Mr Ainsworth:
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what assessment he has made
of the potential effect on the number of tenant evictions
resulting from the decision to pay housing benefit direct to claimants rather
than landlords.
Steve Webb:
The Government does not expect an increase in the number of evictions in
relation to the direct payments of housing benefit. Most tenants in the private
rented sector are already used to receiving their housing payments directly,
and managing their own finances. For other tenants, including many in the
social rented sector, this will represent more of a change. We are working with
the advice sector to ensure that claimants are able to access budgeting support
services to help them to manage their money successfully. Money advice will be
offered at a national and local level, and include a mix of online, telephone
and face to face services. A minority of claimants may require alternative
payment arrangements. This might include paying rent direct to the landlord,
making payments more frequently than monthly, or splitting the payment for a
couple.
1 comment:
After Fergus Wilson decided to evict all of his housing benefit tenants a couple of weeks ago, the government seem to be on the back foot defending yet another issue relating to their coveted Universal Credit flagship policy.
Although we won't be serving notice on our 'benefit' tenants just yet, as properties come free they will only be offered to students, working people or an LHA tenant with a guarantor for whom we can get some form of rent guarantee insurance.
The DWP have insisted all along (Ian Duncan Smith & Lord David Freud), that Universal Credit will be a bulk sum, comprising of many different benefits rolled into one. This in itself is actually a very good idea. Housing Benefit or LHA as its now known should be kept apart from this payment, or at least the landlord and tenant should be given the option of direct payments when the tenancy begins.
As landlords and agents we are NOT asking the government for more money but just asking for a split of payments between the claimant and the landlord. There WILL be a blatant misuse of tax payers money that will NOT get spent on what it was intended i.e. Housing Costs.
The vast majority of benefit tenants are vulnerable by definition and will not pass the money on as rent, but simply spend it on other purchases or luxuries. This has been proven to be the case when these often unfortunate people have so little to live on. You don't have to watch reality TV shows to understand the mentality of so many 'benefit st' tenants. Independent figures show that around 70% will fall into arrears and we fully agree with this.
It is not just landlords but also tenants, Citizens Advice Bureaus, Housing Associations, Landlord Associations and the man or woman in the street who knows this government idea is quite ludicrous and will not work.
The two politicians mentioned above argue that the recipients need to treat this benefit as a working wage and be responsible - Great, in an ideal world.
Many lenders will not lend to landlords who wish to expand their portfolios who rent to LHA or 'DSS' (historically named) tenants. Also NO rent guarantee insurance can be taken on these highest risk of tenants.
The PRS is being asked to handover an asset often worth in excess of £80,000 in return for the chance of getting their rent. No deposit is paid and quite often no rent in advance can be paid by the tenant.
Mass evictions and severe homelessness in NOT a threat but it will happen and cost the government in huge temporary accommodation costs, as well severe embarrassment.
You cannot create indepence from a state of dependence.
Post a Comment