UC email to Landlords is causing THOUSANDS to be HOMELESS!

Universal Discredit‽

Hi Mick

Least we all forget, Universal Credit was first introduced in Ashton-under-Lynne 4 years ago when, at that time, the plan was to pay tenants in 90%+ of cases. We now have landlords receiving 60-70% of their tenant’s UC awards paid direct through the APA process. Not all APA requests are refused. Some are awarded almost immediately.

In recent months DWP has withdrawn the 7 day “waiting period”; abolished the need for “explicit consent”; from 11th April 2018 agreed to pay PRS landlords direct, where at the point of transition to UC, the landlord was receiving LHA direct; plus pay two further weeks LHA at the point of transition at the full LHA rate, even where the tenant has earnings and/or income above their Applicable amount.

All of these developments are positive and came about through the efforts of landlords and organisations like the RLA making representations to DWP and Ministers of State. So, complaining and rattling sabres, does have an effect, although sometimes maybe not as quick as we’d like.

I started making representations for my client landlords in 2014/15. Initially, most of those complaints were successful, and included cases where DWP made “special payments” or compensation for rental loss. But, as I suspected, as the numbers of such cases increased, DWP hierarchy intervened by ruling out compensation, even though, in most cases they accepted the rental loss was due to maladministration. DWP was also of the view, landlords had no right to complain as the UC award related to the claimant, not the landlord.

Ever since, I’ve been pursuing the rights of my clients to complain and seek compensation. In August 2015 I secured written agreement from DWP that landlords do have rights to complain. DWP hierarchy, including its Director General, agreed, that the “housing costs element” should be suspended, where an APA request had been made, pending a decision on the merits of the application. Having secured that commitment, I fully expected a sea change in the way APA requests were dealt with and a substantial reduction in the losses experienced by landlords. However, my optimism was quickly dashed when DWP simply reneged on its promise, claiming the UC regulations provided no facility to suspend, even though its own Guidance to Decision Makers suggested otherwise.

Some of you may recall my exchange with Neil Couling, DWP’s Director General which was published on Property118 https://www.property118.com/open-letter-dwp-neil-couling-regarding-universal-credit/98648/ Following that exchange, we’ve continued to bombard DWP with individual complaints. Some are resolved reasonably quickly, whereas, others take for ever and are very frustrating to all concerned, including some of DWP’s own Complaints & Resolution staff. Believe me, some of them were just as frustrated as the landlord complainants, when tenants month-on-month were paid and misused their “housing element”.

A number of these cases led to 3rd stage referrals to ICE (Independent Case Examiner) and helped bring about the withdrawal of “explicit consent” in December 2017. DWP has also started the rollout of its “landlord portal” which, at present is limited to councils and large housing associations. In time, I expect PRS landlords will also gain access.

So, whilst I fully sympathise and agree with many of your comments, they’re not new. Neither are your suggestions novel, in any way. Since UC’s introduction we’ve argued for an LHA safeguarding approach being adopted, with rights of appeal and a responsive complaints process, which recognises landlords have rights.

We have made progress, for example, landlords can be paid by schedule once multiple APAs are in place. I expect we’ll continue to make inroads re our objectives, especially, if more landlords, start earnestly challenging DWP decisions and taking them to task, through its complaints process, even with its flaws.

It takes months to progress to ICE stage, but past reports from ICE suggest a very high success rate (50% of complaints wholly supported) so I plan to continue assisting landlords doing just that.

For landlords like you, committed to this niche market, I would recommend you either find the time to educate yourself and spend more time being hands-on with Universal Credit or secure yourself professional assistance, otherwise you'll experience further financial pain as the Full Service rollout expandsin area and claimant numbers over the next 4 years.

Bill Irvine

Reply to the comment left by Bill Irvine at 19/05/2018 - 10:36Yes Bill,
Very good point which I wish someone would collect all these factual points & show the Govt & Councils & say See how u get it wrong. They wanted to pay 90% of tenants direct. And now only maybe 30% are being paid direct. We all knew that would happen, but the people at the top han't got a clue. They just made the homeless problem bigger on the way.
Are we saying Bill, UC can keep paying tenant for months after Landlord has reported arrears & once UC realise they've made mistake, they aren't paying the Landlord this 'lost' rent they mistakenly paid the tenant? Or I see your words, u reverted that back?
Yes, I've saved your very informative complaint page, so that should help when contacting people. Gees, one local person would save the Govt & Tax payer & Me & UC millions in time & money.
Ever since I got ONE local email & phone contact quite high up in HB years ago, my workload went down. HB's workload went down. I stopped doing several complaints to Ombudsman a year & council stopped paying thousands in compensation. It's a win win for everyone. UC is LOSE LOSE for everyone.
Yes, as we know, our high up UC contact even himself passed the UC47 APA arrears form onto the UC staff & said SUSPEND THIS, PAY THE LANDLORD, & ha ha u got to laugh or you'd cry, UC are still paying him to this date. If they ignore their own bosses above them, what hope is there for me miles away.
Yes I've got Sherrelle at Caridon Landlord Solutions to help me on anything slightly above simple, as simple to me is hard work for UC, so let experienced Sherrelle do it. Or u, but u too busy with your own UC obstacles.

