this is nothing new, many adverts have had 'No DSS' for aeons
it's what people vote for
it's what people vote for
Join the campaign against RightMove's "No DSS" policy
- Thread starter Wookey
- Start date
ask your local labour councillors about why they do this
nogojones
spelling is overrated
Just a follow up.
Eventually got through, but the only apointment they had in the next two weeks was in Merthyr Tydfil, so mate got on train to see them.
Really helpful. Without going into their specific issues, they have been assured that they can't be made homeless and that they shouldn't hand the keys back to the council until other suitable accomadation is provided. Now they've also got some local counsilors and AM's on side, so there's a reasonable chance they'll be able to retain their current housing.
They were so pleased with the help they're likely to go on and do some voluntary work for them.
editor
hiraethified
Where and when did that vote take place?
when you voted for any party that supports mass immigration
farmerbarleymow
I'm Petee's spirit animal
Manter
Lunch Mob
Jesus. It’s always about the foreigners
farmerbarleymow
I'm Petee's spirit animal
Oh, he's been banned. Good.
Proper Tidy
Arsed
Great stuff
BBC News - Legal victories over 'No DSS' letting agents
BBC News - Legal victories over 'No DSS' letting agents
Legal victories over 'No DSS' letting agents
Two single mothers win out-of-court settlements against letting agents refusing benefit claimants.
www.bbc.co.uk
Great stuff
BBC News - Legal victories over 'No DSS' letting agents
Legal victories over 'No DSS' letting agents
Two single mothers win out-of-court settlements against letting agents refusing benefit claimants.www.bbc.co.uk
Brilliant news, this must mean an end to all homelessness.
SpookyFrank
A cheap source of teeth for aquarium gravel
They might take 'no DSS' off the adverts but you still have to explain/prove your personal circumstances at some point and that's the point at which the agents can just tell you to get to fuck. Just like they've figured out you can't put overtly racist things in your adverts but there's absolutely nothing to stop them rejecting prospective tennants on grounds of race.
Nothing short of smashing letting agents into dust will solve this. Everyone's got another middleman to blame, be it agents or insurers or whatever.
Nothing short of smashing letting agents into dust will solve this. Everyone's got another middleman to blame, be it agents or insurers or whatever.
scifisam
feck! arse! girls! drink!
Yeah. While it's a good victory because it means agencies won't discriminate against people in receipt of benefits, so they can still register and be allowed to apply for properties, it doesn't address the underlying issues. Landlord insurance that discriminates against people on benefits is the real issue. Not much point in being allowed to apply for properties if the landlord still can't let to you under the terms of their insurance - you're just wasting your time.
Unless this has changed? Does anyone know?
SpookyFrank
A cheap source of teeth for aquarium gravel
It's always at the landlord's discretion if they let a property to you, so no it hasn't changed.
scifisam
feck! arse! girls! drink!
I meant the insurance terms. I assume that hasn't changed either.
SpookyFrank
A cheap source of teeth for aquarium gravel
Who knows if it was ever true even, but if the agent says 'insurer says no' then you're fucked either way, just like if the landlord says 'agency says no'. I'm pretty sure someone will give you insurance if you're letting a house to people on benefits.
Proper Tidy
Arsed
It is true about RGI (landlords insurance) - some insurers won't let landlords insure the rent payments if tenants on HB and those that do will ask for a higher premium. I think this became more of an issue after the double whammy of paying HB/housing component of UC to tenant by default and the increasing shortfall between what the rent is and what the claimant gets (although bedroom tax doesn't apply to private obv, but still often a shortfall).
Insurers will argue that its simply based on risk as higher incidence of claims when tenants are reliant on benefits, although you'd think that could be legislated out in same way insurers can't refuse cover based on ethnicity. But ultimately its the people who create legislation that created this situation with changes to benefits regime so what's the chances
Insurers will argue that its simply based on risk as higher incidence of claims when tenants are reliant on benefits, although you'd think that could be legislated out in same way insurers can't refuse cover based on ethnicity. But ultimately its the people who create legislation that created this situation with changes to benefits regime so what's the chances
Proper Tidy
Arsed
Also I'd imagine the itchy sanction trigger finger of DWP plays a role in that higher incidence of landlords claiming too. Basically a perfect storm of being cunts to claimants and trapping in poverty - limited social housing available and penalties if you are able to get a social tenancy eg bedroom tax, excluded from (legal) private, if you do get a private tenancy then various preventable factors make it much likelier than it needs to be that you'll fall into arrears and be out on your arse
Much as I hope this campaign succeeds a lot of London letting agents are now asking for a minimum gross income that is equivalent to three and a half times the rent. So instead of saying No DSS they can just say to claimants you don't have enough money coming in to live here.
SpookyFrank
A cheap source of teeth for aquarium gravel
Nobody in London earns three and a half times their rent.
scifisam
feck! arse! girls! drink!
They do, depending on the rent. It's why you get qualified barristers and doctors still living in houseshares or with their parents.
Similar threads
