Registered with
Wednesday 27th March 2019

Latest Comments

Total Number of Property118 Comments: 5


16:38 PM, 25th November 2019
About 7 months ago

Anyone have a definitive guide for UC tenants?

The ONLY way you should ever consider a UC tenant is with a VERY STRONG guarantor.

As a result of the new deposit cap it is very rare for us to accept any UC tenants, if possible we find a working professional.

Previously we could take £5 short of 2 months rent as deposit AND a guarantor. This meant IF (or should I say WHEN) the council decides that the tenants ‘circumstances have changed’ and stop paying (something they never seem to tell the Landlord about until the tenant is well in arrears). We can speak with the tenant and make sure they understand that they need to get the council to pay up to date and we then also call the guarantor and also serve section 21 notice. That would usually lead to the tenant getting things resolved with the council and if they don’t the guarantor should pay the rent but in the event that they don’t we have the 2 months covered by the bigger deposit.

But once section 21 is abolished combined with the cap on deposits, we now only even consider UC tenants in exceptional circumstances AND with a high quality guarantor.

It really is not the tenants, I have had many really lovely long term Housing Benefits tenants in the past, but at some point where there is not a bigger deposit and guarantor, there has always been some issue where the council has stopped paying and of course the council will not talk with us about it so as a Landlord you are left in the dark. The tenant has no way to pay and you are left to evict to get possession back and just to stick the knife in the council almost always advise the tenant to stay and force you to go through the entire process to get them out.

So it is 100% crucial you only rent to UC tenants if you have a very strong guarantor, but if at all possible avoid and aim for a different market group.

My view is the government should pass a law that councils MUST pay ALL rent due to landlords in ADVANCE regardless of if the ‘claimant/tenant’ is entitled to it or not IF the claimant was entitled to it at the start of the tenancy. Then the council should be responsible for claiming that back from the tenant if it is due. That would give landlords piece of mind that the rent will be paid. But I think I have more chance of winning the lottery than that happening.

I hope that helps and good luck.... Read More


21:02 PM, 6th July 2019
About A year ago

The Alliance Housing Policy

Reply to the comment left by Chris Daniel at 06/07/2019 - 19:54
Hi Chris
I must be missing something. What benefit are you expecting to get from being on a government list?

Bearing in mind at some point or other in the future the government (of one colour of another) will need to raise taxes and will review the easy options. This list would make for a very easy lets tax landlords like this list.

Also please do remember that each council is nothing more than a limited company albeit one that can put it's prices up and force its 'customers' to pay more whilst at the same time reducing what 'service' they provide (I do of course use the term service tongue in cheek).

Maybe I am being too skeptical and untrusting of either the government or councils, but I like to make decisions based on my own first hand experiences and from where I am standing they do not seem like they want to help any private landlords in any way whatsoever.... Read More


20:51 PM, 6th July 2019
About A year ago

The Alliance Housing Policy

Reply to the comment left by Gromit at 06/07/2019 - 18:52
I agree HMRC know the total incomes of landlords but the information is not shared with councils.... Read More


11:04 AM, 6th July 2019
About A year ago

The Alliance Housing Policy

Reply to the comment left by Laura Delow at 03/07/2019 - 11:09
Well put Laura, I agree with everything you wrote!... Read More


10:59 AM, 6th July 2019
About A year ago

The Alliance Housing Policy

Wow I read this blueprint and ALMOST joined up (and I still might).
There is a lot of very good stuff in there, however there is in my opinion also a Critical Error which is:
– Introduce a national database of landlords nationwide costing £50 per landlord for 5 years.
I do not trust the government or councils to have my best interests at heart at all. I do not want my name on any such list ever.
The government (and councils) would of course love to have a list of all landlords along with exactly which properties they own and how much the rents are etc. Then they could systematically destroy the plausibility of the business model (even more so than they area already). OR at least devise a ‘licensing system’ to stealth tax it to death costing the landlords time (jumping through hoops to ensure properties fulfil unrealistic and ever changing requirements) and of course money as the landlord would have to pay the new TAX (licensing fee) per property for the pleasure of having his/her time wasted.
What I want and what I believe any business owner in ANY sector really wants are:
- Consistent rules (not ever moving goal posts)
- and low tax rates
Unfortunately with every change of government there is a risk of a change in the rules. If you have read Labours proposals you will know it will be virtually impossible to be a profitable landlord if they get in (that is of course if they do what they are proposing).
Just the fear of Labour on the horizon combined with the fact I have seen attack after attack from Conservatives on private landlords, means I am now actually selling some of my properties and I do not intend to buy more, in fact I intend to buy an alternative business and am currently reviewing sectors where I think the rules are more likely to remain consistent.
It is a real shame because having now been a Landlord for more than half my life, I have hit flow and could very easily double the number of people I house in the next 3 years, but I realise doing that could expose myself to bankruptcy as a result of unfair taxes and gradually having my legal rights removed (no more section 21), everything being stacked more and more in the favour of the tenant who can and often does cause very costly damage to property knowing full well their landlords will let them off, but had they walked into someone else’s house and caused that level of damage they would rightfully expect to be arrested or given a bloody nose or at very least made to pay for putting things right.
Now we are not even allowed to take a deposit big enough to cover most issues. Tenants can leave without paying the last months rent having trashed the place and there is not a thing the landlord can do. In fact the tenant can not pay the last 4 months rent without any real concerns then vanish and apparently that risk with no legal recourse is ‘acceptable’ for private landlords. Well not for me its not.
But according to the government and council it should be. If anyone has ever had a Council tenant, they will know that even if the tenant has not paid their rent the Council actually advise the tenant NOT to move out until bailiffs physically remove them. On paper this creates an additional cost for the tenant, but the council know because the tenant has no job an attachment to earnings is not possible and a CCJ would be pointless so the landlords just suck up the losses.
Of course those losses, are partly clawed back through higher rents. The government and council know that too, but do not care they want to vilify the private landlords as far as I can see that is their current goal.
I just have not figured out why. My ONLY theory is really somewhat of a conspiracy theory, and it is that they have realised too many hard working people have managed to work hard save enough money for a deposit and then borrow the rest to then worker even hard providing homes for people and after 20 or 30 years of doing this those landlords are able to live off the fruits of their efforts. But that is allowing them to be financially free when their parents were not. It is as if the government do not want people to have that ability to make sacrifice early in life to reap the rewards later on. Almost like they WANT to put a STOP to social or financial mobility. And they have spotted that too many people from poorer backgrounds (like myself) managed to figure out that they could work 2 jobs to save up and buy some property and rent it out and then repeat the process until suddenly they were comparatively wealthy. It’s as if someone has looked and shook their heads and said, “We can’t have that now can we, let’s quick change the rules”.... Read More