Council recommendation …… Speechless
Probably for the same reason you struggle to see mine
Your position is equally uncomplicated to understand as is my [ and others]explanation.
I do struggle to see why you cannot grasp this concept despite numerous posters explaining it to you in a number of different ways.
I suspect you will keep going till someone agrees with you
Good luckPosted 4 years ago
No don’t mind if anyone agrees or not it’s my opinion, people have others , you made assumptions to justify yours then deployed your handbag when I pointed it out.Posted 4 years ago
I have dinner to cook so I can’t carry on with the lovely chat I will come and give you a kiss and a cuddle if it will make you feel any better.projectMember
Chatting to a friend who rents out a property…. The tenant has fallen on tough times and can not pay the rent, the tenant went to the council housing place to see if there was anything they could do/advise. She was informed the best course of action was to stay in the property even if she could not pay the rent and just not answer the door if the landlord came around for the rent, she was told it would take months to get her out and hopefully that would give her time to sort things for her and her daughter.
So obviously the tennant is working, and was able to pay her rent, but due to probbaly wasting money on non essentials she got behind on the rent, Housing Benefit could have been claimed, if the house or flat was deemed suitable for her by the council and fullfiled the required rental costs criteria, eg 2 bedrooms, if the child is over a certain age, or the rent is no higher than the maximum rent the council pay in HB.
Probably the person she saw was a benefits rights advisor,some who are excellent and some who believe its their money theyre paying out and dont offer much help.
Make an official complaint to the council and get them to investigate.
Ps how do you like your daughter living at homePosted 4 years ago
I have dinner to cook so I can’t carry on with the lovely chat ….
But on the plus side lastuphills you orginally started off by claiming that the council’s recommendations had left you “speechless”. It’s now clear after almost 5 hours of you banging on about it that you’ve managed to get over your initial speechlessness.
The only surprising thing, considering how strongly you clearly feel about the whole incident, is how vague you appear to be concerning with what the council should have actually done to help resolve the situation, why is that ?Posted 4 years agomidlifecrashesSubscriber
I’d guess there’s slightly more to it than the third hand version we’re hearing here. Another thing to consider is that the council may not be under any obligation to rehouse people who are not homeless or who have made themselves voluntarily homeless. Thus, to qualify for rehousing help, the tenant may have to wait for enforcement of an eviction order. Tough on the landlord, but that’s the way it’s been for years.
I’ve needed to move bad tenants on before now, I look at the cost of lost rent, courts, eviction and enforcement. Add them up, think of a smaller number I’d rather pay and offer up to that amount to the tenant to clear off and put it in writing that they abandon the tenancy. Hasn’t failed yet.Posted 4 years ago
I intend to buy a small buy to let place as it`s the only way I will be able to provide some form of pension for myself
Well if if your pension pot is not more important than being homelessness then what is ?
Thus, to qualify for rehousing help, the tenant may have to wait for enforcement of an eviction order. Tough on the landlord, but that’s the way it’s been for years.
This was still the case a few years ago when I dealt with this
Your solutions, whilst not the best possible outcome [ for that is them paying] is a probably the best outcome in the situationPosted 4 years ago
Well see what happens when you pop away for a minute
Project … Assumption and wrongPosted 4 years ago
Earnie l …. Because I have no idea what the council should have advised I never claimed to have the answers, I have an opinion about what they should not have advised though. Maybe you can think of one that does not potentially involve a landlord losing lots of money. Banging on about it….ah you mean responding to other people’s comments on a forum. Speechless …have you heard me speak?
Maybe you can think of one that does not potentially involve a landlord losing lots of money.
We all can, the person becomes homeless but that is probably not the best advice for THEM.
Because without the 400 quid or so in the future all I will have is the state pension* .So it would be rather important to stop me being homeless !
The state pension is £160 for single person and £200 for a couple and you can get Housing Benefit on top assuming you did not own your home by the time you retire.
I am not saying you would experience no hardship I am saying it would be less hardship than someone being homeless.
* technically t he state pension is less but their is a minimum income guarantee whose name i forgetPosted 4 years ago
Junkyard..I have a question and this is from curiosity without any agenda, is staying in the house without paying rent essentially illegal, hence the grounds for eviction? So if an individual advised it as the tenants best course of action, is that not being complicit in breaking the law?Posted 4 years ago
I have thought of another question…..that bit about the tenant running up further debt/arrears because of the advise received but still becoming homeless, could a tenant not sue the council. Basically saying all you did was delay me becoming homeless due to a vested interest (ie not having to deal with me until I become officially homeless) thus costing me x amount of arrears.Posted 4 years ago
you read the daily mail ?
