Jump to content

This article about dss tenants made my blood boil


Recommended Posts

http://www.propertyinvestmentproject.co.uk/blog/reasons-why-landlords-shouldnt-accept-dss-tenants/#comment-541785

 

The misconceptions around benefits is astounding. Considering 7/8 of claimants are in work. Just having any ' job ' doesnt make a tenant any more or less of a risk. Especially in this precarious low paid job market.

 

Id like to see some figures around this!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wouldn't want DSS tenants renting my house. Most private owners feel the same. Simple.

 

Do you mean unemployed?

No such thing as DSS people claim for all sorts of reasons...amazon limit tax liabilities, you think they dont have means?

 

---------- Post added 12-07-2015 at 13:18 ----------

 

Why even consider a potential tenant who gets declined for RGI. Makes no sense when there are so many tenants who would get approved and are desperate to rent a decent property.

 

Below makes interesting watching for the reality of letting to those on low income.

 

http://www.channel5.com/shows/nightmare-tenants-slum-landlords/episodes

 

Landlords should be thankful for housing benefit inflating rental prices.

 

I agree about an unemployed tenant being higher risk.

 

But thats not this so called DSS which suggests something else! I would think only considering renting to high income employed people severely narrows the renting pool. Even then its exposure to debts and lifestyle not just income. Even at the average local income. After tax and ni, debts it doesnt leave much to play with.

 

So many inaccuracies in that article its untrue.

 

---------- Post added 12-07-2015 at 13:34 ----------

 

Landlords mopping up the gravy train of inflated rents for years thanks to the state and turn around and say no dss.

These are parasites who should get a proper job. Many landlords are nothing more than liggers imo. Nowt better than a person who dodges work. Same level.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would think only considering renting to high income employed people severely narrows the renting pool. Even then its exposure to debts and lifestyle not just income. Even at the average local income. After tax and ni, debts it doesnt leave much to play with.

 

Landlords mopping up the gravy train of inflated rents for years thanks to the state and turn around and say no dss. These are parasites who should get a proper job. Many landlords are nothing more than liggers imo. Nowt better than a person who dodges work. Same level.

 

Renting only to those who are working and pass RGI checks removes nearly all the risks associated with BTL. The landlord gets paid no matter what and throughout the entire eviction process plus any damage costs if it comes to that. Very little if any loss of income for the landlord. If a working tenant loses his job, the landlord just serves him notice to vacate, then simply finds a new working tenant who will pass RGI again. Happy days.

 

Or the landlord can take on high risk low income DSS tenants with no safeguard, have no RGI, ongoing hassles with the council and risk losing a fortune, even bankruptcy due to lost rent and damage. This is the era of generationS rent, working tenants who will pass RGI are now in abundance.

 

Most landlords do have proper jobs and businesses, BTL just making up part of their investment strategy. Why not invest in property, they don't call it 'safe as houses' for nothing. Nobody owes anyone a living or a house. The first stake anybody should have in a country is the ownership of the roof over their head. If they haven't got that, they haven't got self respect. A landlord looks after the building, the asset, he doesn't look after the tenant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Renting only to those who are working and pass RGI checks removes nearly all the risks associated with BTL. The landlord gets paid no matter what and throughout the entire eviction process plus any damage costs if it comes to that. Very little if any loss of income for the landlord. If a working tenant loses his job, the landlord just serves him notice to vacate, then simply finds a new working tenant who will pass RGI again. Happy days.

 

Or the landlord can take on high risk low income DSS tenants with no safeguard, have no RGI, ongoing hassles with the council and risk losing a fortune, even bankruptcy due to lost rent and damage. This is the era of generationS rent, working tenants who will pass RGI are now in abundance.

 

Most landlords do have proper jobs and businesses, BTL just making up part of their investment strategy. Why not invest in property, they don't call it 'safe as houses' for nothing. Nobody owes anyone a living or a house. The first stake anybody should have in a country is the ownership of the roof over their head. If they haven't got that, they haven't got self respect. A landlord looks after the building, the asset, he doesn't look after the tenant.

 

7/8 of claimants are working. Theres no such thing as dss anyway...or do landlords not rent to people with children for example?

