Checks needed for DSS / LHA tenant?

the reason so many PL's are agianst HB tenants is not because of what they are, but more because of what they do. It can be misleading to generalize, and possibly unfair, but my primary interest is to make the venture profitable and as hassle free as possible, and from purely looking at my own history there is no doubt that the vast majority of the problems, ans 100% of the evictions that I have had to do are from HB tenants, so it is nothing to do with prejudice or emotion, just purely based on facts and experience.

I think that everybody view is right ,if they think it works for them ,I personally teke L.H.A. tenants and several have to come me via current tenants ,we only have 5 flats but at times it clearly can be hassle .I recall being told that employed tenants are the ones to go for then they really stitched up this LANDLORD ,so as previously mentioned do some research but it will come down to making a choice and whether that is right only time will tell.

It also appears that some of the guidelines regarding HOUSING BENEFITseem to be applied differently in other regions as previously pointed out , I was informed of one rule by an official regarding direct payments that in some cases might make this option potentially not so viable (i dont want to put it on an open forum)but reading some of the landlords stories around the country i shouldn,t complain about the ones iv,e got.

Reply to the comment left by "Monty Bodkin" at "01/02/2015 - 08:45":

10 DSS prospective tenants apply 5 fail the phone interview . You progress 3 of the applications and select one . Its exactly the same process as for one of my properties in the posh areas. Some properties are in hybrid areas
The interviewing process is a hassle per se because it takes time whether DSS or workers. We all have to do that.

DSS properties offer me lots of extra income in my area that`s why I do it. Its a business. The tenant type is relatively a non issue as long as I get my rent. The tenant part is all about my skills in managing that person whether they are working or not .

I`m still asking you what is the extra perceived hassle that DSS tenants cause? Do you accept that there are some good ones out there. If you do not accept there are any hassle free good ones then the conversation cannot progress unfortunately.

Imagine you have 2 applications for a property . They are twins and present themselves to you at the same time and give virtual identical stories and in essence are both the same and very good candidates. You just cannot decide. One then says at the end by the way I am working but I am being made redundant next week and will be on benefits the other says I am still working and havent been given any redundancy notice my job is secure .

On what grounds would you ( as it appears from what you say ) automatically select the working tenant. ? Why does the twin who has been just unfortunately been made redundant suddenly be cast aside. Their personality and credentials as a good honest tenant have not changed surely in your eyes as a result of what they have just said

Where is the logic in your discrimination?
.

why doesn,t jonathan ring monty up and have a seperate chat on this issue because its now getting quite boring to read over and over again , I bet the guy who placed the question has had enough aswell . as many have said just pick one and go with it

Reply to the comment left by "graham durkin" at "01/02/2015 - 10:45":

Come on Graham, relax and be more forgiving! Lol. As it happens I have been reading the comments to my post and I totally agree with Jonathan, , I really think the selection is the key and I for one will be applying what Jonathan is talking about, he speaks with a lot of experience in LHA as I have read many of his posts on several sites. I should of mentioned him earlier but Mick Roberts for LHA was the guy that came to mind.

Jonathan,

A very strong reason is that it is possible to get an attachment of earning order against a working ex tenant. It is always easier for someone that has just lost their job to find a new job then someone that has been out of work for some time.

I do take LHA tenants, but only when they give me a better return then working tenants. Otherwise the small increase in risk is not worth it.

Reply to the comment left by "Ian Ringrose" at "01/02/2015 - 15:27":

Its a fair point but I personally dont consider that to be `a very strong reason` for not taking LHA. I certainly dont select my tenants on the basis that I am likely to take them to court at some point in the distant future and get an attachment to earnings order. That to me is like shutting the stable door after the horse has bolted.

LHA for certain sections of society ( sad as it may be ) is long term and therefore offers far more long term security. The rent is consistent week in week out for a single mum and a 6mth old child. No need to even have attachment to earnings order on my radar

A working tenant may have all kinds of ups and downs in their life and also may be tempted not to pay me because of some critical bill that comes their way. Christmas is a prime example when their well laid budget plans often goes awol and you get the apologetic call around the 15th saying can I pay half this month and then make up the rest in January

An LHA tenant does not have that option to spend my rent on that must have present because pay is direct to me . I have never in 15 years needed to take anyone to court. The government pays on time ( usually ) and they have very deep pockets.
.

"Do you accept that there are some good (DSS tenants) ones out there."

Of course I do, I have never said otherwise. I have had many good ones in the past, have good ones now and expect to have good ones in the future.

We are not disputing there are good DSS tenants, only about the hassle factor. We disagree, fair enough.

I`m still asking you what is the extra perceived hassle that DSS tenants cause?

As I answered, there are around twice as many possession claims for those receiving benefits. That is not a perception or discrimination, it is a fact.

You seem to be trying to swing this discussion around to that of morality. Can we get back to when you said;

"I dont do LHA for fun I do it for the money"

Now that your rents (presumably) aren't keeping pace with inflation or market rents, do you intend decreasing your LHA : non LHA tenant ratio or ploughing on regardless?

Reply to the comment left by "Monty Bodkin" at "01/02/2015 - 17:17":

On reading "ploughing on regardless" after posting, it sounds very confrontational, it was not meant to be.

When LHA rates changed from median to lowest 30th percentile, I decreased my LHA tenants. It is now a very different situation and I think a Government will have to capitulate- eventually.

What I'm asking is are you going to hold out or change tack?

There may be twice as many possession claims for DSS but I think that is a fraction of the total number of DSS tenants so its not really a proportional relevant reason to explain the hassle factor in my view . I dont know the figures but if you have say 1000 DSS and 1000 working and 20 DSS are given a possession order against them but only 10 workers yes thats twice as many i agree. But is it all that relevant. It it still leaves 980 perfectly good DSS tenants so you choose from that pool.

Even if it was 500 DSS v 250 workers there are still 500 good DSS tenants out there in that 1000 . I dont get why the stat you gave bears any real relevance to the hassle factor. I`m looking for other reasons I guess from you

. I`m glad you have some good DSS tenants. Are they more hassle for any reason other than the one you put forward?

As for rents yes the 30th percentile reduced the income but only in my area by about £25 pcm so it was not enough to make me switch strategy no. As you know the LHA rent is set every year in alignment to the BRMA rate so its based on market rents in the area. So the pace is kept up with the market around.

I will keep going with LHA if the returns exceed those with working tenants. Even if its about the same return there are benefits in having LHA tenants over working tenants for the reasons stated already.

I bought a 2 bed for a client this month for 85K and will get £650 pcm rent after refurb. To buy the equivalent on an estate where a worker may want to reside would cost maybe 150K. I may get £50 pcm or so more rent . So from a business model viewpoint I would have to be convinced of a good reason why I would want to pay 65K more for virtually the same return.

Even if it were more hassle with LHA - 65K is a helluva incentive to put up with a bit more hassle. If you dont want it yourself pay a property manager 20K pa to deal with it. You are still 45K up on the deal.

The government has been showing increasing moves to provide sweetners to LHA landlords as they need us more and more. London Boroughs ring me up offering all kinds of incentives like 2 mths up front and first 3 repairs for free. Its a time to climb on board the gravy train not jump off in my view

And no worries no offence taken re the `ploughing on regardless` comment.
I am enjoying the debate. I will continue with LHA but keep my eye on the ball . I dont see any need for a change in tack in the short to medium term
.