Brian Dixon
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
#1
Guest 943- Registered: 15 May 2013
- Posts: 449
#2
This has been going on for a long time. If you look at most adverts for rental..They state, the landlords only want working people..The problem is housing benefit goes directly to the claimant and of course if you have drink or drug issues and money issues, the rent is not paid...The councils,housing associations have lists of landlords who are to willing house people on benefits..The rent money should go directly to the landlords and that way there is some regulation of the housing system i.e filter out the shady landlords.
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
#3
It's not true to say that benefits only go to tenants, Peter, it can go straight to the Landlord.
Roger
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
#4
That used to be the case, Roger, but as the new Universal credit is introduced, all benefits will go to the claimant.
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#5
at present my understanding is that it goes straight to the landlord, will be a disaster if that is changed.
Jan Higgins
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,931
#6
Years ago we preferred and happily let our house to a single mother on benefits because the rent was paid directly to us so we knew the mortgage payments would be safe. If I was in the same situation now under the new system I would certainly think twice unless I knew the applicant personally.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to be neutral and polite but it is hard and getting even more difficult at times.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Guest 700- Registered: 11 Jun 2010
- Posts: 2,868
#7
Landlords are NOT all shady!
Years ago my grandmother let a house and the tenant of many years wanted to buy it so she let him pay by small instalments instead of renting until it was paid for.
She also had another house, where the woman tenant was under police surveillance, and one winter the woman chopped up the gate and the front room floor, for firewood - grandma had to pay for a concrete floor to replace it, but was unable to get the woman out of the house, the woman at one point tied the children to the bedpost and went out in the night. NSPCC were involved too.
Landlords at times have a lot to put up with. I think the rent at that time was about 3 shillings and 6d. It is no fun letting property. Controlled tenancy meant you could not get a person out of the property.
---------------------------------------------------
Lincolnshire Born and Bred
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
#8
Post 4 - thank you Peter - but it will be madness if that is the case; what could they possibly have been thinking when they decided that ?
Post 5 - absolutely agree Howard.
Some time ago, we let our flat out to tenants and they had to start claiming benefits, which were paid direct to us. She paid half the rent and the State paid the other half. She then stoppped paying her half and moved out but sublet it and it took ages and a lot of money to gain occupancy of our own property. She was a definite benefit cheat, I hope the Council caught up with her.
We have great tenants now, really lovely couple.
Roger