by the judge.

The judge also awards damages to the landlord of £2,190.

However the tenant has no assets, is homeless and will now get rehoused by a combination of the council, prison service and shelter.

So in this case.
We have a damaged property
A Prison Sentence
A Cost of Thousands
An Outstanding Bill
Court Costs
An arguement with an insurance company,
The resources of the Prison service, Councils, The Courts, The LHA and the landlords bank smashing him in the ribs with bank charges on a property he has not been able to get repossession of for 4 months.

You may think that this is far fetched and couldn't possible happen.

Well that's strange - it happened to me and I received a judgement by post 13 days after the court hearing.The letter arrived last Friday 23/04/2010.

Now, this ex tenants guarantor is now going to either have to pay up or drop their trousers and work up a rythym.

Because now we start phase II on trying to get some of my losses back.

But first I have to repair my property and my insurance company won't pay out because I didn't notify them that the tenant was on benefits.

But the LHA department won't give you the information.
The payments were coming from the tenant.

So this drug dealing, theiving menace, who is still on benefits is in another landlords property and I am now locking horns with the benefits office trying to get those suspended payments back.

And people actually write on this web site forum that people on LHA deserve a fairer chance.

That is true, you know I actually agree with them.

But I want to know - how the hell do you expect me to give any other LHA claimant a chance, when if things go wrong - their is naff all protection for the landlord.

We can't insure against you, unless you are forthcoming with Data
The LHA department will not disclose information, even when the tenant has agreed to disclosure, it can be instantly withdrawn by a tenant.
The Court system is overloaded
The costs are massive.
You need a lot of legal knowledge to navigate the procedures.
The Council advises tenants to drag things out and makes everything worse.
The claims system is appallingly slow.

Remember, that I do this everyday of the week, but most landlords have perhaps one to four properties.

They can't cope with this admin monster - that is why they slag off LHA claimants.
Who the hell wants this amount of hassle?

It isn't the claimant - its the system for ending tenancies that needs fixing and the benefit department rules.

Now lets look at my diary for this week - oh I see I'm in Court again on Wednesday for suing a guarantor for not paying for an LHA claimant, who has smashed up one of my properties.

I will win this case, because I keep very extensive journals - but my God! - you do not need this crap.
This started with rent arrears last August and has since escalated.
Once again - the Council has advised the tenant to wait for eviction by the Courts - but he also got spiteful and trashed the place.

Here we go again! 73

The Landlord wrote this on 2010-04-26 11:40:42 Hey Airedale1,

Just commenting on your situation regarding the Council advising the tenant to wait for eviction by courts!! I had the same thing happen to me before. It frustrated me beyond belief. Not sure if you read my blog post, I wrote about it here, Why Do The Council Side With Rent Dodging DSS Tenants?

I wish you the best of luck with your case. 74

kerry wrote this on 2010-05-12 11:29:45 I am on HB. I have 3 children and am studying to become a teacher. I work 3 days a week but my rent is £275 a week which i wages to do cover so i have to get help. I can not afford to buy as prices are far to high the council will not help me so I rent a property. I keep my the property in very good order and do many repairs/decorating myself. All my friends say i have a great home. The landlord wants to sell this house this year and i have to move out, but its very hard to find a nice home to rent that except housing benefit because landlords that do seem to think we are scuff and only rent out horrid un modern homes to HB tenants! 75

Pissed of Father wrote this on 2010-05-12 12:02:20 Kerry

According to half the pricks on this website who are nothing but piss taking ass holes, especially the cunt who owns the site, then you will be classed as scum regardless of what you do. They won't give a shit about the fact you are becoming a teacher or have kids, cos their only interest is themselves! Fuck knows why half of these idiots became landlords in the first place if they didn't realize that a large percentage of the country is unemployed, disabled or homeless and in need of help with benefits and most of this caused by the type of pricks who are money obsessed and generally don't give a damn about people in worse situations than themselves!
Thankfully, I am not in a situation where I have to rely on these pricks, but I have just helped out my daughter who because of piss head attitudes like these twats have towards DSS, has been shit on by her former landlord and had the house she was living in sold without having even told her!

Stop treating benefit needing people like scum and get fucking real you fucking dumb assholes! 76

The Landlord wrote this on 2010-05-12 12:19:48 @Pissed of father
"Fuck knows why half of these idiots became landlords in the first place if they didn’t realize that a large percentage of the country is unemployed, disabled or homeless"

In short, because a much, much, much larger percentage of the country aren't unemployed or homeless. Go figure.

In essence, your futile argument is no better than, "there are thieves in this country, so what's the point in buying anything nice (because those things may get stolen)?"

Great! 77

Airedale1 wrote this on 2010-05-12 12:26:13 Kerry - If someone owns something, they have a right to sell it, burn it down or stop renting it.

That is the way of the World.

Now all of the expletives you have used may or may not be true.
Sometimes I am an absolute bastard, but usually its because some idiot has breached a promise or contract that we have all previously entered into in good faith.

Even this morning, I have had a LHA claimant ask me for a property. But after making simple enquiries, I have discovered that they have been refused benefit, ruined the councils guarantee bond that he was previously awarded, been previously evicted and basically been a pain in the previous landlords life.

This isn't very encouraging is it?

Look - Kerry,

no -one wants to fall out with you or your daughter, there are always other properties for rent. But if your daughter is claiming LHA and applies for a property - someone will gladly offer her a home, but she had better have a good track record - or a suitable guarantor. 78

Airedale1 wrote this on 2010-05-12 12:42:35 Note to Kerry and Pissed Off Father.

Sorry I got the names on the blogs mixed up.

But a side note to Kerry,

I have absolutely no problem with an LHA claimant.
What I do have a problem with is the LHA system that we all have to wrestle with.

As a landlord, I have to know that any problems with your benefit claim do not affect my business.

If it does - I will offer a low risk property to rent.

It's a bit like when you learn to drive, you put a young, low income driver in an old banger and when their circumstances improve, they usually decide to upgrade.

The same applies to rental properties. If you can not afford a brand spanking new show home, you can look at the lower affordable end of the market.

No government will pay you enough to live in the lifestyle that you wish to aspire to, but they also won't pay a landlord to do so either.

A reasonable property costs from £90,000+ .
Just explain how you expect that to be paid for from Housing benefit? 79

Twattybollocks wrote this on 2010-05-12 12:52:37 @Airedale1 - well said.

@pissed off father: Perhaps you should have let your daughter know that "thats life". You failed to mention how you actually helped out your daughter. Might be better if you helped try to get her off DSS!
Thank you however for ensuring your spelling was correct. A+: go to the top of the class.

@kerry: Keep going! Hope you get something sorted soon and best of luck with the teaching.

TB 80

Airedale1 wrote this on 2010-05-12 12:53:41 Just a note to people looking for a property to rent.

The latest proposal from our new coalition government is that Capital Gains Tax (Tax on property sales) is to go from 18% to 40% on residential property.

Oh dear! - that is why your landlord is going to sell his or her property - they have about 50 days to do this to avoid a massive tax rise.

Thank you Gordon Brown and his money borrowing fuckwit cabinet colleagues.

I expect to see a lot of bargain properties in the next few weeks.

LHA claimants better brace themselves, now I know why your landlord wants to get out of the property rental market.

