Working Tenants but UC Top-up.

[Claymore]

Hi

One of my long term tenants (almost 10 years) who had always received housing benefit top up. She has never been a day late with rent or short even. She has now relocated and is temporarily staying with me. Straight away, she has found a job and now she is looking for a new property. My properties are 200 miles away but if I had any properties in the new area, then obviously, I'd be snapping her up.

So here is the problem - the letting agencies are all saying their Landlords don't accept tenants on Universal Credit - even though she is working and only receives top up. Reason given is that the Landlords Mortgage does not accept UC.

Am I right in saying this has been deemed discriminatory and letting agents are not allowed to say this?

[boletus]

Am I right in saying this has been deemed discriminatory and letting agents are not allowed to say this?

There have been a couple of indirect discrimination 'test' cases backed by a highly funded multi million £ organisation. Up against that level of opposition, it's wiser for letting agents not to say it.

[jpkeates]

It's not discriminatory if it's justifiable, and a lender's policy would be a reasonable justification.

It's possible that the lender's terms are discriminatory, but that's not been decided definitively.

Most lenders have been encouraged to drop those terms (and I suspect that the agents are simply using it as an excuse).

[boletus]

Would unreliable source of income be reasonable justification?

https://www.landlordzone.co.uk/news/...yments-system/

Landlord wins battle with DWP over ‘failing’ Universal Credits payments system

[jpucng62]

It is against the law to advertise 'no DSS' but that does not mean a LL can't choose not to rent to someone in receipt of benefits.

My advice would be for your tenant to major on the fact that she is employed and perhaps you write her reference stating that she has always paid on time. Most LLs who won't accept benefit tenants are trying to avoid non-working tenants so if she can show she is employed that may go a long way to solving her problem.

[Claymore]

Thanks, yes, I can see it's being used as an excuse. Guilty of using the excuse myself when I have felt the need!

[Claymore]

It is against the law to advertise 'no DSS' but that does not mean a LL can't choose not to rent to someone in receipt of benefits.

My advice would be for your tenant to major on the fact that she is employed and perhaps you write her reference stating that she has always paid on time. Most LLs who won't accept benefit tenants are trying to avoid non-working tenants so if she can show she is employed that may go a long way to solving her problem.

Thank you. Yes, I will do this.

[DPT57]

I suspect that there are very few lenders still precluding tenants on benefits so I suspect that the Agent is lying. However, I doubt an outright challenge would be helpful to her cause.

[nukecad]

It is against the law to advertise 'no DSS' but that does not mean a LL can't choose not to rent to someone in receipt of benefits.

It's not quite against the law yet, but it's coming soon and so insurers and mortgage providers are changing their terms and ammending terms for existing policies so that those terms don't exclude benefit claimants from rentals, many already have.

There have been a couple of court cases where blanket 'No DDS' policies have been ruled unlawful discrimination, but those rulings were in County Courts and so don't set 'Case Law'.
It's only a matter of time until such a ruling is made in a higher court which will then make it law.

As you say that doesn't take away a LLs individual choice not to rent to benefit climants,
but they can't advertise such upfront and should consider each applicant individually and not block applications without considering them as a blanket policy.
(Even if that individual consideration is only 'You're on benefits?, not suitable for this property').