No landlord should discriminate against tenants because they are in receipt of benefits

Reply to the comment left by Mick Roberts at 27/06/2021 – 16:37
Yes Mick I always feel so grateful when some 18 year old brat tells me how I should be doing my job.

It would be helpful if language were used carefully and people understood what words meant. There is the right sort of discrimination and the wrong sort. I discriminate between bruised apples in the supermarket and those that are not bruised.
I discriminate between prospective tenants who can pay the rent and have a decent reference saying they have looked after the landlord’s property and those that haven’t. In my HMOs I discriminate against people who have recent convictions for dealing drugs or assault. Sorry but I am not putting you into a household with strangers and people who may be frightened. Discrimination in this sense is just choosing between different things. We all do it.
Certainly we should not have a “blanket ban” against tenants in receipt of benefits but how much time and money are we supposed to spend on a “case by case” basis investigating everyone who applies, especially now that we cannot charge a single penny for the time and costs incurred in carrying out such investigations?

I find that three questions will usually sift out those who are likely to be unsuitable: 1. Can you provide a reference from your previous landlord 2 Can you provide a reference from your last employer (even if you are currently not working) 3. If I carry out a credit reference check are you likely to pass or fail it?
The problems that others have made about the problems of dealing with UC and the clawback of rent also need to be dealt with. They could be substantially solved with the right political will and with better-trained civil servants with the right mindset.
I wish NRLA spent more time and energy lobbying Government on these matters than on criticising its members.

What an excellent comment, Ian. Thank you for putting the issue so clearly and crisply. What chance that those who like to pontificate on these things could be compelled to read your words before they next open their mouths?

Reply to the comment left by Ian Narbeth at 28/06/2021 – 09:46
Best and most sensible comment on this thread so far, Thank you.

Reply to the comment left by Ian Narbeth at 28/06/2021 – 09:46
Ian, I have a ten page application form, if we cannot charge then the tenant must have a time commitment to obtaining a property. Amongst other things I ask for an Experian report (free of charge so does not violate the tenant fees act). Few provide this and thus automatically eliminate themselves from consideration.
You would be surprised at the number of prospective tenants who fail at the first hurdle – Name.

just decline

Landlords do not discriminate. They just seek that the tenants can afford to pay the rent, the deposit and any shortfall or damages incurred thereafter. this is a legitimate option.
Most benefit seekers fail this test. This cannot be called a discrimination.

Reply to the comment left by G Master at 20/07/2021 – 07:38@G Master, yes indeed, and Tenants in receipt of benefit fail the affordability Test, purely because the Government don’t pay anything like the market rent.
Then, Govt hold an enquiry to ascertain why Landlords are ‘prejudiced against Benefit tenants.
Its like a blue collar worker being refused a Test Drive in a Million £ Ferrari. Nothing is for free, and Govt and tenant support groups need to wake up to this.
EVERY business operates on Affordability, so why the denigration of Landlords ? ( because its certainly not going to change things for tenants on benefit for the better ! )

Reply to the comment left by Chris @ Possession Friend at 20/07/2021 – 17:07
That’s it Chris, NOT ONCE has Shelter or the Likes asked us WHY we won’t take Benefit tenants any more.

I keep saying it if UC won’t even let me tell them Please stop paying me, I sold that house 4 months ago, tenant not mine, why are u wasting Taxpayers money paying me rent I’m not entitled to?
If UC won’t even sort that out, then there is no hope for the other claims where we have to fight for the money.