40% taken out of someones property sale profit might be classed as a "bit heavy" 81

goodtenant wrote this on 2010-06-11 10:48:28 was just passing and felt the need to express my opinions here. I am a tenant and i rent a house with my partner and two young children. We claim lha as my partner is in full time employment but at minimum wage and i am currently out of work as i had to leave my job as a manager due to not being able to afford sufficent childcare around my flexible day and night hours. When we found the advert for our current property the advert said no dss. We went for it as we class ourselves as a working couple and our landlord after meeting us was happy for us to claim the small amount we get from the council to help towards our rent each month. The house when we veiwed it was awfull the previous (non dss) tenants had done a runner leaving the house looking awfull and the landlord didnt seem like they were goin to tidy it up so we made an arrangement that if they halfed our rent for two months we'd decorate and tidy up the house. agreed! Now after putting in weeks of hard work as the money only covered material cost the house is stunning. New floors, decorated walls, tidied garden, even a new toilet. We are a proud, tidy family and our home, because thats what this is for us, is imaculate at all times and we added value and improved the house for our landlord. We have never missed a rent payment in 4 years of renting and always leave any property as we found it, even painting the walls back to how they were. Now you tell me why because i claim a small amount of money each month from the council to help me pay my rent makes me a bad tenant!!?? I think it is so wrong to make theses assumptions. All i can say is turn away tenants claiming help with there rent but u could be turning away a family like us and well thats your loss!! 82

Airedale1 wrote this on 2010-06-11 12:34:51 Hello Goodtenant,

I would love a bucketful of tenants like you, but as I sit here typing this - I have a problem that causes me nothing but grief.

Currently landlords are under siege by both threatened CG Tax rises, DSS or LHA procedures, Planning restrictions and worst of the lot the Data Protection Act.

This week I have been advertising a property in Liverpool and I have received 3 applications for the same property.

Thanks to my previous experience I have utilised various identity checkers that help me do a fast check on applicants.

The first guy to apply was a guy called Phillip - he filled in our on-line application form and from that I carried out an ID check. Both his, his guarantors and his employers ID did not check out, so I simply went onto google and did a street view of the given post codes. The places were derelict and I wouldn't let my dog have a shit there.

Then the following day I get a guy called Bartosz, wanting to rent it - this is a bit trickier - because he won't be on any electoral roll - so I asked for his previous address, went on land registry to check who owned it and then traced their phone number and rang it - they had never heard of this guy.

Then I got an LHA applicant that wanted to rent it - so I took their details and did a check - they passed the Id - but had told me that their claim was currently running and simply needed a transfer. So I rang their current landlord who told me that they were being evicted for non payment of rent and he knew they were going to do a "runner". The landlord was that knackered dealing with this moron that I'm sure he was going to offer me money to take him off his hands.

Then yesterday, I got an application from another lady that is on LHA, she has no current claim - so I said I would take her on - if she agreed to a guarantor and that she would wait a week.
I will need this week to check her references out.

Last night I got a phone call from the Police saying that another LHA tenant had been caught in posession of Heroin and they had busted my property door down in the process as they thought my property had been a place of drug dealing.
It is in a great area - and this little shit has caused both me and the neighbors grief - so now another court case!

Now I have various problems, don't we all? - but the biggest is the fucking data protection act. Do you realise that I had to break the law to get enough info on these theiving bastards to make a valid assessment of their applications? I exclude the lady who has been put on hold for a week - but its interesting why she is about to become homeless - its because she will be claiming LHA after losing her job due to illness. The agents she currently is using will not entertain LHA under ANY circumstances.

You have to ask why?

If it isn't the tenant - and there are good and bad of both types, I would suggest that it is due to a completely busted and outragous system that puts the landlord at a complete disadvantage. Obviously thats my viewpoint - but as I'm the person who bought the property - its the view that I hold that counts.

If I ring the LHA dept they won't disclose anything - but this has a consequence - that being that landlords are pissed off big time with LHA claimants and the outragous overkill on protecting basic information.

Such as - Are they on LHA?
Is the claim valid and still being paid?
What I can't have direct payment unless they are at LEAST 8 weeks in arrears? - No sir! - its the law!

Its complete bollocks!

Thats as difficult and detailed as it needs to be.

So I do sympathise with any LHA claimants plight - but as I have said many times on the forum - the whole bloody thing needs demolishing and starting from scratch.

What other industry would accept being told - you can't have the lawfully owed money you are entitled to until your tenant is in a position to be evicted? 83

goodtenant wrote this on 2010-06-12 08:50:34 I am in complete agreement with you that the system is the problem and i sympothise with you for the issues youve had with tenants. My concerns are of landlord who write off lha claiming tenants for that reason and that reason solely. Not to steriotype myself but we all know what "chavs" look like and i know if i was renting out a property i would have an idea in mind of people i would not want in my property. Life deals each and every person a different hand and that doesnt make everybody whos claiming lha a bad person. I wish i didnt have to be in the situation to rent at all let alone claim lha but the way in which my life has turned out im doing the best with what resources i have. As for the system, it is just as bad for the claimant as it is for the landlord believe me. The form and the proof u need to set up a claim takes weeks, they mess you around and then (from my experience) they tell you to write to them with your change of circumstances, you do, a year down the line they say they didnt get the letter and then they slap you in the face with a £2000 fine!! Would you really want the money paid straight to yourself if this is what happens. 84

Aaron wrote this on 2010-06-23 16:28:41 It sounds like half the landlords here would be bankrupt if it was not for lha tenants.
I do sympathise with the frustrations of some of these landlords, but spare a thought for us who have scrimped and saved to live in a half decent area, only to have some unscrupulous btl landlord blinded by £££ signs Buy up the house next to you and let any old scumbag live there.
Councils and landlords should get together and compile a database of the scumbags, and if they want to continue acting like animals they should be teated as animals. A tent in a field with a water trough and that's your lot. 85

Midlander wrote this on 2010-06-23 18:26:32 I'd be interested to know how all you landlords - especially the ones who let in London - are going to be affected by the new LHA rules that have been announced in the budget. Will it start to bring rents down? 86

London LHA landlord wrote this on 2010-06-23 21:52:13 I have 7 tenants in central london on lha and have had for several years. I like most of them as they are good tenants
These plans ( budget lHA reductions ) will move the average one bed rent to £50 to £85 per week less than the private sector for a one bed
This will reduce my income ( which I live on as a business) by about 25%. I think although i want to keep some tenants who are good ones that i will be forced economically to go back to the private sector.What will happend to my tenants ( some retired ) I am not sure i suppose they will be forced to move to a northern cheaper location if they can get anything. Is this what the govt wants? If their rents are not competitive and they cannot pay to make it up how are they going to get good flats etc
These are only one beds and studios we are talking about not 4 5 or 6 beds. Does anyone think Central London is aspecial case that may be reviewed? 87

ha ha ha ha ha ! ! ! wrote this on 2010-06-23 23:06:23 "i suppose they will be forced to move to a northern cheaper location if they can get anything."
LondonLHAlandlord

I guess with what you have just stated and the opinion of many landlords on here regarding DSS tenants, that the reality is a hell of a lot of people are going to end up homeless!

