Shelter ask for Landlords views

Reply to the comment left by Clint at 14/06/2019 - 17:10
Well spotted Clint. I have just looked at that and found that I could add as many 'likes' (all in one session) as I wanted to do. All VERY misleading.......

Reply to the comment left by ameliahartman at 15/06/2019 - 00:44I have filled in the form . I`ve been doing DSS for 20 years. Shelter was formed 53 years ago . I`ve been acutely aware of the failings in the management of the DSS/ LHA/UC system as long as I can remember . I find it incredible that Shelter are just beginning to cotton on to the fact that there might be a problem with the system 53 years into their existence. I find it incredible that they are just considering engaging with LL`s .
Its relatively simple . I have a property and I want some rent for it from a tenant. If that tenant is working they talk to me and give me confidence that they can afford the rent and will pay that rent. If I ring them they pick up the phone and we have an open friendly transparent professional conversation.
When a tenant cannot afford the rent themselves the Council / Job Centre / DWP become their donors and their surrogate rent payers . But when I pick up the phone to any of those surrogates they say its none of my business and refuse to talk to me. That`s not reasonable . Its tax payers money not the tenants so they should talk to me on an equal footing with the tenant in a transparent 3 way conversation.
Until Shelter / Gov / Council / DWP / JC break that bunker mentality and that adversarial culture within they will be on a losing wicket .
In 1998 I became involved in multi agency meetings when sharing of information was just beginning to take shape. They were in their infancy. Historically no agency spoke to another agency and we were all super protective of what we saw as the privileged information of `our client` . But in effect the client belonged to everyone . Everyone was trying to help that client in their own way. Just a slightly different focus. Each statutory agency began to slowly realise that they could work better together than alone . We formed sharing protocols and called them SLA`s ( service level agreements ) It was brilliant as it was like we were all now working together towards a common goal problem solving multi faceted issues collectively and collaboratively .
That was 20 years ago and when i started taking DSS tenants for business reasons primarily but also I was happy to help the more vulnerable in our society the biggest problem to overcome was trying to speak to the people who you would think had a vested interest in working with me to provide that safe house and safe environment . I reached out to Shelter then and they ignored me and were hostile on the phone. So were the council so were other random agencies purporting to help the homeless. There was and still is this massive secrecy about them. So the culture has to change and maybe this is a start I just dont know . So public agency talking to public agency has made leaps forward over the years . But public to private collaboration seems still stuck in the dark ages. The world will not fail if someone just someone would pick up the phone and tell me WTF is going on . If they don`t I revert to defending my territory and grab for my Sec 21`s.
There is something very wrong when i get paid LHA direct for a year then its cancelled one day and no one bothers to tell me and I find out 4 weeks later. They then pay UC to the alcoholic tenant and put them in rehab . No one rings me up for a reference before they do that to see if there are any vulnerability factors . If I ring up the council / JC / DWP they all blank me . They say their `relationship` is with the tenant not me. So they give £650 of taxpayers money to an alcoholic behind my back.
How can Shelter be unaware of these types of anecdotal stories as to why LL`s wont take DSS I am unclear . For me its been as clear as daylight for the last 20 years.
I wish their efforts well in changing their focus for the good of all

Reply to the comment left by ameliahartman at 15/06/2019 - 00:44
I cannot imagine how difficult it must be for any landlord to work at Shelter.

They absolutely must know that LHA rate caps and Universal credit deter landlords from letting to those who cannot afford to buy, and yet it would go completely against Shelter's left wing politics to support a capitalist approach to this problem. The level of conflict there is of the highest level.

Likewise, Shelter will be acutely aware that many landlords are selling up due to section 24, resulting in tenants who cannot afford to buy a home to move out. The shrinkage of the PRS will result in more homelessness of the truly vulnerable. However, Shelter support Section 24. Again another conflict of the highest magnitude.

That's just scratching the surface though. Have you read many of the Guest articles submitted by "Appalled Landlord". This person speaks openly about the many reasons landlords have to detest Shelter - see >>> https://www.property118.com/author/appalled-landlord/

I suspect this 'Approach' from Shelter is a guarded response to the National Landlord Alliance being formed and making it publicly known that Shelter are in their sights. Amelia, I'm sure you have a balanced view but there is plenty of evidence of Shelter publicly vilifying landlords and tarring us all with the same brush because of a minority of toe rags within our sector. Call me sceptical but just as Larry n the rest of us are making headway with certain issues, Shelter now want to engage with us ... yeah right!

