Discrimination in the rental sector

The letting agent has a duty to present the best low risk candidate tenants to his landlord client. As such the employed professional or student will always win over a benefits tenant. Benefits candidates are also often unable to provide a reliable guarantor (uk citizen & home owner).

So, more stir it up against Landlords rhetoric from Shelter & Co, however as they provide not a jot of investment in the economy save a few self serving jobs perhaps the campaign and petition should be "Close Shelter - Support Landlords"

They are confusing economics with discrimination. My experience with HB means no-one on benefits gets in to any of my properties. No ranting by Shelter will change that. If legislation forces me down that road I will simply sell up.

I sent a FB message to Shelter in this debate and got a following reply:
==quote==Hello Antonina,

Thanks for getting in touch about our campaign to end DSS discrimination.

We know there are still some buy-to-let mortgage lenders who have policies that don’t allow landlords to rent to people on housing benefit. However, recent discussions with the representatives from the mortgage industry have suggested the majority of the buy-to-let market do now allow landlords to let to tenants in receipt of benefits – with some suggesting that up to 85% of the market, by market share, allow it.

Many large lenders, including Nationwide & BM Solutions have recognised that these policies are unfair and have made changes. We’re calling on any lender who still has this policy to remove it, but in the meantime, we’d encourage landlords to shop around to choose a lender who doesn’t unfairly restrict who they can let to.

As for your question on Section 24, we did support the introduction of the tax changes on the basis that they might help dampen the risk of a bubble building up in buy-to-let - and because if the government chooses, the money could be used to undo the damaging freeze on Local Housing Allowance rates.

However, we do think the government must look closely at any unintended consequences of the policy for the tenants of the minority of landlords with marginal business models.

You can read more on our thoughts on Section 24 here: http://shltr.org.uk/e5n

Many thanks,
Sam @ Shelter
==unquote==
There is quite a discussion on their FB page, with quite a lot of tenants thinking that they should be exempted from paying rent as they are benefits' tenants... You could not just make it up.

Reply to the comment left by at 22/08/2018 - 08:52
I am totally with you on this. Recently I eventually (4 months) gained a possession order in 14 days. Initially Gravesham were telling me they could only pay the tenants arrears if I was prepared to grant a new tenancy of 6 months. I called this blackmail. The first court order was for current rent plus £10 per week. The tenant only paid the £10 per week ignoring the current rent difference. On hearing of the eviction Gravesham council immediately stopped HB payments. even a council will not pay rent the that is due. So why should tenants. To make matters worse of course the tenant will no doubt sit there until the bailiffs go in.

Why don't Shelter invest in property and provide accommodation for poor DSS tenants. See how long that'll last.

Reply to the comment left by Siobhan Southern at 22/08/2018 - 09:23
Further to this Siobhan - With there annual budget of £50 million they could house quite a number if housing each homeless cost £100k (doubtful) it would house 500 people.

Dear Shelter
If you think it is unfair discrimination for landlords to refuse to rent to impecunious people who want to pay rent in arrears (if they haven't spent it on other things first), there is a straightforward solution. Lobby for the Government to offer HB tenants interest-free loans equivalent to one month's rent (two months' if the tenants can't afford their deposit) so they can pay their landlords upfront. I am sure the Government will view this as sound economics and a totally zero-risk, copper-bottomed, gold-plated investment. You must agree that it would be unjustly discriminating against HB tenants if the Government refused them this. Alternatively, you could invite the banks to invest in this scheme, or maybe use your own funds. Just a thought.

I will wait for the mortgage lender to write to me and change their mortgage terms to allow HB tenants. Without this my hands are tied, no matter how much Shelter would like it to be different.
Also, what bright spark thought it would be a great idea to pay the rent to the benefits recipient instead of the landlord? This seems to have caused far more evictions than there were before.

I agree there is discrimination within the rental sector.

Its the only business I am aware of that cannot deduct significant operating costs from taxable income.