42% of landlords reluctant to rent to non UK passport holders post Right to Rent

by Property 118

11:46 AM, 18th December 2017
About A year ago

42% of landlords reluctant to rent to non UK passport holders post Right to Rent

Make Text Bigger
42% of landlords reluctant to rent to non UK passport holders post Right to Rent

A recent survey by the Residential Landlords Association (RLA) of almost 2,800 landlords has found that 42% were reluctant to rent to anyone except those with a UK passport and 49% are less likely to rent to someone who has permission to stay in the UK for only a limited time.

RLA Policy Director David Smith wrote:

“Under the Right to Rent policy landlords are responsible for checking the immigration status of their tenants and face prosecution if they know or have reasonable cause to believe that the property they are letting is occupied by someone who does not have the right to rent in the UK.

“It is little wonder that faced with the threat of prosecution landlords, having been effectively turned into border police, are playing it safe.

“Given that according to Oxford University’s Migration Observatory, the foreign born population is almost three times as likely to be in the private rental sector as UK-born nationals, this policy is actively discriminating against them.

“A policy that was designed to make the country a hostile environment for illegal immigrants is also creating a hostile environment for those who do not have a passport. This includes the 17% of legitimate UK residents who do not hold a passport.

“Despite assurances from the Government about making allowances, landlords are fearful of being caught out by forged identity documents which are becoming more prolific as a result of the policy.

“Ministers might have reached some sort of agreement with the EU last week about the status of EU nationals living in the UK, but without legal certainty landlords will not know who they can and cannot rent to and for how long.

“Landlords cannot be blamed for being cautious when the threat of criminal prosecution hangs over them and they do not have the knowledge or experience to act as border control officers.”

David Smith called for The Home Office to suspend the scheme pending a full and detailed assessment of its impact on tenants and prospective tenants.



Comments

money manager

12:11 PM, 18th December 2017
About A year ago

Good, as there appears to be fewer senior students from the ME that reluctance will support my lettings.

Mick Roberts

12:57 PM, 18th December 2017
About A year ago

U telling me.
Most of my tenants would fail these checks last time I did the online checker thing.
I've known 'em all me life, they was born in Nottingham, I know their Mums, I know the Mums daughters since I was 3. Yet I can't rent to them? 'Cause they han't got a passport? Have u heard of poverty? And £80+ passports?
Yeah right Mr Govt, go screw yourself. They having a house & that's that.
But brilliant sounding Mr Polish man who I'm slightly concerned of 'cause of these checks & 'cause I han't been on the immigration check course, I might just play safe & not rent to him.
Sorry Mr Govt, I'll be honest & straight to the point & won't lie to u, it's your fault, u made the rules up.
Just as u wanted Universal Credit to be paid direct to tenants 'cause some tenants din't wan their Landlord knowing they was on benefits, as they cun't get a house.
Well now, MUCH MUCH more people 'can't get a house 'cause u giving UC tenant LANDLORDS RENT money direct, and they spending it, so Landlord in't taking 'em in first place.
You cun't make it up could u, these Tory 5 degrees, but thickheads when it comes to street level common sense.
Ha ha rant over.

amarni 1

18:29 PM, 18th December 2017
About A year ago

Reply to the comment left by Mick Roberts at 18/12/2017 - 12:57
And, Mike, what a pithy rant it was too! I always enjoy reading your valuable contributions to this forum and generally dislike pc stances. But you are using what is an ancient word for an anatomical term for a female and over time and in vernacular use is viewed as a very derogatory term for a woman. I ask that you use the shortened spelling term of the word, 'cannot', and replace it with 'can't' in future.