How else am I going to be kept informed of vital information such as the news that swarms of vicious Asian hornets are massing at the other side of the Channel ready to invade us and kill our lovable indigenous hardworking honey bees ?Posted 4 years ago
I think the council are obliged to advise the tenant that they have the legal right to remain in the property until lawfully evicted . They are obliged not to advise the tenant with an eye to maximising a small businessmans profit. The small businessman has a number of solutions to this problem including insurance taking the appropriate bond and lodging it with the relevant agency factoring the expected expenses into his rental charges etc. Who should take the hit for a profit making landlord not understanding his market the landlord or the ratepayers?Posted 4 years agonick1962Member
I like this bit of first class investigative journalism in the Daily Fail article
Asian hornets were first recorded in Lot-et-Garonne, south-west France, in 2005, after arriving in a pottery shipment from China.
They spread across France but until now were blocked from coming to the UK by the English Channel.
Last I heard the English Channel is still there so we should be safe 🙂Posted 4 years ago
Lots here seem to want to side with the tenant who cant pay ? Lifes a bitch there is nothing wrong with being a landlord .As I have said before it might be the landlords only income or the money may be a small pension .There is nothing wrong with owning property and renting it as a business .The rental return on capital invested per property is actually quite small about 6 to 10 % gross if you watch the doing houses up type tellyPosted 4 years ago
Most folk are explaining why the council said what they said. I think everyone is sympathetic to both parties but most would agree the about to be homeless person is at the greatest need rather than the own a house and rent person.
I would imagine a tenant not paying is a risk any landlord would factor in to their calculations.
Re the council my understanding is that it is breach of contract between tenant and landlord – and this has already occurred so they are giving advice on what is best to do at this point. As noted they do not legally need to vacate till served notice etc.Posted 4 years ago
If the tenant could pay and was paying and they advised them to stop then a legal case could possibly be made by the person who received the advice and /or the landlord.
I doubt a case against the adviser/council would get very far personally.
Lots here seem to want to side with the tenant who cant pay ?
I haven’t noticed anyone siding with the tenant, never mind lots. Some people have suggested why a council employee might have advised the tenant not to make themselves intentionally homeless, is that what you mean ?Posted 4 years ago
Junkyard … I think it is wrong use the better/worse off as a basis for comparison, my issue is not with the council explaining the possible scenarios my issue is with what I was told, that the advisor actively encouraged the tenant to remain without paying rent. You are using an example to demonstrate your view, what happens if the landlord had to relocate to find work and now rents a room in a shared house, he needs the rent to cover the mortgage on the rental, his wage just covers his expenses. The tenant remaining in his place now means he loses 3 months rent add in legal fees etc he now can’t meet his expenses and is going to be made homeless, the bank doesn’t get their money so are going to reposes sticking him with a massive debt (the neg equity), meanwhile the tenant is evicted and rehoused the landlord can’t get housed because he is bottom of the pile …..who is worse off? Yep mine is only an example of a possible scenario as is yours.Posted 4 years ago
it is wrong to encourage staying in the place without paying
I am not sure they ever did encourage as the fourth hand account we have suggests
They advised and that is the best course of action for them – that is the Truth.Posted 4 years ago
I am not sure that means it is encouragement – I doubt they were there doing high pressure sales techniques to get them to do this shouting
Crank … A valid reason for the principle, but it puts the burdon onto the landlord. Not all landlords fit your stereotype, some rent through necessity and would struggle to meet that burdon. In the same vain not all tenants who do not pay the rent are down on their luck some play the system. Taking 5 months or whatever in my view protects the tenant too much to the detriment of the landlord. A council advising a tenant to actively play the system (in my opinion ) is wrongPosted 4 years ago
I also think it is wrong it takes ‘months’ to evict a tenant who can not/ will not pay the rent.
But that’s how the situation is.
Presumably you would have been much happier if the council employee had misinformed the tenant and falsely told her that if she didn’t pay her rent she would be out on the street before the end of the week ?Posted 4 years ago
The topic ‘Council recommendation …… Speechless’ is closed to new replies.