Landlords are not faceless ogres, many landlords are just couples who each had a property and decided to rent one or were forced to do so by market conditions when they decided to move in together. The profits are not huge, a boiler can cost thousands and many have a shorter lifespan because tenants play with them. A landlord can lose $20,000 from a tenant who doesn`t pay rent, vandalizes a property and then needs a legal way to evict them. That`s 20,000 profits and not rent (which goes for mortgage, insurance, agents, management, repairs and maintenance). There is simply no way a government will ever succeed in firing LL to take control of HB`s tenants. So forget all those stupid legal cases, none of which will ever lead to forcing LL to accept HB tenants. It would be as if Narks & Spencer were selling their faith for the same ories as Aldi!!!!!!! It will never be hapoen because you simply cannot dictate to an individual in this xase a LL what he is allowed to demand. The last crowd of idiots who tried this were the stupid Labour governments of the 60s and 70s, which led to a mass exodus of LL that only recovered in the 80s with the introduction of S21 and 8 and the AST. Going back into the future with rental regulations is just crazy. The result will be the same………………. A mass exodus of private LL.
Expecting the LL DSS tenant to take over when rents rise due to the significantly reduced supply is for the birds. Things will be much harder for regular renters, let alone HB, who frankly won`t stand a chance unless they move to cheaper and less popular parts of the country. I sympathize with the DSS tenant, but honestly not my problem buddy. You pay my market rent or you don`t become one of my tenants. Nothing personal, just business! Oh my God, you`re a sad little man. You are one of many naïve idiots LL deals with. We avoid people like you who are so full of their rights. You will find that my views are realistic and shared by the majority of workers. Welfare classes will not like that, but they will not have a say because they do not contribute anything. They will do as they are told, and if that means moving their lives to cheaper areas, then that is what needs to happen. Private LL won`t give up on welfare classes because there isn`t enough money left and dealing with HB types is a real effort and just not worth it. That`s why LL doesn`t want any more hB tenants.
Hard, if you don`t like it, it`s just business. But for LL, which is willing to take the huge risks associated with HB tenants, then there is certainly the case that the actual government salary gives some sort of guarantee that the rent will be paid regardless of the economic circumstances. Just read the reviews on this site to see that landlords have lost £10,000 to £30,000 for bad tenants destroying their properties, some have had to remortgage their properties to fund this, so why risk DSS when there is a shortage of properties and a large number of tenants? The first case to make headlines came in February 2018, when single mother Rosie Keogh, who had a perfect rent payment balance, filed a lawsuit against rental agent Nicholas George, who had a “No DSS” policy and refused to consider her application. My question is: how can this be overcome in the meantime? I agree that rejecting someone on DSS is not direct discrimination, but it may amount to indirect discrimination, even if it is not your intention (this is the problem with indirect discrimination itself). If you issue S21, most boards will take the expiration of the S21 as a date on which they are required to accommodate IF tenants have children or are at risk. It`s just London and the big cities telling tenants to wait for the bailiff. The root of the problem runs deeper than just “landlords rejecting DSS tenants” – so much deeper. If ALL landlords accept DAS tenants, the underlying problems of a faulty system will not be resolved. The reality is, rightly or wrongly, that it is easy to create a practical case for why landlords should choose non-DSS tenants over DSS applicants. With that in mind, it`s really hard to find the usefulness of the “NO DSS” ban, because even if landlords are forced to accept applications from applicants for housing assistance, I think it would be fairly easy for landlords to justify their reason for choosing a non-DSS tenant. It would not be a bad thing to get rid of pests in the north.
Much cheaper for the government and it would make more rental properties in London available for those wishing to work. It is just a fact that the government should not pay a lot of money to house welfare recipients in London. K won`t cover them because the rent they`re willing to pay doesn`t meet my requirements. In addition, there are all the associated business risks. In short, I don`t want government money to pay my rent, and it`s not enough and insufficient for my needs. No one can force a private LL to take over a UC tenant. It really doesn`t bother me that I don`t allow UC tents. Most of the time, government policy causes this, as if things were different, I would consider UC tenants. It is quite possible that uC tenants will avoid the Other bC if they make the effort to work only 16 hours a week. But they can`t even bother to do it. Meanwhile, millions of migrants flock to do the work that IC`s lazy tenants reject. Keep in mind that all DSS tenants are only allowed to rent in the lowest 30% of the rent in an area, on top of that, if a tenant, even non-DSS, has more rooms than they need according to the board`s rules, they won`t receive the full rent.
So the root of the problem is much deeper than landlords who simply refuse to reject DSS tenants. It is also based on the fact that we cannot put in place the right protection policies to secure our investments when granting leases to DSS tenants. An owner who owns a building in New York with at least six (6) units, or a broker who works with such an owner, must screen and consider all potential tenants in the same way. It is illegal to use government support as a reason to deny someone an apartment. We conclude that the respondent unlawfully indirectly discriminated against the plaintiff by imposing a PNP [provision, criteria or practice] that housing assistance recipients could not apply to these three properties. Equally outrageous is the fact that landlords no longer receive direct rent payments that are given to the tenant to pass on to the landlord. This has proven to be the reason why so many DSS tenants have defaulted because they simply do not pass on the rent. Several large purchase lenders have relaxed their mortgage terms to allow homeowners to rent homes to tenants with housing benefits.
These include NatWest Bank, Nationwide and Cooperative Bank. It is common to see “no DSS” or “DSS accepted” on rental property listings. However, this is an illegal practice. Landlords should not discriminate against DAS recipients in the selection of their tenants, as long as the applicant meets all other eligibility criteria. Most tenants who refuse to leave do so at the express request of the local council, which tells them that if they leave before the bailiffs arrive, they have lost their right to temporary accommodation by making them homeless. Although I am a private tenant claiming housing allowance, I don`t think private landlords are to blame. The fact is that the government has overpopulated our country. It`s as simple as that.
Social housing has been sold, people complain that it is not being replaced. How can this situation go on forever? Where are they going to build them when there is no more land, but boats full of people arrive! It is our advice that discriminates. Where is the help for singles? Why are one-bedroom properties never built? Why are people under 35 supposed to live in a shared apartment, like a bunch of students? Who is the one who created the local housing allowance, in most areas, a week-long permit would not cover a night in a B&B. They did it because they know that landlords will not touch us with a loss of rent, because it is impossible to live on it. You pay rent directly to tenants rather than landlords, if your skin, hunger and rent go into your bank account, what will you do? You will use it to eat.