In the absence of a passport I believe that an ID can be obtained for £20 (someone correct me if I am wrong) and a birth certificate/driving licence will also suffice. How much a person has also depends upon their interests and what is important to them. Interestingly, I notice that most people now, from the beggar sitting outside of M&Spencers or Greggs or Nando's in my home town of Guildford, and including immigrants I see on tv on the move, to the general public, have expensive smart phones to message and Skype with. In the main these smart phones cost £100 upwards - the fact that a passport may not be genuine is neither here nor there as far as I, a landlord, am concerned. I also prefer to obtain as much information as I can before someone moves in regardless of nationality and carry out my checks. As you say, you know most of your tenants' mothers and no doubt fathers and a doctors registration; UC number; national insurance no; should suffice in the absence of a passport.

I welcomed Iain Duncan Smith's proposed changes to the DSS to UC benefit. It was to simplify a complex benefits system, give a shock clampdown on council tenants on benefits letting rooms/houses and ensure that those in receipt of these benefits became aware of the costs paid by the tax payer whilst treating the recipients of these monies as adults and in a similar fashion to those of us in work and who budget etc. It did not take much difficulty to envisage the problems that would and does arise from this change in regards to monthly incomes and monthly budgeting and responsibility for regular payment of their bills, including rent.

In my view, anyone claiming UC - once on it - needs to have a willing and sensible member of the local general public assigned to them (not a council officer) go in to their homes and go through a proper itemised budget plan with them on an initial, then weekly basis, then monthly, then quarterly basis. This, in my view, would do more than simply handing out money ad-hoc. Can they afford to keep a dog for example? Most of us could cut back a little, a lot etc...a very good lesson anyway.

I, as a tax payer would welcome these people being helped into understanding how budgeting works. Food vouchers given out to them to shop at specific shops if the budget has not worked out in the early period would also help. They are not all 'vulnerable' and, in deed, many seem to know their way around the social care systems, and face-book etc without difficulty.

Of course, I am aware that you take on people who most likely are never going to work again, if ever did; and you have to cover your costs, as do we all. I know from your input here it is not easy and you are frequently their main go-to person.

Out of interest, how would you have made the vital changes to the DSS/UC benefit schemes and payments to the landlord? Should tenants be simply housed and not be aware of the costs of housing and paying for them, state pensions assured, in many cases nothing ever paid in? All council tax paid and health insurance covered? No checks carried out once in disability benefit schemes, for ever?

I have worked in care of the elderly, council-led, 99% ex-council house (1950's) tenants "from the cradle to the grave.." and they certainly knew how to hide their money and once in the system were never checked to see if they could pay. Of course, there were monthly invoices itemising on paper their rent charges and an additional one itemising our visits, time taken etc incorporating the excellent care being given, (although from many of them you would not know that). The final monthly residential and care bill was hardly anything to them, so much was credited back. Equally, no communal charges - site lighting, site heating, site daily cleaning, Miele washing machines and dryers in the shared laundry room, all gas and electricity included in the rent at special prices. Daily buses to transport them to the local club, twice-weekly neighbour morning meets and pm lotto with tea with biscuits. I recall how the price of a cup of tea went up from 20p to 25p and the attitude of these elderly with their Rolls Royce electric wheel chairs...."What"!.."I'm not paying that ...! And so it went on. The other, less than 1% owner/occupiers, having sold up their homes and paying proper rents etc to go into the sheltered housing unit with their care not discounted in the same way - everything they did was fully charged. You could always see those that were non-payers (tanned and always just back from a sunshine holiday).

All this under the noses of the 5 x full-time on-site local council admin staff 8 - 5pm (with emergency call-outs chargeable to council and paying extra remuneration to staff for call-outs from their own homes) paid ca £60/80k per annum and 2 x full-time cleaners to oversee the system and of course, we care County Council care staff 10 x over shifts, 24/7.

Mick Roberts

7:44 AM, 19th December 2017
About A year ago

My tenant's wun't pay £20 for the ID.

In society & it's been happening for thousands of years, there will always be so many that need 'help'. UC is has taking taken away this safety net.
We're all different & that's what the Tory Govt don't get. They want everyone to be good with finances & banks just like them.