Buy to let should never have be allowed without regulation to control who can and cannot rent a property. It is plain clear to see that many landlords discriminate against DSS tenants and now with this government budget, discrimination is going to escalate out of control as landlords are now going to be sh***ing themselves that the DSS tenants who have previously provided them with the rent for their property, is no longer going to get enough to cover what in many cases amounts extortionate rental costs!

Personally I have no sympathy for any landlord who is going to lose money from the decisions made in the budget. Many of the problems with housing has been caused by allowing buy to let properties and effectively taking away the possibility of a starter home for many first time buyers unable to afford large mortgages!

The way I see it, if you have property you are going to struggle to get rent for, then tough s**t! Maybe if you hadn't been so damned greedy in the first place, then you might not be having to worry about finding people to rent the property and possibly losing even more through Capital Gains Tax!

Lets face facts, with the economy as bad as it is and many people having to tighten their personal budgets and the increased possibility of losing their jobs, it is going to make finding tenants a whole lot harder, especially when you consider just how many buy to lets there are available...it will be interesting to see if landlords are forced to lower rents just to compete!

On top of all this, the part of your statement that "i suppose they will be forced to move to a northern cheaper location" shows just how disasterous this could end up being if the people concerned have spent their lives living in London and have family, friends and connections around that area! But I guess as long as the landlords are ok, then sod any one else!

My hope is that many landlords will lose a lot of money through the results of this and upcoming budgets and fingers crossed it will put many properties back on to the market for first time buyers at a reasonable cost...hopefully caused through repossessions by not being able to cover mortgage payments through lack of tenants! 88

airedale1 wrote this on 2010-06-24 07:17:29 I have just read your comments and I cannot fathom your attitude to landlords.

You just don't get it do you?

A landlord simply wants a tenant that will look after a property and pay the rent on time.

They certainly don't want people who despise the fact that they have tried to make a go of things and improve their lot.

And to hope that houses are bought by first time buyers because of a mass of repossessions of privatly owned properties.

Forget it fella - any repo's will be bought by pension companies and very rich individuals who will not put up with LHA bullshitters - who instead of paying their rent on time - simply spend their allowance on anything but what they should do.

The housing shortage for LHA is caused by the LHA system - it will destroy a landlord before it coughs up a penny of rent - that is why LHA tenants are not acceptable to a massive majority of landlords - it has nothing to do with the claimants, it is the system that is unfathomable and changes rules and procedures from council to council. 89

Paul wrote this on 2010-06-24 07:23:21 Actually the LHA rates here in Cornwall are already BELOW the market rents. DWP, elderly and low income families are finding it very difficult to find suitable properties because landlords have no problems in finding people to pay the market rent.

LHA rates are only going to be capped for the very highest rates. In reality there won't be any great deal of change.

In Cornwall this means that single room LHA rates for a two bed property per month will remain at 550.00 per calendar month. 90

Midlander wrote this on 2010-06-24 08:52:25 "In Cornwall this means that single room LHA rates for a two bed property per month will remain at 550.00 per calendar month."
Paul Keith

If I understand this comment correctly - that each single room in a 2 bed property will rent out at £550 pcm - this is not what the LHA calculation website says!

Cornwall:
1 bed with shared facilities = £66.05 pw = £286 pm.
Even if you multiply this x 2 for the whole house, that's £572.00 pm.
https://lha-direct.voa.gov.uk/Secure/LHARateSearch.aspx?SearchType=LA 91

London LHA landlord wrote this on 2010-06-24 16:13:15 to Ha Ha HA Ha Ha!

May I state that i worked very hard about 20years in 10 years running a business and took a risk to buy property which like Airedales says i have rented out to LHA tenants for about 8 years.This is despite being driven mad by the council whose paperwork ( ie 3 contradictary letters in a week no replies to phone calls or letters at all) is so unprofessional. Also may i say that I was quite happily renting to the private sector until the council did a web site with rents on that made it attractive to take on LHA tenants. I did not set the rent and councils should not be surprised to find landlords going back to the priave sector if they chop rents so dramatically. By the way I actually care for my tenants and run the oaps to the benefit office when they need to go and do allthe legal paper work and replace their furniture etc if it is needed. If i get good tenants I look after them. 2 in 8 years have trashed the place and I have only had £500 to fix the places up which costs thousands (from the council) and no deposits. IF all landlords are put out of business where are LHA people going to live? I don't understand your attitude either. 92

ha ha ha ha ha ! ! ! wrote this on 2010-06-24 17:11:23 @LondonLHAlandlord & airedale1

My lack of sympathy for any landlord stems from something you state in your first line...you "worked hard for 20 years in 10 years running a business to buy property"

Many people who are having to rely on LHA benefits are also people who have worked damned hard for many years and do not deserve to be regarded as scum by someone who has a few houses they rent out at extortionate prices!

As I said in my first posting, the biggest mistake when allowing buy to let, was not regulating it so that discrimination against certain tenants could not allowed. I will add that there are circumstances where troublesome tenants will cause problems, but legislation should have been put in place to deal with these types of people in order to protect the property etc.

Airedale, you state that I "just don't get it"
Wrong! I do get it! I see it every day where I work!
I have seen the complete mess that past government policies have created and I see the real difficulties that many people are now suffering on a daily basis.

I also remember the last time we had a Tory government and what it did to this country and by the looks of it, is now going to make things even worse for a great deal of people. Haven't you noticed that it is the poorer off people in society who is taking the biggest hits with this budget while the banks and businesses get away with hardly a slap on the wrist?

In the past week alone, I have had to deal with over 50 new cases of people becoming unemployed. The area where I work is seeing businesses collapse all over the place and the only thing I can see is the prices of everything now going to rise because of the last budget. These people I deal with are people who have spent most of their lives working in the same industries, working damned hard, only to be s**t on by being made redundant! They are now in a position where they are going to be reliant on benefits until they find work, which in this area is going be extremely difficult!

Discussing the situation with one lady who I dealt with and what led me into doing some research on the housing situation for an upcoming meeting, she told me about how on several occasions how her and her husband had tried to purchase a house only to be outbid by people who were buying to let. The problem is, she is not alone.

Buy to let landlords have been allowed to purchase anything in order to build up their portfolios of property, but this has caused many people struggling to get on to the housing ladder. Housing that they themselves could have sold in a time of crisis had it been necessary.

If landlords are put out of business, it will by default force the government to come up with a solution for the housing problem. They will not be able to ignore the situation when large numbers of people without homes suddenly start to appear.

As far as I am concerned and several of my colleagues agree, the sooner buy to let is ended and affordable properties become available again to people who actually want to live and own their own homes, the better it will be in the long run.

For those who are unemployed and struggling to find rented accommodation, this should be made available through council housing and as it is already now too late to get properties back from private landlords, a new legislation regarding who can and can not rent a property should be introduced as soon as possible!

As I said, my sympathies do not lay with the landlords and any who end up losing their properties through this and future budgets and this governments handling of the benefits deserve what they get. The sooner the better, as it will signal changes to the system which are long overdue! 93

airedale1 wrote this on 2010-06-24 18:59:31 Listen Mr Ha Ha Ha Ha -

Are you from this planet?

Do you realise that BTL is all over the World?

If I don't buy in this country I could buy from Algeria to Zimbabwe.

Do you seriously think that any colour of Government has the means or bottle to even attempt to fix this countries housing shortage?

The only people or industry that has that sort of buying power is either pension funds or private capital from people who are willing to put their neck on the line and take a risk.

