No DSS when renting.

[Arrr Sez I 10]

I definitely felt very sorry for those landlords in the program who suffered bad tenants running up arrears and leaving thousands of pounds worth of damage to the property. It was malicious damage as well. They should be put in prison, it was criminal damage. If only they had run credit checks and referenced these bad eggs sufficiently they would have been safe. A stark warning to all private landlords to protect your assets at all costs.

[Steptoad 12]

Letting agencies are not always that good. A close relative used one to let his house, only to find himself in court after the agency let the house to people who used it as a cannabis farm and then tried to blame him.

[petecob 10]

The lady who let some one rent it while she was not there,

i felt for her and the mess the house was in was disgusting,

and unfortunately i agree this time, it is prison worthy for the damage they did,

 

did not see in film, did she do a check or not

[Arrr Sez I 10]

The lady who let some one rent it while she was not there,

i felt for her and the mess the house was in was disgusting,

and unfortunately i agree this time, it is prison worthy for the damage they did,

 

did not see in film, did she do a check or not

 

I think her family was abroad initially or out of London anyway, can't remember if she had instructed a letting agent to manage the place whilst she was away.

[Jeffrey Shaw 90]

The lady who let some one rent it while she was not there,

i felt for her and the mess the house was in was disgusting,

and unfortunately i agree this time, it is prison worthy for the damage they did

If so, I hope that someone thought to prosecute. See the Criminal Damage Act 1971.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1971/48/contents

[I1L2T3 10]

If so, I hope that someone thought to prosecute. See the Criminal Damage Act 1971.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1971/48/contents

 

Yes they should. Wonder how often people actually do, having been through one major legal battle already.

[Jeffrey Shaw 90]

Yes they should. Wonder how often people actually do, having been through one major legal battle already.

It's not the same. CDA 1971 creates criminal liability, so prosecutions are usually by the CPS at no cost to the property owner.

[geared 302]

Problem is the police/CPS can't be bothered because all the accused will pass the buck and taking it to a civil court doesn't get decent results because these people have no money or job to pay for the damage they do.

 

The only 'victory' you can get is a personal one after securing a guilty verdict and a £1 a week payment

[danmas86 10]

The new Disability Discrimination Act forbids any landlord or agent to advertise "No DSS" as this could discriminate against anybody who claims any kind of benefit, not just housing benefit.

 

Apart from the fact the "DSS" has not existed for some time but remains in the public domain as a euphemism for "Housing Benefit", the latter should be the only term used if you don't want to accept tenants who are claiming housing benefit - because that is exactly what you are trying to avoid. To continue using "No DSS" will make you open to being prosecuted under the DDA 2005 as you are protentially discriminating against all benefit claimants! Beware!

[ttparsons 10]

Thanks for the advice.

[Cyclone 10]

Have you got a link to the legislation?

 

Edit - can you be prosecuted for "potentially" discriminating, as opposed to actually discriminating?

[geared 302]

So are they allowed to advertise 'no housing benefit' or something similar??

 

Who exactly is going to prosecute for this 'crime' anyway, are the police really going to start trawling through every single advert in the country and go after the person directly??

 

I seriously doubt it.