If u save when u 7, u save when u 37.

I've seen these people go in & help them with budgets & when their gone, the original chaos ensues.

Can they afford to keep a dog? No, but do they keep a dog? Yes.

And yes give 'em food vouchers, & on same footing, give 'em rent vouchers, so that proportion of it which is now called the Housing element, only be used for rent. But Oh No Mr Tory don't want that, he'd rather take a chance & see Taxpayers money being given to pay the rent, just wasted on other items.
I've had HB tenant 13 14 years, no arrears no problems. They've switched her onto UC, she now in arrears & avoiding the phone.

I don't know the one solution, I'm not a politician. I rent houses out, I don't run the benefit system.

I do know it was working before and now it's working much MUCH less. I know now the shelters are full, the Travelodges are full and they wasn't before.

All us in the benefit world know UC is making the homeless much worse and it's only just coming in. Why are the Govt conceding on a few issues? That will happen more and more.

The payments to Landlord part should have been exactly that, payment to Landlord, 2008 LHA same mistakes, it's only been 10 years, now HB staff quite easily pay to Landlord with one phone call.

Should tenants be starved & made homeless? I'd say not, give them their safety net.

amarni 1

16:18 PM, 19th December 2017
About A year ago

But they are not being starved and can apply for one-off top ups as a safety net.

Someone in receipt of benefits cannot expect to coast along without taking responsibility for their choices, ie pay the rent on time and buy their food as against spending it on cigarettes and drink/drugs.

Those with absolutely no desire to work must then feel the brunt. This society props up too many whilst allowing them to loose their integral self-respect along the way.

I know someone, an owner/occupier in receipt of benefits, who when requested to attend a case assessment goes to the doctor and gets herself signed-off as being too mentally and emotionally ill and is then put on more medication to avoid the interview. In the interview that eventually takes place she puts on the actress act until the examiner has to agree not to arrange for another assessment for 2 or 3 years ! This same person has told me that they refuse to go out and look for work - they are too good for it ! By the way they manage to afford to smoke, drink and use the occasional drug with all her other waster-type friends ! The last time I saw her was in Robert Dyers prowling around looking to steal the odd item. You probably have similar in Nottingham too and know who they are.

As far as the Tory party goes, I agree and their actions and policies appear to me to be a suicidal death wish.
They seem incapable of thinking through their policies and oblivious to the fall out by many within their own party too, only to have to further embarrass themselves when back-tracking. From the June 2017 election catastrophe to changing weekly benefits to monthly overnight, charging £0.50ppm for phone calls to them by claimants, to Mrs May, at the Tory Party Conference needing a glass of water to stop her weak, croaky voice from coughing as she is reciting 'strong and stable' - a true leader would have had this covered and either not had to ask for a glass or her aides would have arranged for this in preparation etc. Unfortunately, Mrs May is not well and this does not bode well when leading a country. Perhaps she could emulate Mr Putin more, ie be seen in different poses, on horseback and promote herself etc. Ha, ha.

