Industry news

Campaign launched to end discrimination against benefit claimants

discrimination by private sector landlords against people who are reliant on welfare benefits to pay their rent. Shelter claim the problem of benefit claimants


being refused private tenancies is growing. They quote from a YouGov survey of almost 4,000 private renters which found that almost a third of people receiving housing benefits said they had not been able to rent a home due to a ‘No DSS’ policy in the last five years. The charity has been undertaking mystery

shopping – by telephoning letting agents to find out if they would accept benefit claimants as tenants. In 20 out of 21 calls made to one agency they were told they would not, even though the firm subsequently told them this was not their policy. Shelter claims this was not an isolated case and they are urging people to join their campaign. The problem has been exacerbated by low wages

which have stagnated since the financial crash in 2008 and has seen increasing numbers of those in work, also claiming benefits. It is now estimated that 40 per cent of Universal Claimants are in paid work. Television programmes like Benefit Street tend to stigmatise claimants and harden attitudes against them. Back in July Shelter published analysis of official

Government figures which showed that in 2017 some 55 per cent of the families living in temporary accommodation were working - this represented over 33,000 families who were holding down a job despite having nowhere stable to live. Many private landlords complain that

joint campaign has been launched by Shelter and the National Housing Federation to end any form of

accusations of discrimination are unfair because it is the policies of mortgage lenders and insurance companies which are forcing them to be restrictive about who they let their properties to. There are also problems caused by benefits being paid in arrears to claimants, so they often accumulate debts with rent and other bills, which are difficult to pay off.

CRITICISMS In addition recent tax changes (stamp duty increases and withdrawal of tax relief on mortgage payments) are forcing many smaller landlords to sell up or look at ways of cutting costs, while unpaid rent poses a serious problem for them. The Residential Landlords Association have

slammed Shelter and the NHF ‘for pointing fingers at letting agents and private landlords’ while failing to offer any solutions. John Stewart, Policy Manager at the RLA said there are many reasons for landlords being reluctant to let to those on benefits. “Private landlords see tenants who are claiming

benefits as a higher risk. The key to widening access to the private rented sector for these tenants is to reduce that risk. This is something that is understood by the homelessness charity Crisis” said Mr Stewart. “Their rent guarantee and bond schemes help many people into private rented accommodation by taking on some of that risk” he added. Explaining the need for the campaign, Greg

Beales, the Director of Campaigns at Shelter, said: “Go onto any housing website now and you will see it. ‘No DSS’. The Department for Social Security (DSS) was renamed years ago, but the meaning of ‘No DSS’ is still known to all. It means we will not

Shelter claim the problem of benefit claimants being refused private tenancies is growing

rent this property to you if you are ‘on benefits’. “In 2018 Britain we have landlords telling people

don’t apply if you are on benefits. Don’t apply, I won’t even consider you. It doesn’t matter if you have always paid your rent on time. It doesn’t matter if your references are great and you and your family really need a home. ‘No DSS’. It’s prejudice and it’s discrimination.” Shelter believes such actions are indirect

discrimination and illegal. They plan to bring a series of test cases to the Courts in the coming months to challenge those who refuse to consider letting to people on benefits and to ask the courts whether their practices are lawful or are in fact indirect discrimination.

High Court Right to Rent challenge set for year end

A date has been set in December for the hearing of a High Court challenge to the Government’s Right to Rent scheme on the basis it discriminates against foreign nationals. The challenge has been launched by the Joint

Council for the Welfare of Immigrants (JCWI) and will take place on the 18th and 19th of December. The JCWI is being supported by the Residential

Landlords Association. A study by the RLA’s research arm PEARL found

that as a result of the right to rent policy, 42 per cent of landlords are now less likely to rent to someone without a British passport for fear of prosecution for getting things wrong. Permission was granted for the JCWI to launch a

judicial challenge of the policy in June. At the time, RLA Policy Director David Smith said: “Landlords will welcome the High Court decision to allow a judicial review of the Right to Rent policy which has put them in the impossible position of acting as untrained Border Police trying to ascertain who does and who does not have the right to be in the country. “This has created difficulties for many legitimate

tenants as landlords are forced to play safe and only rent to those with a UK passport. The announcement is an important step towards overturning a policy which the government’s own inspectorate had described as having yet to demonstrate its worth.” The announcement of the court hearing

coincides with the RLA’s call for the Government to issue guidance as a matter of urgency on the rights that EU nationals will have to rent property both before and after the UK leaves the EU, including under a no deal Brexit. Analysis of Government data by the RLA PEARL

suggests that 66 per cent of EU nationals (excluding those from the Republic of Ireland) live in private rented housing. | HMM September 2018 | 17

Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52