You will never get what you want from handouts - and just bleating on as if all landlords hate you because you are on benefits is crap.

But lets look at some simple maths.
(Try it with the house you currently live in)

If you, I or the council build a property it will cost a minimum of £80,000 including a freehold on the land. (And that's up North)

That means that over 20 yrs - you will have paid back £4,000 of money borrowed per year.
(That's approx £80 per week.)
Now add the interest that is required even at todays rate - say 4% on that £80,000 is £3,200 per year or £61.53 per week.
Add the two together and you have £142 per week or £615 per month or £7384 per year.

So now lets assume that 1m homes were to be built, stolen by the state or taken from the housing market.

Where will the £7.384 billion come from? - and that's a figure where a cardboard, shabby council designed pre-fab is made.

The beauty about this country is that we are not ruled by the state and that we do not live in communal buildings owned by the mill owners such as in Korea, where if you lose your job - you lose your home, car, school and everything else you had because the company you work for runs the lot.

We have a flawed system - that is true, but as I have written many times on this bulletin board - The LHA system that could put you in a nice second hand house that was bought years ago at a much lower price than in todays market, would be available - if they made it feasible that when a claimant messes a landlord about we had a fast redress - you wouldn't have this problem.

For example - today I have been in a County Court with a tenant who is on LHA.
I have had to have her evicted - the reason?

1. She owes over 15 weeks rent.
2. She receives LHA direct and has blown it on booze, fags and mobile phone bills.
3. She has damaged the furniture.
4. She has become agressive with the neighbors.

But the interesting thing was whilst I was waiting to go into the court - she was receiving Free of charge legal advice and was accompanied by a representative of Shelter.

They had the bloody cheek to try and get me to change my mind on evicting her - and also wanted me to write off her arrears!

Thankfully - the judge sat there and listened to the crap she was coming out with and at the end of it awarded me back my property.

Now - I have to ask you? - when a benefits system denies a landlord the right to direct payments from the Government to avoid all of this turmoil until the tenant is at the point of being legally evicted - who the fuck came up with this stupid rule.

It was an academical fuckwit who has signed up to the labour party.

Yes - that's right a card carrying labour party knob head, who despite screams of dire warnings from the rental industry - just bulldozed this rule through and cocked it up for all LHA claimants.

There is no housing shortage that cannot be fixed - but the rules of dealing with each other have got to change.

The government hasn't got the money to take back all the property and dish it out to comrade Ha Ha Ha, if it did - it would spell the end of our society.

Mr Ha Ha Ha,

even if all the landlords went bust tomorrow, the properties are owned by the lenders - they will never give their assetts to an LHA claimant.

You are too big a risk, if I tell my insurance company or my mortgage provider that I have an LHA claimant - they don't want to deal with me or the council.

You need to realise why - its because you have no asetts, no security, a bad attitude and when things go wrong - the councils run a mile and say "not my problem gov".
Your council paymaster goes home at 4pm and doesn't give a toss about you.

It's tough - both for landlords who are starting out and already established - but the property market is like any other - if you don't look after your business you will fail.

And the same applies to Mr Singh, down the street, with a local shop - if he can't offer something better than Tesco - he will go bust.

Mr Ha Ha Ha, I will endeavour to make sure you do not become a tenant of mine, but I am still open for business to LHA claimants in general, because as well as them I will get a guarantor to co-sign the tenancy agreement.

That is because I have reduced the risks to an acceptable level, because I have made a mix of working, LHA and immigrant tenants and have systems in place to manage problem periods that all businesses get in all industries from British Airways to BP oil.

BTL is not the cause of all the problems - it has freed up parts of your country to great rejuvination and houses have been bought that councils have given up on and greatly improved. There are areas where this has failed - but they will be turned around by private individuals with a bit of flair and tenacity.

They will whinge about LHA and claimants will Whinge about Landlords , but we will end up coming to some sort of workable agreement.

If we don't you will end up living in some government built shanty town where the property will last 20 years and will become a wreck, eyesore and high rise carbunkle. 94

ha ha ha ha ha ! ! ! wrote this on 2010-06-24 19:56:26 @airedale1

If you read my posting correctly you would have noticed that I am actually working for a living! I do not need to rent anywhere as I am lucky enough to own my own home!

Instead, I have to deal with the poor sods who have fallen on hard times and are referred to as scroungers or scum by those who think they are better than others because they either have a job or in the cases which I have seen on this website, have a property to rent out and think they have a right to tar all DSS tenants with the same brush!

But thank you for your response, as I have to congratulate you on totally missing the point and rambling on about something else entirely, proving exactly what I said about discriminating against DSS tenants!

Personally I hope you are number one in the list of losing a fortune when the whole market comes crashing down!
Alternatively go off and buy some property in Algeria or Zimbabwe...that way you might free up some housing over here for first time buyers! 95

Paul wrote this on 2010-06-24 21:53:37 "In Cornwall this means that single room LHA rates for a two bed property per month will remain at 550.00 per calendar month."
Paul Keith

Sorry chaps, was half asleep. What I meant was TWO BED PROPERTY.
Originally was going to give SRR but went for two bed instead and didn't delete fully and check! Nothing mysterious in what I wrote, just a plain error that's all. 96

Midlander wrote this on 2010-06-24 22:25:26 "and think they have a right to tar all DSS tenants with the same brush!"

In all fairness (and I am a tenant!) the landlords here are not doing this. Have you read the whole thread? They are mainly blaming the administrative system. Although I admit there are DSS tenants who are a bloody nightmare - I have lived next door to some of them. :-( 97

airedale1 wrote this on 2010-06-25 07:23:59 Mr Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha,

I see what this is all about now, if someone offers a point of view that differs to yours, you want them to suffer a painful financial death or worse.

So you think in extremes, like the people you criticise that call LHA claimants "Scum bags" etc.

That is where we differ. I do not wish bad news or damage on any person, I simply suggest that the current system is manged in such a way where a landlord isn't placed in a position of near bankruptcy, before the LHA is paid directly to them.

As for me going bust, it has nearly happened a few times, but I have got over the rough spots one way or another.
But if I had gone bust there would be about 40 tenants currently homeless and my properties would have been auctioned off by the bank to possibly 40 or more BTL investors.

I have never seen a Local Council buying property at an auction - that would be interesting to watch.

But your dream and wishful thoughts on the future of the property market will never arrive, because if, as you suggest, I am a greedy type, then so are all the other capitalists out there, who would love the chance to buy a property at a knock down price.

Your ideas of how the property market should develop appear misguided by a deep seated hatred of "anything or anybody" that does not appear to have fallen on hard times.

You say that you are working - but does that mean that your employer does not grab money from their customers far in excess of the actual cost of its production.

If it is a public limited company they profit from this method of selling any type of product or service by such a degree that they pay not only your salary, the directors salaries, the shareholders dividends and all the company running costs by a smash and grab of their customers money?

Yes I am rambling again, but you need to take a closer look at how you earn your living.

You own your house? - well here is an idea, why not rent a spare room out to an LHA claimant and you may get a better idea of how your local authority deals with your rent claim from the LHA claimant. The Government will be pleased and will let you earn a good amount of rent tax free.

Come back in a few weeks time and tell us all where, as landlords, we are going wrong.

