Cant prove tenants partner has moved in

[lfj1963]

Newbie here. I suspect my tenant has moved in her partner for a number of years. When questioned she always denies this - just says he is there a lot because of the kids However several neighbours, see him leaving and coming home from work so say differently. I dont believe there is an ulterior motive re the neighbours as they are known personally to me. . In the past my plumber has discovered the partner "hiding" in a bedroom, in rain it is obvious a car has been removed from the drive etc. Tenancy agreement states that visitors cant stay more than 3 weeks within any 3 month period. The management company have raised this with her several times and confirmed I am happy to add him as a tenant subject to referencing but she is adamant he doesnt live there. I suspect that this is because she may lose maintenance/benefits.if he is added. Any options for solving this

[theartfullodger]

The grassing up possible benefit fraud is here... (sounds likely to me from what you say..)

https://www.gov.uk/report-benefit-fraud

And/or s21..

Don't like crooks or cheats, be they tenant, agent or landlord.

[landlord-man]

Yep, benefits fraud.

However, is it still the case that the LL can be chased by Housing Dept for "overpaid" benefits?

[Section20z]

Yep, benefits fraud.

However, is it still the case that the LL can be chased by Housing Dept for "overpaid" benefits?

Only if paid direct.
As long as rent is being paid then MYOB would be best advice IMO

[Neelix]

Benefits fraud AND council tax fraud ….

[theartfullodger]

Yep, benefits fraud.

However, is it still the case that the LL can be chased by Housing Dept for "overpaid" benefits?

Yes, landlord can be chased even if not paid direct, but in that case does not have to pay. A mistake I made early on.....

(I can chase Johnson the criminal for the damage he's done to the economy and health of the nation, but sadly he doesn't have to pay)

[DPT57]

Benefits aside, what she is doing sounds perfectly sensible by not saddling herself with a co-tenant who is financially entangled and who she can't get easily get rid of if they decide to part. Many couples retain two properties even after being together for a long period, to keep their independence. Such luxuries are not available to tenants on benefits with risking losing them. However, as said above, its her risk and I wouldn't get involved unless there are other factors to consider. Why is the management company enquiring?

[landlord-man]

Ive known 2 housing benefits tenants with own properties move in together and illegally let the other property.

Used to be very common.

[nukecad]

I suspect that this is because she may lose maintenance/benefits.if he is added.

The replies so far have been about the possible benefits aspect,but I have to ask:

Do you actually KNOW that she is getting any maintenance/benefits?
Or is that'"I suspect" just speculation?

[jpkeates]

What real-life difference does it make to the landlord?
None.

[lfj1963]

Thanks all
First of all the rent is not being paid by benefit, so I don't know for sure she is getting maintenance/benefits. My concern is that if her partner is living at the property, which the neighbours have suggested, if I gave notice and he refused to leave there would be additional legal proceeding to remove him - time cost etc.
Secondly, it invalidates my landlords insurance.
There is a long history of this tenant, breaking conditions on the AST which I have not pursued in the past as her rent is always paid on time, but its reached a point where the agents have suggested she might be happier in another property - long story! If she decides to stay I would like to insist that her partner is on the AST for reasons above -does this sound reasonable?

[jpkeates]

My concern is that if her partner is living at the property, which the neighbours have suggested, if I gave notice and he refused to leave there would be additional legal proceeding to remove him - time cost etc.

There would be an issue if she left and he didn't - he would then be a trespasser and could be removed by court action or you locking him out.
But how likely is that?

Secondly, it invalidates my landlords insurance.

In which case, serve notice.
And change insurance company, there are lots of legitimate reasons people don't want partners on tenancy agreements.

There is a long history of this tenant, breaking conditions on the AST which I have not pursued in the past as her rent is always paid on time, but its reached a point where the agents have suggested she might be happier in another property - long story! If she decides to stay I would like to insist that her partner is on the AST for reasons above -does this sound reasonable?

Yes.
But I'm intrigues as to why the agent has that view - they're not the one's who'll have to go to court to retake possession.

[theartfullodger]

I've reported suspected tax fiddler's to HMRC and very happy to. And know they do take action (not always). Clearly tax fiddling is a much bigger problem than benefit fraud, but were I to see such evidence as above, I'd happily report that with the same moral confidence/doubt as with tax fraud.

Arguably a citizen has a duty do: I resent paying more tax than I would need to were it not for the fiddlers. Don't suppose other members here are happy with that either. Don't get me started on huge multinationals or the PPE farago involving overseas companies that are dissolved and restarted at alarming speed.

Best wishes and Merry Christmas to all non-fiddlers!

Artful, in receipt of 6 benefits.....

[DPT57]

If she decides to stay I would like to insist that her partner is on the AST for reasons above -does this sound reasonable?

It needs to be your decision, not hers, and from what you've now said, I think the decision should be to serve notice and evict her/them. He has no rights to live there so will have to leave when she does.

[hybrice]

Thanks all
First of all the rent is not being paid by benefit, so I don't know for sure she is getting maintenance/benefits. My concern is that if her partner is living at the property, which the neighbours have suggested, if I gave notice and he refused to leave there would be additional legal proceeding to remove him - time cost etc.
Secondly, it invalidates my landlords insurance.
There is a long history of this tenant, breaking conditions on the AST which I have not pursued in the past as her rent is always paid on time, but its reached a point where the agents have suggested she might be happier in another property - long story! If she decides to stay I would like to insist that her partner is on the AST for reasons above -does this sound reasonable?

Conversely to what others have said, I don’t believe there would be any issues here. If he refused to leave you’d simple issue a warrant of possession which is addressed to and applies to “The Defendant and all other occupants”, the bailiffs wouldn’t allow anyone to remain in the property when enforcing a possession order. They wouldn’t care in the least if he’s her partner or not.

Obviously, that assumes you kicked off possession proceedings. If you mean she gave notice and he didn’t leave, then yes - apply for a court order for trespass. But that’s relatively quick and as he has no standing against the property, should be pretty cut and dry.