rocco Posted March 9, 2014 Share Posted March 9, 2014 I'm a landlord and I have also just launched a letting agency in Sheffield that uniquely specialises in letting to tenants on benefits. I spent over 20 years working in Sheffields benefit service so this does put me at an advantage as I understand the benefit regulations and how to avoid incurring overpayments of housing benefit (this can be a nasty surprise for any landlord). I also spend a lot of time working with and supporting my tenants with any benefit related issues so they know that they can come to me if they do ever have a problem. From my personal point of view all of my tenants that are on benefits have been good tenants, they haven't trashed their properties and they pay their rent on time. In fact the one tenant that has caused me a problem recently was actually a working tenant. I find it difficult that many people assume that all people in receipt of benefits are bad, that they smash up their properties and incur rent arrears, this is simply not true. If we think hard most of us will know people who are in receipt of benefits i.e. tax credits, retirement benefits etc. Do you consider that those people would be rogue tenants? My bet is that you will know equally as many working people that would make a bad tenant. My point is that there is good and bad in all types people, its not all people that are on benefits that will cause a landlord a problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeffrey Shaw Posted March 10, 2014 Share Posted March 10, 2014 The problems are caused less by the people that are on benefits than by late/non-receipt of the benefits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mollymop60 Posted September 30, 2015 Share Posted September 30, 2015 Hi, where is your letting agency ? I have a son who is looking for a house with 2 other men all in there 50s who are tenants at a house in Psalter lane and have been there for about 6 years but the landlord has decided he is selling the house, they want somewhere in the Netheredge area as my son has a lot of hospital appointments if you know of anywhere can you let me know ? Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted September 30, 2015 Share Posted September 30, 2015 (edited) i suppose a certain b&b some time ago would have been prudent to advertise 'heterosexual, married christian couples with no vices only' Sexuality is a protected characteristic, such an advert would be illegal. Employment status is not protected, so you can legally use it to select or discriminate if you wish. ---------- Post added 30-09-2015 at 13:03 ---------- The landlord would want to know because he could find that he was uninsured. I agree, though, that there is no reason to evict a good paying tenant. I don't think my landlords building insurance made any reference to the employment status of the tenants, although that's just from memory. Old thread, resurrected, now I find I'm repeating myself! At least I'm consistent. Edited September 30, 2015 by Cyclone Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
muckymurphy Posted September 30, 2015 Share Posted September 30, 2015 (edited) Sexuality is a protected characteristic, such an advert would be illegal. Employment status is not protected, so you can legally use it to select or discriminate if you wish. ---------- Post added 30-09-2015 at 13:03 ---------- I don't think my landlords building insurance made any reference to the employment status of the tenants, although that's just from memory. Old thread, resurrected, now I find I'm repeating myself! At least I'm consistent. or bored! Edited October 3, 2015 by nikki-red Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happ Hazzard Posted September 30, 2015 Share Posted September 30, 2015 Tenants on benefits mean more wear and tear on a property as they are at home far more than working tenants. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeffrey Shaw Posted September 30, 2015 Share Posted September 30, 2015 Tenants on benefits mean more wear and tear on a property as they are at home far more than working tenants. But: a. not all people at home all day are on benefits; and b. not all people on benefits are non-working. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aliceBB Posted October 2, 2015 Share Posted October 2, 2015 (edited) Plus, it is possible to be fully employed, yet on benefits, especially in London. For example, someone working 40 hours p.w. on the minimum wage in London will struggle to afford a room in a shared flat (as well as heating it and feeding and clothing themsleves) and may well qualify for Housing Benefit. Edited October 2, 2015 by aliceBB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ms Macbeth Posted October 3, 2015 Share Posted October 3, 2015 Why are we still using the term 'DSS'? Why not just 'Benefits'? The Dept of Social Security has been defunct for years, (since around 2001?) when it became the Dept of Work and Pensions, the only place I ever see DSS mentioned is when its part of an ad for properties to rent, as in 'No DSS'. How people take care of their homes shouldn't be judged purely on their status with regards to benefits. I've been in some sparklingly clean but threadbare homes, and some full of luxury items that need a deep clean! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GVOWL Posted October 3, 2015 Share Posted October 3, 2015 Landlords always know, because a tenant claiming HB has to get the landlord to complete a form. And there lies the problem, the authorities start getting involved, rent payments become open to scrutiny by the taxman and the landlord doesn't like it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now