Dss= not working to many landlords. Not the case.

All you have to do for an rgi check is pass a basic credit check and provide references. Its not the same as taking a loan out and even those with average credit can pass it.

 

What should be upmost is affordability. And also a knowledge of local pay.

 

Sheff is £18k i believe. Id class that as low income. Still youd be better renting to a self employed person on same money as they can offset tax. A working person cant.

 

---------- Post added 12-07-2015 at 15:58 ----------

 

Its this issue around dss i find unsavoury.

Btl landlords been pimping off state for years. They should be more sympathetic to people in various circumstances.

 

---------- Post added 12-07-2015 at 16:09 ----------

 

If btl landlords cant sustain losses they shouldnt be expecting a profit. If they dont behave professionally, then its not a business.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Btl is a business. Like any other Business.

Why make it personal? If you unfortunate to be in a position where you rely on HB to help you make up your rent liability then not only are you going to face predujice from the likes of landlords but also other forms of credit like car loans etc. The business person is simply covering his back.

 

But I have two tenants on HB one working one not. I have not got a problem with it. The working one is paying £50 a month under market value but the other is paying £50 over market value and I was offered it as a carrot dangler from the Council as this disabled person could not find the right flat suiting their disability in the area of their choice. So one pays off the other and I'm even.

 

What I do have a gripe with the Council found tenants is if for whatever reason you need to give notice on a tenant on HB they advise the tenant to stay put until the bailiffs come knocking. I am one of a few who source tenants in need from Housing Solutions but when I need Housing Solutions to help me and my tenant, their customer when a S21 situation arises they don't want to know.

 

Then when the bailiff come a knocking then and only then do they get emergency accomadatiom on a take it or leave it basis. Meanwhile I have to face losing rent and face legal costs. Surely in the time the S21 notice takes to take effect (min 2 months) they could at least try and find somewhere like they did the first time? Rather than put the tenant in such a stressful situation.

Edited by GerryBooth
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Btl landlords been pimping off state for years. They should be more sympathetic to people in various circumstances.

 

A Landlord should not be expected to be some kind of social safety net or carer for those less fortunate. I think that would be a little daft and very unfair on them. What Landlords are trying to do is make good investment choices and profit. They're doing this by selling a product at a price - hopefully it's a product someone wants at a price they can afford.

 

Good Landlords have good properties, in good nick, they look after them well as they're an expensive asset and they set their rents at market rates (or just under to make them even more attractive). Bad Landlords obviously exist.

 

I would expect letting to someone in receipt of benefits (I'm mainly talking about LHA, I suppose) is a choice made reluctantly by some Landlords; the article goes into a few reasons why. These aren't made-up reasons, but the style of writing can be read as a bit offensive. There's no point in it making your blood boil, though, the author is clearly writing from personal experience of being on the other side. It sounds... messy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But 'T becoming unemployed' is unlikely to be a ground on which L can terminate a letting.

 

Money is good enough when working...evicts if loses job. Mmmmm. Not nice.

 

---------- Post added 13-07-2015 at 10:02 ----------

 

A Landlord should not be expected to be some kind of social safety net or carer for those less fortunate. I think that would be a little daft and very unfair on them. What Landlords are trying to do is make good investment choices and profit. They're doing this by selling a product at a price - hopefully it's a product someone wants at a price they can afford.

 

Good Landlords have good properties, in good nick, they look after them well as they're an expensive asset and they set their rents at market rates (or just under to make them even more attractive). Bad Landlords obviously exist.

 

I would expect letting to someone in receipt of benefits (I'm mainly talking about LHA, I suppose) is a choice made reluctantly by some Landlords; the article goes into a few reasons why. These aren't made-up reasons, but the style of writing can be read as a bit offensive. There's no point in it making your blood boil, though, the author is clearly writing from personal experience of being on the other side. It sounds... messy.

 

The author puts forward points in a misinformed way.

Weve all had bad experiences. To be frank it makes me laugh landlords can be so righteous, considering my bad experiences and other people i know.

 

Truth is so called working tenants can fall on harder times too...evicting them is irresponsible. Working with people makes for a better relationship and trust both ways.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.