New partnership wants to know why private landlords won’t rent to councils

Reply to the comment left by Beaver at 02/09/2024 - 12:46
Thank you

Reply to the comment left by Wendy O’Connor at 04/09/2024 - 10:28
Yes if the Council purchased my flats when they were on the market, for example, they could have housed quite a few people and saved thousands/millions in b&b and hotel accommodation over a few years. My flats have been rented out successfully for 10 years, great small rental flats. No new flats need to be built with all the delays and red tape. It's a no brainer.

Having just gained possession of a property from an benefits tenant can give you about 15,000 reasons why I will never rent via the public sector again.

Reply to the comment left by Nick Pope at 08/09/2024 - 08:17
In my case, there were only 12,000 reasons and two years of aggravation. NEVER again will I take any tenant who qualities for legal aid, which in effect means anyone in receipt of benefits.

and don't even think of doing a property furnished or partly furnished. I did several through Rolls Royce and they paid up for all damage and cleaning but I did one for a lady on benefits, she sold the washing machine and replaced it with another 2nd hand one and complained it wasn't working - paraphrasing Norman Tebbit , she was on her bike and turfed out.

I agree re "professional" tenants. I once, very foolishly, chose a self-employed sound engineer with his homemaker wife and 10 and 12 year children who were in independent schools over a German banker and his wife and new baby. I only received one month of full rent, then it was always 70-75% with excuses about non-payment of their invoices, even though the lids' school fees presumably were being paid, he ran a newish BMW and his accountant had testified his income was over £100K and showed me the tax returns from 18 months previously.

They flooded the kitchen by over-rumming the bath, scraped the wooden floors moving furniture around, played football indoors and broke 160 year old coloured glass in the hallway, scrawled crayons on the walls etc. When I finally got them out, I discovered my chances of recovering my losses via a CCJ were zero: self-employed you see, so no way to deduct earnings at source. Also no savings, and the car and all other assets were in the name of his mother-in-law.

If I ever take a self-employed person again, I will expect 12 months rent in advance, invoices for the last two years, bank statements and a guarantor. The CCJ system is utterly unfit for person. Debts awarded by a court judgement should at the minimum be backed up by being added to people's tax bills, with an appropriate fee payable to HMRC for the administration costs.

Reply to the comment left by AnthonyJames at 08/09/2024 - 12:25
I agree, I have been hoping for the return of debtors prisons for many years.

The Council's change the rules constantly. AFTER you've took their tenant.
Plus when new staff member comes in, all original arrangements get chucked away.
I'm biggest private provider to Nottingham's Benefit tenants over 27 years, you'd think they'd ask me why-They don't.

For all the myriad reasons given by posters above, renting direct to homeless people is a bad idea and generally not financially sensible. A few years ago my own council in Scotland had a scheme whereby a landlord could sign up to house someone on the council's waiting list for three years and be given a guaranteed rent. The council was responsible for collecting the rent and any repairs and would hand the property back to you in the same state that they took it. The only slight downside was that the rent was a bit less than you could get on the open market - but without any risk it was often worthwhile. They don't do it anymore, maybe because they feel that rents are too high to fund.

Reply to the comment left by Mick Roberts at 08/09/2024 - 15:44
the reality is they don't want to know Mick, which is whey they don't ask.

As long as you keep taking benefit tenants they will not worry about the situation. They have an overflowing list regardless if you take a tenant or not, the numbers are overwhelming.

They either can't see the wood for the trees or can see the trees or they don't want to even acknowledge that a lot of trees mean its a wood.

Either way it's a blame game they will always win. If the council's can't blame the LL, they blame the government for not providing the funds.

This means they are never at fault yet act with impunity also as the government doesn't care who they blame, as long as it's not them...

The PRS WILL have to change if this carries on. Whoever is left in the game is going to have to be as cut throat as the council and the government. They want private LL's out? fine, the numbers of properties available will drop and those LL's are left are going to be very, very selective.

Every tenant is going to be rejected unless whiter than white in terms of referencing etc - everyone else who doesn't meet the criteria (not just affordability either!) will be pushed aside.

Are you now being more selective when you have property become vacant or are your properties located in areas where it is difficult to have find self funding tenants?

Have you taken on those coming from abroad to work in the care sector, over benefits tenants for example?

Have you approached other councils (not Notts) that want to take your properties for example?