Jonathan Clarke

1:50 AM, 20th December 2017
About 12 months ago

Reply to the comment left by amarni 1 at 18/12/2017 - 18:29``In my view, anyone claiming UC - once on it - needs to have a willing and sensible member of the local general public assigned to them (not a council officer) go in to their homes and go through a proper itemised budget plan with them on an initial, then weekly basis, then monthly, then quarterly basis. This, in my view, would do more than simply handing out money ad-hoc. ``
In an ideal world with unlimited resources this yes would be an admirable solution But in real life I`m afraid it is a totally impractical unfeasible suggestion. Where are these truckloads of `willing and sensible` people going to come from ? There are 1000`s and 1000`s of people who simply are and will forever be unable to manage their finances effectively . If parents and the education system have failed them in 18 years its folly to suggest that a well intentioned individual would be able to do more than just touch the surface. It is such a time intensive task to attempt that and just a further waste of taxpayers money.
Government should understand that there will be those who abuse the system and those who don`t even know the system in the first place to know how to abuse it. Why we beat them all with the same stick is beyond me .
In school I was good at some stuff but rubbish at other stuff . So I was graded into Set 1 Set 2 or Set 3 . Some people are just useless with numbers and Maths and forward planning . They simply dont have an aptitude for it Why spend hours and hours trying to force a round peg into a square hole .
If I was good at fixing cars i could fix them myself but I am not so that why garages are there. The government doesnt say I should learn to fix cars . There are a multitude of systems out there to help fix things for people that they cant fix themselves. Some people cant deal with money. Why does the government think it has to force them to deal with it . I go to an IFA or an accountant for stuff I dont know . Should I be expected to know everything about money and do away with these professionals . Of course not
Why cant tenants be allowed to make a mature adult decision and say ... Look I`m good at fixing cars so i dont need a garage but I`m not good and never will be good at dealing with money . It does my head in and I always get it wrong . I know that about myself ....so I want to make a conscious adult responsible decision to have my rent paid straight to my landlord. By not allowing a tenant to make a very simple choice like that you are in effect stopping them making adult choices about their lives. You are in fact compounding the problem and dis empowering them and treating them like a child .
UC treats everyone the same even though everyone is different . It is not fit for purpose. Ive had dozens of tenants who are exasperated with the system
I know already many `willing and sensible` people who try to support them . They include me ,CAB, social workers, probation officers, support workers, homeless charities. I talk to them all . But they too are at their wits end with a system so poorly designed and so obstructive and so lacking in common sense.
Why doesnt the government come to me, Mick, support workers, social workers. homeless charities etc etc and ask us our views. We could tell them how they got it wrong and why they now need to ship evicted tenants 50 miles out of their home town into temporary accommodation . This costs the taxpayer far more
It costs the taxpayer about £25 a night for me to house HB tenant. When I evict them which I am doing they end up often in a police cell or a hospital bed . Dysfunctional people go downhill when their lives are disrupted and they lose their home These cells / hospital beds places cost £400 per night to the taxpayer.
Either pay me £400 a night to sit with them and work out itemised monthly budgets or much simpler save that £400 and pay me my rent direct .
When I worked in a job my taxes were taken from me direct. Deducted at source . They didnt want my employer to pay me gross as they didnt trust me to pay that money on to HMRC . And I am a highly functional person but no they didn`t trust me . But surely they want me to manage my finaces so by their logic hey should pay me yes? The country of course would fall apart if all employers paid gross and HMRC didnt deduct tax at source . No way would they collect it all Why cant they deduct the housing element of UC at source and pay me direct . Hypocrites

Mick Roberts

7:35 AM, 20th December 2017
About 12 months ago

They're not being starved? Aah right, the gal I saw yesterday that had no food in her cupboards, I must have been imagining that one.
One off top-ups? I think she's already had that one, so the next one-off, well it's now not a one-off as it's not allowed.

And these UC advances are a joke, even the front line staff don't know how to do them.

They can't expect to coast along, but they do. Do we then make 'em homeless? And their kids too? Them kids could grow into good top people like me & JC ha ha.

I've got some normal non disabled tenants & they are just unemployable. Nothing wrong with their body as such, but proper thick & just don't listen. U tell 'em to go right corner of the room to get that spade & they will go to left corner of room & get the flower bowl. The mind boggles.

Very good words Jonathan, we're all different. There's only us at the sharp end of having deal't with these people for 20 years that understands them.
Again Homelessness on Channel 4 news last night & BBC1 news this morning. I know building houses is one part of solution.
But why isn't anyone asking the likes of me & u?
I've evicted 4 families last 4 years Benefit cap. Hundreds of other landlords have done the same. They give the benefit cap, but take the money off the Landlord, THE RENT! What has tenant learn't from that? They still receiving the same money. It is causing homelessness.