If it will help here is where you can advertise your room http://www.spareroom.co.uk/

You may see that at any one time there are 35,000 or more rooms available - but if you are such a bright spark, I invite you to show your generosity to an LHA claimant and lets see if your ideas are still the same after a few short weeks. 98

Jane wrote this on 2010-07-04 06:08:41 I have just come back from a house I had rented out to a DSS tenant.

Yesterday, I paid £50 to have all the stuff he decided he didn't want/need, and had left at the house,and outside the house, taken away. I then began cleaning the cooker and oven of 8 months of grease/fat/burned on pizza etc. This took hours of bloody hard work £20 of cleaning products and 3 cans of oven cleaner!

I then cleaned the toilet/bath/shower/kitchen and floor where his dog had crapped and pee'd. The living room carpet, complete with crap and pee stains and vile stench, was folded into the middle and thrown away. The carpets had been new, in fact the house had been re-furbished.

He paid for a couple of months then claimed his cheque hadn't arrived/cleared and made any other excuse that came to mind.I had to chase him all the time. I bent over backwards to help him - I altered the rent from paying in advance to paying in arrears to fit in with the council's strange method.

He phoned me to say he had no hot water - he hadn't been paying his rent but I take MY responsibilities seriously and arranged for the plumber to sort it out within the week - still no rent. I went through the 8 weeks rent arrears procedure with the council who suspended his claim, THEN sent HIM a cheque for the 8 weeks arrears and guess what? Yes, I got not 1p of it! It must have felt like Christmas to him. I served a section 21 on him. The council were less than helpful. The LGO is dealing with the matter now.

I got a letter from the council to say they would pay me direct, then another letter from them saying his claim had been suspended - I called him and he said he had found another house! He will do exactly the same again in his next place, God help the landlord.

Now then - I HAVE been on Benefits, WAS an abused wife, DID bring up 3 teenage kids on my own, DO hold down a full-time job as well as running 4 properties but the big difference is I wasn't going to be held down, got off my arse and got a job, retrained, bought a house with a mortgage, which I still have and have invested in these properties as a future for me and my kids!

I have been prepared to take on DSS but realise now that I have to insist on a Guarantor and will serve section 21 notices at the start of the tenancies - no more bending over backwards to help etc - and whose fault is that? The tenant who ripped me off owing £1000 and leaving his filthy squalour for me to deal with. 99

airedale1 wrote this on 2010-07-04 06:59:00 Hello Jane,

After reading your comment, I not only sympathise, but have another sorrowful tale to tell about another shower of LHA claimants abusing the system.

I have just rented out to 5 new tenants this week and 2 are on LHA at a house in Crewe.

I have made quite a few comments on this web forum and what comes through here loud and clear is the fact that dealing with the council who administer this LHA scheme needs to be radically overhauled or better still privatised.

There are thousands of Customer service/ call centre staff who could administer this system in a far better and more organised fashion.

The whole system is an absolute shambles.

The house in Crewe is really gorgeous, the tenants think it is fantastic and I have emphasised that if they upset the neighbors, they will be evicted.

But I then had to deal with another bunch of fuckwits that live in another property in Mold in Flintshire.

Yesterday, I had an hour long phone conversation with a guarantor, who was actually sending me a Facebook page that her son had been on, where he and his "Friends", were actually bragging about an all night bender at one of my properties.
Where one of his mates has pissed on his mattress and ruined it.

He then made the mistake of ringing his guarantor to complain that his room had been broken into and then vandalised, because his locks were sub-standard.

The guarantor then quite rightly rang me to complain about the lack of security at the house.

So I rang one of the neighbors, who told me about the little party going during Friday night and Saturday morning. Where he had been kept awake all night by these thoughtless bastards, who because they are not working, have time to accrue rent arrears and spend their LHA on crates of beer.

So I told the guarantor to do some investigating of her own and then come back to me.
The guarantor then had to apologise and then sent me his facebook page.

His Section 8 notice arrives tomorrow, as does the section 8 for all his other housemates.

They are all, except one person on LHA.

The council are about to receive another two homeless statistics on their housing list.

However, I have dealt with this council before and it will involve a County Court Case and they will have representation from Shelter and Citizens Advice.

I will have to prove my case to the court and they will be re-housed and everything will be paid for by the tax payer, except my costs.

The guarantor wants me to evict them all, it is interesting that the guarantor is the mother of one of the tenants.
So it really comes to something when your own mother thinks that you should be made homeless and your behaviour is so bad that she disowns you.

The reason they will all receive a Section 8, is that despite me warning them not to insult my intelligence and to respect their neighbors, they have pissed off just about everybody within a 100 meter radius of my property.

My reputation as a landlord is damaged and so I will seek vengeance on behalf of my neighbors and myself.

I will not rehouse another LHA tenant within this area, because I get no back up from the LA.

So to protect my neighbors, my mental health and my wallet - they will now all be evicted.

Would you agree, that LHA claimants are sometimes not worth the risk?

Do you think that removal of all benefits for being a social menance, would infringe their rights to be a human being?
Would having the right to have direct payment to the tenant removed be better if it was for breaches of any tenancy agreement clause?

The last Labour Government are the cause of the LHA crisis within the private rental sector.
They are responsible for wrecking the economy and the LHA system, where there is little or no protection left for a landlord.

The difference in attitude of the new government and the last is stark!

In time, I hope that landlords like you and all the others that have been "mugged" by the state on this forum, feel it is safe to take on people via LHA, not all claimants are a social problem on legs, but we need some recourse and common sense to prevail.

Jane, I hope that you get your property back into the market and rented fast.

I now will spend my Sunday, looking at a damaged property and assessing the costs to the guarantor. 100

twattybollocks wrote this on 2010-07-04 09:16:24 Sorry to hear of your woes guys. Hope you get these 'human beings' sorted soon.

Whilst we have a human rights act that is so blatently abused there will be no answer to this problem. The only way this will be sorted is to keep lobbying your MPs to get off their arses and do something.

The recent announcement by the Government that they are dropping letting agency regulation is farcical. If someone out there who is more intelligent than I can come up with some wording for a petition, something along the lines of "we the undersigned who are currently Landlords who are facing ever more demanding and restrictive legislation DEMAND that the Government proceed with Letting Agency regulation to bring back into balance the fairness" then I would sign it, as would I'm sure hundreds of others.

Perhaps we need to revolt and go and burn our section 8 papers outside Downing Street?

TB

PS - hope your tenants catch something nasty real soon! 101

Jane wrote this on 2010-07-04 22:38:26 Hi folks!

Thanks for your supportive and constructive comments.

I have a couple who are interested in this house - now clean and smelling sweeter, so that's great news.

As I have said though, this time I expect everything - Guarantor, Section 21 Notice, AST,etc. I have told the couple and explained why I am insisting on it and it hasn't put them off, so ....

I should have cleaned my oven today after dinner but somehow, I just couldn't face it! :))

Keep smiling folks and don't let the b******s get you down! What doesn't kill you makes you stronger. 102

LondonLLady wrote this on 2010-07-06 15:52:11 If using a guarantor, please remember to check their bank, work, etc references. It costs £28 to get this done, and the guarantor pays for this. If you are feeling generous tell them you will refund it if the check is positive and flat is taken by their guarantee. You can do this through the NLA website. Well worth £75 a year membership for advice and downloading contracts.
http://www.landlords.org.uk/services/nlatenantcheck.htm

I find just telling prospective tenants they have to pay for a credit check if it is negative scares off the financially unstable in the private sector.

