UC47 rejected but tenant consistently in arrears?
I have just had a UC47 rejected as it states rent arrears are not in excess of two months rent. Does this mean the total tent of the property – or does this mean the total amount of rent due by the tenant towards her part of the rent – in other words her top ups? A distinct difference.
I want to challenge this as tenant is in arrears to the tune of over £1,000, but this has built up as a direct result of her negation of payment of the top ups to the rent which have been consistently underpaid since April 2019. If I have to wait till two months actual rent accrues first (that’s over £1700) then the period of arrears will span nearly 2 years!
Anyone had a similar issue – can I challenge on this basis as it is clearly unfair.
Many thanks
Reluctant Landlord
Editor’s Note:
.Gov Click here: If a tenant is having difficulty paying their rent, fill in the UC47 form to request payment of rent from a tenant’s Universal Credit.
Comments
Have Your Say
Every day, landlords who want to influence policy and share real-world experience add their voice here. Your perspective helps keep the debate balanced.
Not a member yet? Join In Seconds
Login with
Previous Article
Supported living in HMO advice please?
Member Since April 2015 - Comments: 468
5:32 PM, 5th June 2020, About 6 years ago
Reply to the comment left by Manni at 05/06/2020 – 16:57
The tier 2 complaint email address is below:
[email protected]
All I can say is best of luck
Member Since November 2019 - Comments: 29
5:39 PM, 5th June 2020, About 6 years ago
Reply to the comment left by Clint at 05/06/2020 – 17:32
Thanx Clint. Yes will need all the luck in the world. Several calls and many hours on the hotline and nobody will speak with me saying I need tenants permission although the gov website states if rent payments to landlord are in place tenant permission is not required. UC helpline are running some sort of triage serVice with inexperienced staff
Member Since April 2015 - Comments: 468
6:19 PM, 5th June 2020, About 6 years ago
Reply to the comment left by Manni at 05/06/2020 – 17:39
I virtually always have them say that they cannot speak to me however, I tell them that the number is for landlords as well, and inform them that it is on the government website, for landlords and that I have used it for the last three years.
If they still insist they cannot speak to me, I ask for a supervisor which they never put you through to, but eventually do give you information such as yes we have received your UC47 form and it is due to be looked at or we have not received anything from you even if you say you sent it by email. Basically, the information given is usually useless or information that if you ring again, they say they have no record of it.
I generally use the calls as part of my complaints where, I state the dates I called UC and the people I spoke to and what was said.
Yesterday, I got a reply from my MP where, I had written to him about the case that I had posted on 26th April 2020. He copied me into the reply that he got from a Complaints Resolution Manager at DWP. The letter was very detailed, and I was most surprised that they had records of all the documents and applications I had made for the rent, right up to the present time including my complaints.
To cut a long story short, I have yet to reply to them which I intend to do through my MP again where, I have to point out that they had not paid the rent to me where, the rent was almost 2 months in arrears and, I informed them that the tenant had no intention of paying, and also that I had got the tenant a CCJ because of this. Following this, they still paid the tenant, totally ignoring their own guidelines and the month after that when the tenant was more than two months in arrears and me having filled another UC47, they phoned me and took my bank details informing me and the tenant, the date of the next payment which was going to be paid to me however, they ended up paying it to the tenant so effectively causing me to lose three full months of rent.
More recently, when I lost a further three months rent, with this same tenant, the call centre stated that the tenant asked for the money to be paid to herself, and the letter to the MP copied to me stated, that the rent was stopped as the tenant had stated that she had moved, and an address was given to them and on the same day the tenant said she moved back in and there was something about disrepair of which I know nothing about. The whole thing is absolutely ludicrous, and had caused me to lose three months rent.
Anyway, all this gives me an opportunity to make my MP more aware of what is going on at UC and hopefully if he intervenes, I may get some compensation….Pigs may fly.
Member Since November 2019 - Comments: 29
6:25 PM, 5th June 2020, About 6 years ago
Reply to the comment left by Clint at 05/06/2020 – 18:19
Wow. Your having almost as much trouble as me.. theft is apparently not a term allowed when it comes to rent payments… but I can’t think of another….
Member Since April 2015 - Comments: 468
7:31 PM, 5th June 2020, About 6 years ago
Reply to the comment left by Manni at 05/06/2020 – 18:25
I don’t know how many problems you have with UC but all I can say is that it is a full time job and this country is going backwards rather than forward.
Member Since August 2013 - Comments: 148
6:37 PM, 8th June 2020, About 6 years ago
Hi
My most recent bulletin https://universalcreditadvice.com/articles/dwp-and-independent-case-examiner-both-failing-private-landlords/ referring to Mick and almost everyone else’s frustrations with the APA scheme, lack of response and the continuation of wholly unnecessary losses experienced by landlords, UK wide.
For those of you who use Twitter, please RT @Billirvine17 to see if we can engender some momentum from landlords and support organisations.
Bill
Member Since November 2019 - Comments: 29
4:57 PM, 10th June 2020, About 6 years ago
Reply to the comment left by Clint at 05/06/2020 – 19:31
Finally sorted ..after about 29 emails and 20 phone call all giving the same reply that it wasn’t their responsibility