Hear Hear JC that's exactly it what u say:
But when I pick up the phone to any of those surrogates they say its none of my business and refuse to talk to me. That`s not reasonable . Its tax payers money not the tenants so they should talk to me on an equal footing with the tenant in a transparent 3 way conversation.
Until Shelter / Gov / Council / DWP / JC break that bunker mentality
I am saying now to UC, What is the worst that can happen if you pay us the rent directly? Oh I see, tenant's rent gets paid & they don't lose their home.
One simple thing I've argued for & I recently had a meeting with 4 high up UC people who they sent to see me, I have said the first step, we TELL U a case, we say this woman, her rent is wrong. Don't tell me anything. Here is her name details etc. Go away, check the claim, this is wrong with it. They said Can't. I said we ain't gonna' solve ote then.
Anyway this particular case, I could see them thinking as it had gone to complaint Stage ICE no turning back. They DID after the meeting look into it & said Yes Mick, it's wrong, admin error. And they backdated the amount for the missing months.
And that is my argument, talk to us, tenant's ain't bothered. They don't see it till the bailiff comes knocking. Even if for now, u don't talk to us, at least let us tell u Look I've been doing HB for 22 years & even if I han't, I am sure, in fact I know this claim is wrong. Please look into it.
I don't have this problem now as l have high up people in HB, but I used to have to tell the youngster, the newbies, Look just imagine the Landlord is right. Let's just say I am right, what if I am right, look into it now instead of letting this drag on for months.
And this is why homeless going up, knock down effect of one cause which is SO SIMPLE to solve, talk to the Landlord, he may just be right, he may not just want to pay his mortgage, he may not just want the funds for his private jet, he may just want to keep the tenant in the home. Easier u make it for tenant, easier u make it for Landlord. Easier u make it for Landlord, easier u make it for tenant.
You bash the Landlord, u bash the tenant.
We had that too in Nottingham JC, they called it the working together initiative. I can't remember the year, about 2000. And it worked, staff started to work with Landlords instead of against.
Now, the local Job Centre 5 miles away from the Nottingham Housing Benefit office CANNOT I repeat CANNOT talk to the Nottingham Housing Benefit office. That's stupendous!!!
I'm having to teach the Job Centre JC the Universal Credit guidance/rules/regs/ which my good colleague Bill Irvine of https://universalcreditadvice.com/ is teaching me & alerting to me of changes. JC aren't even aware of changes that came in Dec 2017, still in the stone age. Although the managers are very receptive & are listening & acting. But for me to have to dialogue between the two centres in 2019 when they are both effectively Taxpayers depts shows what little communication we have. And the powers above them to not link them together is pathetic.

I understand the scepticism about the survey, but as you can submit even without giving contact info, what’s the harm in doing it? It’s a good opportunity to engage and communicate our views directly to Shelter, and we may even have a positive impact! Unless Shelter is actively monitoring this forum, all the complaining in the world isn’t going to get to them.
At least by completing the survey, we have a chance of conveying our message. I have, and I’ve expanded my views in the ‘other’ boxes - as they’ve invited us to do. I have stated that I don’t like their anti landlord message and their support for non accountable tenants etc etc (I was unaware at the time of the points that Amelia makes).
Which raises another point - about PERCEPTION. Amelia’s post tells me more than I have ever known about Shelter and their motives, so I am now better informed. Prior to reading that I had a negative perception about them and what they stand for.
We should all take the opportunity to do similarly for Shelter: Let’s show them that we are a group of good people providing high quality accommodation for many individuals, in a professional way, but we need certain basic safeguards- to be paid rent and be able to get possession of our properties in defined circumstances. Let’s try and knock down the negative and misguided perceptions of landlords and inform them of how it really is for us.
We all know the PRS legislative environment is going in the wrong direction. If as a result we all sell up, the country will be crippled. Instead of our enemy, Shelter could actually be our ally in helping to communicate this message to government, as they have a louder voice than we do. Why not take the opportunity, constructively, to let them know our views?

Reply to the comment left by ameliahartman at 15/06/2019 - 00:44
"the problem of revenge evictions under Section 21 (which HAS become a huge cause of homelessness in this country"
Amelia, where is your evidence for this? Are you confusing "revenge" with legitimate reasons such as rent arrears, anti-social behaviour, refusal to allow access for inspections or maintenance, abuse of the property, refusal to accept reasonable rent increases etc, all of which are fraught with difficulty for landlords if they try to use other procedures? It is propaganda from Shelter, Generation Rent and other assorted activists and so-called academic experts that has led to S21 evictions being labelled "no fault", to the extent that even those who should know better, such as Government Housing Ministers seem incapable of mentioning S21 without adding those words. It is a classic misinterpretation of the data and misrepresentation of the facts.

Research shows that in the vast majority of cases landlords use S21 even in the case of rent arrears because it is simpler, cheaper and more certain than S8.