Reply to the comment left by Mick Roberts at 19/05/2018 - 12:00
Perhaps, Mick, David Price, you and me should collectively make a point of no longer accepting UC tenants…maybe even get media involved. I could take 300+ properties out of circulation, David about 80-odd, I think, plus your load. We (rightly) attribute blame to DWP and we watch the fireworks. My S.21s certainly got noticed and likely contributed to some of the changes. What do you reckon…?

Reply to the comment left by Luke P at 19/05/2018 - 14:33I no longer am, unless I know 'em and 100% sure they gonna' be ok now and in 5 years.
I don't get why the media don't make a bigger meal out of it, after all it's taxpayers money that these kids at UC are giving the tenants to spend as they like. Taxpayers don't like giving HB tenants money as it is, but to then waste it as well.
You can start it off if u like. And I will take UC again if they revert payment easily.

Reply to the comment left by Luke P at 19/05/2018 - 14:33
Already started Luke, I will be issuing S21s like a machine gun issues bullets, starting on the day of full service rollout which in my area is 31 May 2018. I do a mail merge from my database so that every S21 is correctly dated complete with the certificate of posting and the certificate of service. Whole process takes 10 seconds of my time. These will be issued every three months until UC interacts sensibly with landlords, preferably by allowing them to interact on line just as the insist claimants do.
ASTs have a big A in the top corner, S21s a big C and certificate of posting a big C1, ready to present to the court for a possession claim.
The three tenants who have already transferred to UC were immediately in serious arrears and I cannot afford to have many more default on their rent, so have to take proactive action.

Reply to the comment left by Mick Roberts at 19/05/2018 - 15:28
Generally the media do not get involved because landlords are hated more than benefit cheats‽

Reply to the comment left by David Price at 19/05/2018 - 15:37
Hi David

If you’re already receiving LHA paid direct to you, in most, if not all of these cases, why are you issuing section 21s en masse?

The fact that your area goes Full Service on 31st May, doesn’t mean all your cases migrate to UC at that time. Some may remain on LHA for another 2/3 years, so where’s the sense in issuing notice to a tenant, already having their LHA paid to you, when it might be completely unnecessary?

Also, for those that do immediately migrate, if, at that point LHA is paid direct, then DWP from 11th April 2018 can redirect payment of UC, without the need for an APA! Again, if UC was paid direct, as proposed, issuing section 21s appears premature and unnecessary?

For many landlords, invested in LHA/UC accommodation, it’s not easy, for a variety of reasons, to overnight, switch from benefit dependent tenants to working tenants. Adopting your proposed strategy could help repossess their properties, but could also potentially create lengthy void periods with no rental income and mortgage defaults.

I fully understand your frustration at what’s happened so far, but if you’re hoping serving section 21s is going to greatly influence DWP I believe you’re mistaken.

Few, if any, landlords would want to create unnecessary homelessness, especially where the tenants have previously proved themselves good and reliable. Many of these tenants, given the choice, would prefer if the housing element came to you, as this removes the threat of repossession. Why should they be deprived of their tenancy for faults caused by a seriously incompetent DWP administration?

Bill Irvine

Reply to the comment left by Bill Irvine at 19/05/2018 - 16:58
All of my tenants are on direct HB payments, but it is simply not happening when switching to UC.

Perhaps you’re not aware, Bill, is that a DWP manager has refused to authorise direct payment because I served S.21s to all and she “…knows my game!” Despite the fact all were on direct payment before and now (with S.21…although not the reason they were served), they are a Tier 1 Consideration Factor.

I have few options left and as the second largest provider of PRS property to benefit recipients, this will have an impact!

Suggestions welcome, Bill.

Reply to the comment left by Bill Irvine at 19/05/2018 - 16:58
Bill I hear everything you say but do not trust the DWP based on bitter and expensive experience. Why should I trust any organisation with such a dismal reputation, an organisation which makes it near impossible to speak to anyone and rejects paperwork without informing the originator. I want to be in a position to take immediate action should things go wrong, call it insurance.