Reg Posted January 16, 2008 Report Share Posted January 16, 2008 Hi Guys, just evicted my dss tenant, what a nasty piece of work he turned out to be. Giving my threatening phone calls if I dare not give him back the full deposit, before i'd even gone round to do a priliminary inventory check, and he paid me once on time in 2 and a half years. I've learnt never to take on a dss tenant again, especially as the council woudn't pay me direct and most of the time had to get the rent off the guarantor, unauthorised changes etc, the list goes on. Moving forward, the next tenant (will be a professional) and I will demand 6 weeks deposit, and one month in advance as the last tenant try to refuse me the last month's rent etc Anyway, I'm going to insist that the rent by the new tenant is paid by standing order and tricks to make it go smoothly? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Selkirk Posted January 16, 2008 Report Share Posted January 16, 2008 Reg I too have had trouble with DSS and their T's and will not entertain them now at all. Unfortunately it looks as though I'm saying they're all the same which is not my intention but I'm not prepared to take the chance. What does everyone else think, is there a poll or something where people can vote on this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GPEL Posted January 16, 2008 Report Share Posted January 16, 2008 Anyway, I'm going to insist that the rent by the new tenant is paid by standing order and tricks to make it go smoothly? Select a tenant who's got money in his account. No money no standing order payment. After the initial setup (which could be keyed wrong at the bank), none-payment is unlikely to be because of bank errors, though the tenant may try and say otherwise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trenners Posted January 16, 2008 Report Share Posted January 16, 2008 Well I think that DSS tenants are great and tenants who work are "well dodgy". After all - a working tenant might lose their job then they won't be able to pay me the rent ... whereas a DSS tenant doesn't work and the Council pay all their rent ....... There are good and bad people in all walks of life ... just because someone is a DSS tenant doesn't mean they are bad ... just because someone works doesn't mean they are good. How can you simply discriminate against ALL DSS tenants ? Totally illogical - in my opinion. Just because the Council - rather than an employer - pays their rent doesn't make them bad. If you had a bad DSS tenant ... why did you wait 2.5 years to evict them ... I would have got rid of them after 6 months and then got a new one. There are 8,000 people on my local Councils waiting list and, as a result, I NEVER EVER EVER EVER have a void period in any of my properties ....... Eliminate voids, maxiumize earnings, minimize letting costs ...... GO DSS !! Mark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GPEL Posted January 17, 2008 Report Share Posted January 17, 2008 Sadly, this doesn't match reality. From a position of risk assessment, it's industry knowledge that the likelihood of problems (damage, neglect, arrears etc) with DSS occupants is much higher than from most other sectors. Is this not why many mortgage companies don't permit their occupancy when granting permission for owners to let their property. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trenners Posted January 17, 2008 Report Share Posted January 17, 2008 Hi GPEL, I think the discrimination against DSS tenants is something that has come from the past and is not a real relfection of the current state of affairs. That is certainly my experience. Firstly, the tenants were never "DSS tenants", they were "DHSS tenants", before the DHSS was abolished a few years ago and replaced by the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP). So - anyone stating No DSS is living in the past. No DWP is the correct term - mortgage companies take note !! Secondly, just because someone collects a benefit rather than a wage does not make them a greater risk. I understand that not all HB claiming tenants are good people - but they are not all bad either. Not all working tenants are good either. Mortgage companies that state "No DSS" in their small print are setting a mortgage condition that is irrelvant and incorrect. Surely it should either say "No HB claiming tenants" or "No DWP" tenants. There is no such thing as a DSS tenant ! Finally - with the local housing allowance (LHA) being paid directly to the tenant from April 2008 - it is going to be impossible for a landlord to police which tenants are "DSS" and which tenants are working and which tenants are partially working and partially "DSS". Mark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GPEL Posted January 17, 2008 Report Share Posted January 17, 2008 Nit picking over terms doesn't negate the facts that higher risks are associated with tenants in this category. Evidence speaks for itself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Selkirk Posted January 17, 2008 Report Share Posted January 17, 2008 I've found the council to be the biggest pain of all actually, keep changing the payments, clawing back then repaying and mostly very unhelpful after waiting on an 0870 number for 20 minutes. It's no suprise then that there are so many 'council' qualifying T's and so many empty houses. My guess is Trenners has a very good relationship with the council, probably on personal terms with someone, built up over a period of time, it works for you and that's perfect. Each to their own then, in my case it's once bitten... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simon Dewsberry Posted January 18, 2008 Report Share Posted January 18, 2008 HMmmmmmm Finally - with the local housing allowance (LHA) being paid directly to the tenant from April 2008 - it is going to be impossible for a landlord to police which tenants are "DSS" and which tenants are working and which tenants are partially working and partially "DSS". Well proper referencing will pick up their ability to pay ... In principal i do not have a problem with HB or LHA ...have a T who has been trying to sort his claim out for 4 months now ...........he has been wih me a long time (not taken as HB client but as working with good ref ..then lost his job) Here lies the problem ...he cant/wont sort it out so i am left to liase with HB LL liason officer and his "case support worker" which takes up unreasonable amounts of time ...i am sick to death of sending in the same information 3-4 times and this week answering "when did the rent rise take place ?" ....It hasn't risen at all........!!!!!!! and "we understand that mr xxxx has recently moved from room A to room C please state when this occured " ... There has been no move ..............!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Complete waste of my time .... and as far as "maximising" rent ........HB NEVER pay full market rent ..?? In my area LHA has been suggested to be set at £52 pw for a single adult which does not cover the rent ....so leaving T to drag the rest from his income support which he can ill afford .. By choice DHSS,DHS,HB, LHA are all Pain In The Ass (PITA) and i avoid like the plague....but by default have ended up with a few when peoples circumstances change ... JUST MAKE SURE THEY COME WITH A CAST IRON GUARANTOR .... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.