No DSS

[edhistory]

I see prospective landlords are still specifying "no DSS" in EDF adverts.

As the DWP pay disability benefits can this blanket proscription be legal?

John K

[Loz]

Most BTL mortgages specifically prohibit tenants on DSS, so the landlord has no choice.

[Burbage]

Loz Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Most BTL mortgages specifically prohibit tenants

> on DSS, so the landlord has no choice.

That's not as true as it used to be, even when it was against benefit recipients as opposed to social tenants, which are subtly different. Most lenders now don't have such restrictions, having caved in to some tawdry lobbying by irritating lefties who, possibly fairly, thought it iffy that bailed-out and part-nationalized outfits should be discriminating against their fellow-recipients of taxpayers' money.

But it hardly matters, anyhow. Housing benefit recipients might be able to cover the rent, and may even pass the credit checks. But the credit check fees, search fees, booking fees, inventory fees and commencement fees should be something of a barrier, even if the deposits (and the deposit-protection fees - agents being nothing if not inventive) aren't.

As for disability discrimination, that's only illegal if its mentioned explicitly. If the property is unsuitable for disabled tenants, which most aren't, you're fine. This because landlordism is one of the few businesses that's largely exempt from heavy-handed, or indeed any, regulation, mainly because, as a growth sector, it deserves more than one form of hidden subsidy.

The exception, of course, is the heroic borough of Newham, which has declared itself a "selective licensing" zone throughout, meaning even non-HMO landlords must register, to the horror of landlords and agents, whose squeals were enough to warm a human heart. Although selective licencing is supposed to raise standards in the rented sector, lenders are, naturally enough, now refusing BTL mortgages to properties in such areas, on the grounds that they are supposed to be areas of 'low demand' or of high 'anti-social' behaviour, and thus a shorthand for places that housing benefit might stretch to.

But that's only Newham (and, arguably, Scotland and Wales), who may yet be challenged by one or other landlords' associations, assuming they fancy their chances. Southwark, happily enough, has no current plans to inflict selective licensing on landlords. Whether that's because property management and maintenance is currently something of a sore point in Tooley Street is not a helpful question.

[Loz]

Burbage Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Loz Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Most BTL mortgages specifically prohibit tenants

> > on DSS, so the landlord has no choice.

>

> That's not as true as it used to be, even when it

> was against benefit recipients as opposed to

> social tenants, which are subtly different. Most

> lenders now don't have such restrictions, having

> caved in to some tawdry lobbying by irritating

> lefties who, possibly fairly, thought it iffy that

> bailed-out and part-nationalized outfits should be

> discriminating against their fellow-recipients of

> taxpayers' money.

Maybe there is change in the wind, but on a quick check of two mortgages from two different lenders (one taken out six months ago), both specifically exclude renting to DWP benefit recipients.

This article from December seems to show that most lenders still have the restriction in place.

http://www.mortgagesolutions.co.uk/mortgage-solutions/news/2229147/lenders-still-refusing-landlords-with-tenants-on-benefit

[Burbage]

Loz Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> This article from December seems to show that most

> lenders still have the restriction in place.

>

It looks like you might be right. Or possibly wrong. If I haven't lost count, but it looks like three u-turns from Nationwide in six months, and they're not having to beg for funding or jump to a Treasury tune.

Either way, even before the recent foot-shuffling, at least three major lenders (Nationwide was one, with Paragon and another whose name I forget) didn't exclude HB tenants. Which makes the apparent 90%+ of "no DSS" ads look a little disproportionate. Especially given that, according to Shelter, nearly 40% of private tenants receive housing benefit to some extent. Mind you, given there's no easy way for a landlord to find out if you're a benefit recipient (payslips might do it, but 'replacement' payslips are easily available for a fee), I suspect that a good many landlords just put it in the ads out of habit. Which is a shame, because it effectively means that they're only discriminating against honest benefit recipients.

[Loz]

Yeah, I always wondered how a landlord was supposed to know if a tenant was getting HB. Especially as their status may change during the course of a tenancy.