Agent letter evicting UC tenants read out by Corbyn in PMQs

Agent letter evicting UC tenants read out by Corbyn in PMQs

9:03 AM, 16th November 2017, About 4 years ago 33

Text Size

Jeremy Corbyn used one of his 5 questions to the Prime Minister in the House of Commons PMQs to read out a letter from GAP Property saying it was giving every single one of its Universal Credit (UC) tenants two months’ notice ahead of the roll-out of UC in the area.

The letter said: “GAP Property cannot sustain arrears at the potential levels Universal Credit could create.”

The letter sent to UC tenants by GAP said: “This is an extraordinary event that requires both you and us to take extraordinary measures.”

Corbyn told the PM that the buck stops with Ministers and “Blanket notices of eviction handed to tenants, because of Universal Credit are totally unacceptable, should shock us all and bring shame on this Conservative Government.

“Ministers have been told over and over again that the roll-out of their flagship social security policy is causing debt, hardship and homelessness, and this is further proof of the devastating impact it is having.

“The Tories must immediately pause the roll-out and fix these problems that are turning people’s lives upside down.”

Is it possible to smell a U-turn coming with Theresa May asking to see a copy of the letter?

Although she did attempt to defend UC by indicating that after 4 months the number of tenants claiming UC in arrears had dropped by a third.

How many more big agents and landlords will it take to do the same thing before the penny drops and the government comes to terms with the UC issues that have been reported by Property118 landlords and contributors ever since its inception?



by Luke P

20:37 PM, 19th November 2017, About 4 years ago

I am meeting with both George Freeman, MP (chairman of the PM’s policy Board) and Shadow Minister for Housing -Melanie Onn, MP- if anybody would like me to ask anything specific.

The general message coming from my local Labour MP is ‘people before profits’…essentially I should house people for free (or at least on long-term credit) because UC and the associated delays are not their fault and that it’s not nice to be evicted. She also believes I am ‘circumventing the law’ by serving s.21 notices. She is of the opinion it should be as difficult as possible for LLs to evict and only in dire circumstances and if a Judge agrees -failing that, a problem tenant is exactly that…your problem. How dare I take preventative action to ensure the viability of my business!

For me the most frustrating part is the logic (or lack thereof) behind this line of thinking. I am working within the rules. If s.21 is removed, I will exit the industry. Why is she not campaigning that Tesco allow UC claimants to take food from their stores without paying -as long as they promise to pay at some point in the future. How would hotels manage if they could not keep a credit card on file to charge for the theft of towels or damage to the room? Why is Housing seen so very differently. It’s as though they want to force LLs to remain in the industry (which they won’t if it becomes any more onerous) but also to dictate how they can function…because humanity, apparently.

by NW Landlord

20:51 PM, 19th November 2017, About 4 years ago

Waste of time the lot of them

by Chris @ Possession Friend

21:47 PM, 19th November 2017, About 4 years ago

Reply to the comment left by Mick Roberts at 16/11/2017 - 14:33
I agree, reducing the 'Target' of 6, to 4 weeks [ and lets be honest, they are not even anywhere near 6 weeks ] isn't going to help.
As I understand, After 4 weeks, the claimants will START to get paid -BUT Not back-paid - where on Earth are HB tenants going to cope ?

by Mick Roberts

6:32 AM, 20th November 2017, About 4 years ago

Reply to the comment left by Chris Daniel at 19/11/2017 - 21:47
Yeah, when mine switch over, they ain't gonna understand why the HB 'rent' isn't continuous and following on from HB.

There is gonna be gaps and they won't have the money, nor understand why there is a gap.

Because it is totally bewlidering how there is a gap. U would think the DWP and Govt would get this right. One benefit ends, another starts. But Oh no, DWP says we gonna totally mess your finances up now.
You think u had it hard before, well now we ain't paying u for 2 months or so.

It's crackers.

by Luke P

7:54 AM, 20th November 2017, About 4 years ago

And this:

From what I understand, claimants that work and are paid weekly (traditionally paid on a Friday) could be over the UC threshold when there are five Fridays in a month rather than the usual four because UC is paid based on a snapshot of income/circumstances in any one calendar month!

by Mick Roberts

17:46 PM, 23rd November 2017, About 4 years ago

Further to my last comments, below is part of a letter I have just sent to UC, which needs addressing by everyone who gets to meet anyone from UC/DWP:

I sent you this UC 47 form by email 4 Nov 17. Why has it took you THREE weeks to ask for my bank details?

Why don’t you use common sense & see the existing claims I have with yourself TO SEE THAT YOU ALREADY HAVE MY BANK DETAILS.

Why are you asking for my bank details again?
Why can’t you ask for my bank details on the UC47 form? Do you not agree this would save lots of time?
How much longer would you like to delay this?
So tenant is already over 8 weeks in arrears 27 Oct.
You delay things by not doing the common sense things above, her next Housing element ‘rent’ is due 27 Nov. Do you know what date it is today?
Who’s paying the mortgage? Not rocket science is it.
My 5 year old kid could run this process better.

Please don’t tell me the above is policy. Why not? Tell the policy makers this needs changing. Go learn off Housing Benefit & Local Housing Allowance. The mistakes they have made & corrected, you are now doing & it’s costing millions of pounds & man hours to you, the Govt, DWP, UC, Me, tenants.
You can solve this in one swoop by asking HB about the problems direct payment caused when LHA came in, in 2008. And how most councils solved that about 4 years later.
Don’t you learn from history?

by Luke P

21:14 PM, 23rd November 2017, About 4 years ago

In a (very) brief summary of today’s meeting, I found George Freeman to be exceptionally receptive and one with solid conservative values. It would appear arrangements are to be made for myself and four other large portfolio landlords to meet with Sajid Javid (and possibly either David Gauke or Alok Sharma) which is an excellent result -as good as could be hoped for.

by NW Landlord

21:21 PM, 23rd November 2017, About 4 years ago

Hi Luke

Is this regarding s24 ?

by Luke P

21:46 PM, 23rd November 2017, About 4 years ago

Reply to the comment left by NW Landlord at 23/11/2017 - 21:21It is likely that S.24 will be our main topic of discussion as I believe we have achieved as much as can realistically expect, in terms of concessions, as far as UC is concerned (although I would like to see acknowledgements of the receipt of form UC47 become commonplace).

We will also discuss a plan to get a lot more empty homes back into use and in the process landlords a good name.

by NW Landlord

23:32 PM, 23rd November 2017, About 4 years ago

We are large portfolio landlords in the north west specialising in housing benefit etc circa 500 units if we could be of any help let us know as a lot of our houses are concentrated in a small area which will be decimated by s24 we have incorporated but that’s not the point

Leave Comments

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

Forgotten your password?