The huge Labour government LHA payouts for large properties in Westminster in London have helped to buoy up the property prices. This doesn't help the landlord or the first time buyer purchaser. The drop in prices I see coming as a result of evening out the LHA payments in my area is the reason for my next round of "super saving".

I was thinking about renting to LHA again. After reading this thread, even the huge sums promised pale.
The only LHA tenant I ever had was a smiley young lady I didn’t screen, as she was recommended by a departing tenant. She went mad. The toaster was her friend and people were leaving the shared house because they were scared of her. DSS would not pay for the 2 empty rooms and I couldn’t evict her under the Mental Health Act. I had a duty of care to inform new arrivals of her condition and so the rooms went empty. She left when her DSS money ran out 4 months later. I have my charities but a healthy adult who won’t take her meds and thinks all is fine with appliances as mentors was a tough one. The experience didn’t do me lasting financial damage, but a bit of financial help would have been good, even being told she would not be there past a certain date would have been calming. I vet everyone now.

I save 6 months bills, mortgage payments, expenses, in case of unforeseen probs. It's hard, but it's worth it. 103

Jane wrote this on 2010-07-06 21:14:03 Hi and thanks LondonLLady!

I will certainly take your advice and vet the Guarantor too - £28 well spent, will refund if it comes back OK, if it doesn't, they were taking the mickey so don't deserve it back!!

The couple have rung tonight to say they have arranged direct payment to me via the LHA Department... I have told them I need to see signed, dated forms etc. I feel really quite nervous - hope it's not the "same old, same old" but know I have got to minimise the risks.

I'm like you - put money by and it IS hard, but we all need contingency plans for the "what ifs?" I think!

It must have been a horrific experience for you with the woman/toaster episode, hope all goes well from now on. 104

Paul wrote this on 2010-07-06 21:57:57 Jane, It certainly isn't my intention to worry you unnecessarily, however the fact that your prospective tenants are requesting LHA to be paid direct to you, in itself shows that for some reason the prospective tenants COULD be incapable of dealing with their financial affairs. If you are unaware as to what type of questions have to be answered to get LHA paid direct, I suggest you visit your local council office tomorrow and collect one of the payment direct application forms and have a look at it. In a nutshell LHA will be paid direct to the tenant unless THEY can prove that they have a financial or mental 'history'. All the best 105

AngryLandlord wrote this on 2010-07-07 00:18:28 The worst experiances I have had have been with LHA tenants and the biterly obstructive council officials - one told me that the LHA was the tenants money and upto them whether they paid rent or not. If these b*stards are evicted they win the lottery and get emergency housing whilst the L/L is left nursing heavy losses.

However, all DSS tenants know they can screw at least 2 months rent (sometimes more) from a landlord and there is nothing the L/L can do about it.

The previous Labour government encouraged long-term scroungers and scum as they were its core supporters - the number on benefits and incapacity as a lifestyle choice has risen substantially under Labour and they nearly won another term.

I have had Labour party members referring to L/Ls as 'evil' and 'greedy' and that somehow we L/Ls should be providing mansions for the scum who are too lazy to seek legal employment.

I have dealt with a number of DSS claimants and I have yet to meet one who was a genuine hardship case - the vast majority (and I mean the vast majority) are lazy undeserving b*stards. I know this as I've had to provide housing for the emergency cases who have been evicted as well and the first thing they ask me is 'does the property come with free Sky TV?' When I tell them that it doesn't they refuse to stay. I have also had emergency cases asking me to 'cover' for them so that they could go on holidays abroad or so they could stay with friends - when I refused to do so again they refused to stay.

I accept there are cases where people need financial assistance and I have met only a few claimants (in 10years with a throughput of several hundred claimants) who have managed to turn their lives around. But these were people for whom claiming benefits was something to be ashamed of, not a lifestyle choice, and they were rarely on benefits for any great length of time. It would be a great shame to tar these unfortunate individuals with the same brush as the underserving majority, but unfortunately I can only afford to be charitable when my loans/mortgages are being paid regularly.


Labour hated L/Ls with a vengence whilst at the same time jelously hoping to emulate their success - the biggest culprit being Tony B-liar who has built an extensive property portfolio as his own party condemned and legislated against other L/Ls.

Rant over... 106

Jane wrote this on 2010-07-07 06:22:46 Hi Paul

Thanks for your good advice.

I told the prospective tenants that I wouldn't let to them unless they arranged for payment to be made directly to me and I want then to sign a form so that the council can discuss matters with me. Together with a Section 21 notice at the start, a Guarantor and payment made direct to me, I'm trying to minimise risks. Even then, it can all go horribly wrong, I know - but I have to let it out or pay the mortgage myself.

Unfortunately, the house is in an area of high unemployment, so I don't have the luxury of picking and choosing - I've learned a lesson there!

I would like to clarify though, if the tenants arrange for direct payment, can they change their minds once in the property and have it paid directly to themselves instead?

Thanks angrylanldord, I can well understand your anger and frustration - the whole system is a mess, from what I can see. For the genuine people who have worked and have now fallen on hard times, I have nothing but sympathy.

There are indeed some people out there who have never done a stroke and who consider Giro Day as "Pay Day". They know every benefit out there and know how to go about "playing the game" to get it! Now, I would have thought they could be given jobs working within the Benefits Agency as their life experiences and thorough knowledge of the system is worth harnessing! :)

I see some families growing up and just moving onto the Benefits System, "after all, mum and dad did it, Gran did it and they're OK..." They seem to be making it a career path and guess what their children will probably do...? It makes me angry and yet I understand their "reasoning".

I have to work 2 weeks to pay my mortgage and council tax - they don't have to get out of bed to keep a roof over their head. I work the next 2 weeks to pay other bills and pay for food etc - they are given money for food/clothing etc. I have not a lot left - neither do they! I have worked for a whole month - they have done what they liked. It's no wonder they think we're "morons"! As workers and contributors to the tax system, this is completely skewed logic, I know.

It's the system that needs redressing - along with the LHA system in the council.

Good luck out there - it's a minefield! 107

AngryLandlord wrote this on 2010-07-07 07:05:42 Jane

Unfortunately the LHA applicants actually believe that they are entitled to live off 'greedy' and 'evil' landlords and they are encouraged and supporte in this misguided belief by the Council who go out of their way to stitch-up Landlords.

Latest example I have is the LHA tenant signing up to another property and diverting the payments there without informing me. The council continued to pay me for the whole of the tenancy then decided they wanted the whole lot back as I 'wasn't entitled to the payments'.

I'm currently fighting the case as the tenant is an absconder but the council is not interested!

Have told all my landlord friends/colleagues not to house DSS at any costs as its simply not worth it. 108

airedale1 wrote this on 2010-07-07 08:59:41 Jane,

In my experience, if the council let you receive direct payment straight away, simply by a request from a tenant - you are dealing with a severe hardship case or someone who is a bit bonkers.

Councils are NOT allowed to grant direct payment unless either of the following can be proven.

1.The tenant cannot handle their own affairs and they are assessed for this.
2. They are at least 8 weeks in arrears and this has to be proven.
When they change properties the cycle starts all over again.