UC is causing homelessness by paying tenant 'the rent', & the delays in paying. Simple from where I'm looking, pay Landlord direct. Another so many hundred thousand no longer homeless. It's costing millions to keep 'em in emergency accommodation.

Ha ha yes u say the same as me JC, why don't the Govt come to us. I spoke to TOP TOP person in UC last week & he wasn't even aware that UC don't tell us when they have received our arrears form, so we constantly ringing costing taxpayer thousands to make sure they have the form. HB LHA have been telling us for years, yes got your rent arrears proof, relax, we ain't paying tenant any more. SO SO SIMPLE. But UC is getting this wrong 'cause they ain't asking us the people on the ground 'How can we make this better?'

Yes Nottingham now being shipped 40 miles away to Sheffield 'cause all shelters are full.

I have it on good authority every tenant homeless costs 10k to house, from start to finish. 10k when paying Landlord direct would save millions.

Why do Income Support pay the water company direct from the tenants benefit, for lots of years? 'Cause they know then at least it will be paid & tenant will have water. Why should rent be any different?

Jonathan Clarke

9:20 AM, 20th December 2017
About 12 months ago

Spot on Mick
Case studies of last week
I had a tenant yesterday sends me a desperate text , No food in fridge . 8 pence to their name . 3 kids. Starving and cold and ill. Works part time . Tries their best. The council has had her application since August after some random suspension. She cant fill out the complicated form they sent out. No one to help her .Sec 21 has been served. Expires 8th Jan I gave them £50 to get some gas and a McDonalds
Another LHA suspended because tenant got wrongly arrested and moved house for 2 weeks as part of his bail condition. Charges dropped. Some random witness saw a fight called police but police got the wrong end of the stick. 4 months later they all havent updated their computers to reflect that 2 week change. Sec 21 served . Expires 27th Jan. Its like if i go on holiday for 2 weeks someone putting the holiday address on the computer and stopping all my rental income and taking 4 months to sort it . DWP blame council . Council blame police . Police blame `the system` .
There are loads more . Countless suspensions. Under trained staff. Callous attitude. LHA freezes HB Caps. UC catastrophe
When someone at the council presses the suspension button on a computer they are in a nice warm office with their lunch on the table. Not a clue about the outside circumstances . I challenged this and said give me a call first before you press suspend I will give you an up to the minute update just in case you have missed some human tragedy like the one who didn`t attend an appointment because her mum had just died that day or the other one when they had a car accident and were in hospital on a drip
But no they resolutely refuse to engage with me . They just quote some HB regulation saying they have the power to suspend. Its a power they have yes but its an uncontrolled abuse of power. These relatively low paid council workers have the power to wreck peoples lives and they do not have the training or knowledge of the case history to make a sound decision. They are acting as judge and jury . Their power should be called to book and investigated. Crazy
. . It should as the default option be an open 3 way conversation between me the tenant and the council with everyone telling each other exactly whats going on .
Data protection = Sec 21

money manager

11:00 AM, 20th December 2017
About 12 months ago

Reply to the comment left by Jonathan Clarke at 20/12/2017 - 09:20
and a McDonalds? How many spuds, carrots and onions could she have bought and cooked, on your gas?

amarni 1

12:05 PM, 20th December 2017
About 12 months ago

Phew! OK, I get it ! Based upon what is written in the above comments about the many claimants and their not being able to understand or manage money, it would not matter how much they are in receipt of: they would always overspend, regardless of the sum.

1 2

Leave Comments

Please Log-In OR Become a member to reply to comments or subscribe to new comment notifications.

Forgotten your password?

OR

BECOME A MEMBER

And the landlord vote goes to - ?

The Landlords Union

Become a Member, it's FREE

Our mission is to facilitate the sharing of best practice amongst UK landlords, tenants and letting agents

Learn More