If they are a couple, there is something seriously wrong with this scenario.

Most tenancy agreements have a clause that allows a previous landlord to give a prospective landlord previous tenant history, without infringing their rights to be human.

Get hold of their current landlord, or better still another set of tenants.

The whole situation seems far to risky, they could be gypsies for all you know.

I would be on the phone to the previous landlord for a verbal reference.

Your property is worth possible hundreds of thousands, dependent on your location.

If your new tenants have applied for a new LHA claim and have signed the form allowing you to speak with the council directly, check with the council LHA department themselves that they are willing to do this.

If they currently are not - DO NOT RENT your property to this couple.

Forget about the guarantors and stuff and move on -

I currently have an LHA tenant that is £1050 in arrears - and has not paid a penny since April.
They have a council guarantee bond (Worth £380) and a set of guarantors that won't respond to written or telephone messages.

The council are not at all helpful and I will now have to evict him.

The guy himself has serious problems, but I am not prepared to go bust over a councils lack of judgement. They have cancelled his claim because he has missed an interview.

He has been appealing since May - but this is hassle an LHA claimant cannot cope with.

This is what is wrong with LHA - the office worker goes home at 4.30pm and as far as they are concerned, your as much use to them as used toilet paper.

Move on - and get some of your losses back, from the private sector.

You are making an assumption that the LHA people are the lovely people from the housing dept.

They are NOT. They have different priorities and the one you are interested in - do not care one single bit about you. When things go wrong, you will be their good news for that day.

The rest of their day is receiving phone calls from claimants, complaining.

The whole system is knackered.

This will be your life from now on.

T*ere w*ll be b*ts m*ssi*g f*r a suc*esful claim an* yo* wo*t get yo*r r*nt.

(You will get the missing letters from different people at different times from the same department).

It is a nightmare. 109

LondonLLady wrote this on 2010-07-07 09:07:00 Please mention where you live when you post, it's helpful info. I'm in North Westminster, London.
Jane, Paul, Angry, and others, where are your properties?

I'd like some feed back please on a plan--->
I plan to sell my own flat and the rented one below to move. That would be jam today.
I have always acted as my own agent and rented to professional tenants. I have recently heard 5 bed flats could get a good rent from DSS. This increased rent for these 2 flats joined as 1 large flat and another very nice newly renovated 5 bed house would help enormously to add double glazing to the flat and give me a year of super saving toward my own new flat. That would be jam tomorrow. Then the DSS rents return to below private rental levels I'd give notice to leave and sell the first 2 properties to buy my own next one. Jam today. I'd live in 1 bed I'm currently renting out.
Would you recommend taking this risk for 1 or 2 years on a contract and then evicting the families as planned? That would be jam tomorrow, as always. I'm 55.
So, jam today or jam tomorrow?

When I advertise the house as "DSS welcome" large polygamous Arab families come with some decent and some dodgy agents. It's an extraordinary new world for me. Does anyone in London have a good DSS agent?

Does anyone think house prices will drop when DSS payments go below private payments? 110

airedale1 wrote this on 2010-07-07 09:21:58 LondonLady,

If you go to this web site, you may get some useful info.

http://www.thelhaexpert.com

I am based in Cheshire, with property in Merseyside, Lincolnshire, Cheshire, Flintshire and Yorkshire.

In my areas LHA is lower than private sector rents anyway.

London will not feel any pain in values over this issue in my opinion - but even if it does - it will only be short term. 111

LondonLLady wrote this on 2010-07-07 10:46:52 Regarding guarantors- Guarantors must sign the guarantor’s form and have a copy of the letting contract BEFORE the tenant signs the contract.

Thanks for the website tip airedale1, it looks informative. LHA is a very different world from the straight forward private rental. The LHA should be paid on time at the start of the month directly to the landlord, anything else is madness. 112

Lisa wrote this on 2010-07-07 11:43:53 " I’m pretty sure that a large portion of people on social benefits are on benefits because they are BAD at handling money. "

What a load of rubbish. People are on benefits for a variety of reasons but last time I checked being unable to take responsibility for money was no one of these.
This in yet another example of why people on benefit get given a bad reputation, because of sensationalist journalism based on conjecture rather than fact.

People who aren't on benefits can be just as bad at handling money... 113

Lisa wrote this on 2010-07-07 11:44:10 " I’m pretty sure that a large portion of people on social benefits are on benefits because they are BAD at handling money. "

What a load of rubbish. People are on benefits for a variety of reasons but last time I checked being unable to take responsibility for money was not one of these.
This in yet another example of why people on benefit get given a bad reputation, because of sensationalist journalism based on conjecture rather than fact.

People who aren't on benefits can be just as bad at handling money... 114

Twattybollocks wrote this on 2010-07-07 13:59:05 "Benefit receipt as a selected career path and not a hand up". Discuss!!

What an excellent topic. Will write when I have girded my loins and put my vitriol in order.

IMHO the Government must drop the word 'benefit' for something more akin to it's purpose. Why should the chavs/unemployed/clinically stupid/insane 'benefit' from the state?

There should be different levels of payment to which you have to prove your entitlement (I don't like that name either). How about the 'Gratitude' payment? Ie you have to be grateful for the tax payers paying for your fags/white lightning as the lowest in the scale rising to the 'been made redundant due to the recession and will be grateful for any help 'till I get back into work and heres what I am doing to get there asap'?

Silly me, that's not going to happen though is it not with the 'Human Rights Act' around. Some of the scum we talk about on here are sub human and it should not be applied to them anyway.

I suppose it is not any governments faults given that the Civil service remains the same irrespective of who is in power and they fund the QUANGO's who then come up with these stuipid laws and don't have the bollocks to stand up for the rest of us!
TB

Excellent discussion BTW!

PS: My properties are in Cardiff and Lancashire 115

Jane wrote this on 2010-07-07 17:33:34 Hi all

Thanks for all your advice - it's very helpful stuff indeed. My properties are in Flintshire and Yorkshire, by the way. 116

Paul wrote this on 2010-07-07 21:03:11 Jane - In response to your question. " I would like to clarify though, if the tenants arrange for direct payment, can they change their minds once in the property and have it paid directly to themselves instead?"
It is an interesting question you have raised, but in my opinion, purely academic. This is because for the tenant to have had L/L direct payments set up in the first place, the tenant would've had to show that they are unable to deal with their personal affairs. Therefore, I can only assume that if a tenant were to ever want the arrangement reversed (which theoretically they could), it would most probably come about because of a dispute between the landlord and tenant. If this were the case, and as a L/L you suspected that the tenant would withhold rent, you would then have to contact HB to get the claim suspended before the next four weeks' payment was issued. Hopefully this won't happen to you. 117

LondonLLady wrote this on 2010-07-07 22:39:40 TW, there's Job Seeker's Allowance. Pretty clear push toward expected results.

Thanks everyone for letting me know where you're located. All this info is fascinating. 118

Jane wrote this on 2010-07-08 06:18:17 Paul

Yes, I can understand exactly what you mean.

I was mulling over the possibility of a tenant on LHA being full of good intentions - as they usually are at the outset (!) and having their rent paid directly to the Landlord. Christmas is coming etc, they then decide that they would rather have the money paid direct to them, they're a bit short etc etc.

Would/could the council refuse their request??? I have a sneaking suspicion that they couldn't - Human Rights etc etc.

I have heard, although I don't know how much truth there is in it, that in some areas, if a prospective tenant on LHA finds a place but the landlord says they want the rent paid directly to them, there is a way that it can be arranged with the council. I don't know if this is true, but wouldn't be surprised as it would take people off the council waiting lists. Has anybody else heard anything about this? 119

jeff wrote this on 2010-08-13 15:45:16 Hi I think the Rent should be paid to the lanlord full stop.But as for reading some posts on here especially from some landlords.If you cant afford to take the losses of a few months rent then why go into the game.Sounds to me like your your probably worse than the claimants themselves.Jumping into something to make a fast buck off the ones that you are slagging of so much now.Lets face it a £60,000 btl at 5% is only £250 pm so if you cant withstand losing a few months rent.When the profits are so big then youll probably the scumbag landlords that offer shitty bog standard properties that only attract the scumbag tenanats.
I have a porfolio of 50 properties and have many dhss tenants and yep have been to court for evictions numerous times also with proffesionals.That just part of the buisness just the same as any other buisness.As for people on benifits there people just same as eveyone else.
Sorry for my english.Was to busy down the markets when I should have been at school 120

The Landlord wrote this on 2010-08-13 15:53:41 @jeff
I don't really understand your point.

So landlords shouldn't become landlords if they can't afford to take a few months losses? So NO ONE should buy a house in case they lose their job and consequently can't afford their mortgage after a few months? That's basically what you're saying.

What's the difference between someone losing their salary, and a landlord losing their rental income? There isn't really a difference. 121

jeff wrote this on 2010-08-13 16:37:12 yep thats right its a buisness at the end of the day and you have to weigh up all the risks before going into it.Seems to me theirs landlords on here just abusing people who for no fault of their own have fallen on hard times.Their probably the same lanlords that have a few houses of the backs of these people/goverment.Lets face it its your own greed thats got you into this situation and if you havnt got a few quid to cover your payments then your in the wrong game.
And coming onto a web site abusing people who are struggling well that dosnt really say much for ya. 122

LondonLLady wrote this on 2010-08-13 23:11:34 Jeff you might want to know how to cut and paste to Spell Check on Word to make your points clearer. Ask a friend how to do this. It's easy when you know how and a modern marvel, really.

The words greedy and landlords being used together make me tired. It was 30 years into the business before I lived as well as my tenants. My tenants comfort and standard of living came first. Please give that one a rest, thanks.

I believe every one at home or in business should save up 6 months worth of bill costs before they splash out. This means both renters and mortgage payers. 123

Not happy!!! wrote this on 2010-08-14 02:38:24 If a landlord can not afford to keep up payments on a house if a few months rent have been missed, then they really should question their ability as to whether or not they should be in that business.

I have recently lost the house I was living in due to the actions of one such landlord, who's failure to pay the mortgage on the property has now left me in a position where I am to be evicted!

He has happily taken my rent off me (on time and never once missed!), but his inability to manage his finances has had serious consequences on me!

He has since been made bankrupt, failed to protect my bond and also clearly lied to me!

Regardless of how one sided the arguments many landlords seem to possess against DSS tenants, it is quite clear that there are landlords who are equally as bad when it comes to maintaining their finances and keeping up payments!

As far as I am concerned, there should be a law passed stating that unless the person purchasing the property can afford to pay for it through finances gained elsewhere, which do not rely on the income from the property, then they should not be allowed to purchase it in the first place!

I seriously question the ability and mentality of some of these landlords who take on a property and do not expect to pay out for repairs and maintenance as well as keep up with mortgage payments. This be whether or not it is for a DSS tenant or a Professional tenant!

As I am someone who is unemployed and seeking work, I am now in a position of desperately trying to find somewhere to live which accepts DSS tenants, but what annoys me the most about this, is reading ignorant comments from landlords who believe they can do no wrong and that it is only ever DSS tenants who are the problem causers! This is only made worse when you consider it is such a person who is the reason I am now in this mess!

I am sorry to say it LondonLLady, but the words greedy and landlords can be used together in a great many cases, along with many other descriptions which I am sure you do not wish to hear.
Fortunately, I am not like many of the landlords on here who wish to slander everyone because of the actions of others and because of this, I am not small minded enough to think that all landlords are the same.

My biggest regret was ever moving out of the first house I ever rented, as the relationship I had with my landlord was fantastic and exactly what a tenant/landlord relationship should be! Unfortunately he passed away a few years ago and his property was sold on by his family. Since then,(with the exception of one)I have only ever had landlords who have caused me problems!

So it puts it into perspective for me, just how poor the state of property rental has been allowed to drop and highlights the lack of consideration for the people who you rely on for your mortgage payments! This is why I believe that unless you have the money available elsewhere to effectively run a property as a business, then you should not be doing so at the risk of other peoples rights to a roof over their head, respectable living conditions and most of all a clear and precise (separate) income to guarantee your ability to cover the mortgage!

Buying a property to rent out and earn an extra income may be a nice little earner for some, but when you fail to keep up your end of the deal, it has consequences which are far more damaging than the local shop owner who has had to close shop because a new Tesco's has opened up next door! Your failures have direct consequences for the tenants which may mean they struggle to find suitable accommodation elsewhere and in my own case, may not be able to find anything in the short amount of time I have been given before I am kicked out on the street! 124

Daz wrote this on 2010-08-26 20:51:09 Have you thought, that for some Land Lords, this is there only income due to not being able to work and they only have properties which they purchased with compensation following a serious car crash ! 125

Not happy!!! wrote this on 2010-08-27 02:53:15 That may be so, but have you as a landlord considered those who are disabled through things such as car crashes who are on benefits unable to work?

There will always be different people with different circumstances, but regardless of what those circumstances are, DSS tenants are more or less pre-judged by many landlords without any consideration for their circumstances!

I am sorry to say it, but my thoughts remain the same, regardless of how you obtained the money to purchase property to rent, whether by good luck or misfortune! If you choose to make money from the rental of a property, then you should have in place the finances and the resources to maintain a property regardless of your personal position. If you haven't, then you are not in a position to safeguard the tenant (as highlighted above) in the case of emergencies or financial downfalls you yourself may experience elsewhere.

As harsh as it may sound, just because you received the money from a car accident, it does not mean your responsibilities to a tenant should be any different! 126

Midlander wrote this on 2010-08-27 10:10:08 Last night (ITV 7.30pm 26th August) there was a documentary on tenants from hell on the 'Tonight' programme.

It highlighted many of the gripes mentioned on here by landlords, but also showcased a 'businessman' who rented a luxury apartment in the City at £6000 per week (!) who only paid one month's rent, and his landlord had one hellova job getting him out. So it's not only the 'DSS scumbags' that are doing it!

It was said on the programme that the new govt has promised to 'look into' the current landlords' situation.

Prog can be seen here... http://player.stv.tv/programmes/tonight/2010-08-26-1930/

Now I would like to see a balancing programme about tenants' problems with landlords and - particularly - with letting agents. 127

Not happy!!! wrote this on 2010-08-27 14:13:49 I absolutely agree Midlander, there should be a programme dedicated to Landlords from hell, because they DO exist and from my experiences, they are NOT a rare thing! 128