Options
Panorama - The Great Housing Benefit Scandal
Ethel_Fred
Posts: 34,127 Forum Member
✭✭✭
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-32381471
Nine billion pounds of taxpayers' money goes to private landlords every year in housing benefit.
And the Institute for Public Policy Research estimates that at least £3bn of that money is spent on poor quality accommodation annually
Roz Spencer of Lewisham Rogue Landlords Team knows the problem all too well. She told us the landlord could be the "biggest villain that walked this earth", yet the local authority would still have to hand over the housing benefit.
So it's up to local authorities to take bad landlords to task. But this is a big job for small, often under-resourced teams. And from what we saw, the process of prosecuting rogue landlords can be long and complex.
Roz Spencer would like to see stronger penalties. She describes the maximum fines as "pathetically small" as they often amount to less than one per cent of turnover. It's little deterrent when there are such big profits to be made.
Lunatics and asylum come to mind
Nine billion pounds of taxpayers' money goes to private landlords every year in housing benefit.
And the Institute for Public Policy Research estimates that at least £3bn of that money is spent on poor quality accommodation annually
Roz Spencer of Lewisham Rogue Landlords Team knows the problem all too well. She told us the landlord could be the "biggest villain that walked this earth", yet the local authority would still have to hand over the housing benefit.
So it's up to local authorities to take bad landlords to task. But this is a big job for small, often under-resourced teams. And from what we saw, the process of prosecuting rogue landlords can be long and complex.
Roz Spencer would like to see stronger penalties. She describes the maximum fines as "pathetically small" as they often amount to less than one per cent of turnover. It's little deterrent when there are such big profits to be made.
Lunatics and asylum come to mind
0
Comments
Totally agree - housing benefit costs £25bn a year and there are more renters and fewer owners each year. If we carry on like this the HB bill will eventually exceed the NHS budget!
This is due to a total failure of housing policies by Labour and the Coalition.
There was another, think it was C4 couple of weeks ago. Property developers targetting property they can convert into multiple occupancy, to fill with HB claimants. They got a better return on the property this way than letting it out as the family home it was. Some were very proud of their financial accumen. Basically private landords / businesses profiteering from the taxpayer and doing the social housing work of the last two governments for them.
And yet the Government have cut funding to councils so they can't afford to have inspectors inspect every house on a regular basis.
There are some bad landlords, there are even more bad tenants.
Yes well with most landlords being multiple buy to let land lords, that is a statistical outcome.
All i will say is.......
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b04gyrm4/broadcasts/2014/10
Have you got a 'thing' for Matt Alright? ;-)
Nope, just look at the date ;-)
I've seen an (eye opening) episode or two at the time.
Dont know about that, saying a law has just been pasted to deal with this problem. Parliament passes law to ban 'revenge evictions'
17 March 2015 | By Daniel Douglas
A law to ban ‘revenge’ evictions was passed by the House of Lords after a long campaign spearheaded by housing charity Shelter.
The law, which was passed yesterday as part of the Deregulation Bill, will make any eviction invalid where the tenant has made a complaint about housing conditions that the landlord did not respond to adequately.
Where a landlord gives notice seeking possession through a ‘Section 21 notice’ following a complaint about the condition of their home, it will no longer be possible to evict that tenant and a court must strike out any attempt to evict under those circumstances.
More than 200,000 renters currently face this type of ‘revenge’ eviction every year, according to research by Shelter. The figures were based on the findings of a YouGov poll of 4,500 private renters.
Campbell Robb, chief executive of Shelter, said: ‘We’re thrilled that politicians from all the parties have finally taken a stand for renters across the country today by banning revenge evictions once and for all.
‘Hundreds of thousands of people will no longer face the appalling choice between living in a home that puts them or their family in danger, or risking eviction if they complain.
‘This is an important step towards protecting renters across the country, but there is still more to be done. As we approach the general election, all politicians need to show renters they will continue to do everything they can to fix our broken rental market for good.’
The law will apply in England but, as housing matters are now devolved in Wales, will not apply there.
Croydon Council last night ploughed ahead with its plans for a borough-wide private rented sector landlord licensing scheme, although the government last week announced these will be banned from 1s April this year.
Landlords renting out properties in Croydon without a licence will now face fines of up to £20,000.
What is the 'turnover' that 'maximum fines' are 1% of? What are the 'maximum fines' supposed to be for?
As a landlord myself (retreats under a hail of missiles) I find the councils pretty on the ball. You have to have a gas certificate, electrical certificate and energy certificate in force; the council will inspect the property and take photographs before the tenant moves in, to show that it is sound and dry; if you are willing to take a highly vulnerable tenant they may agree to indemnify you by one month's rent, even though it will take you at least 4 months to get them out if they stop paying any rent. There probably is more money (at least more than the none that I make) in HMO's, but it's not a market I want to get into. (all right in student towns.)
Are you doubting the ability of civil servants and local government employees to accurately process and deal with housing benefit claims ?
Agreed.
As a former claimant of housing benefit (also retreats under a hail of missiles), my HB claim was investigated, verified and once the local authority were happy that my application was genuine, about a month later I got help with my rent.
I think the point is that the money is being given to line landlords' pockets and in turn helping to contribute to the housing problem by making BTL more attractive, when at least under the old council house system the money was going into something sustainable and beneficial to everyone
In my experience HB staff are totally and completely inept, and if they actually get something right it is more by accident than design.
That's the point, if private landlords or businesses can operate and make handsome profit then so 'in effect' can the local authority. Why pay HB out to 'disappear' when it could be paid out in one hand, and paid back to the local authority in the other (ie: their net HB bill if housing HB recipients themselves would be £0.
Excactly right. It was quite clear from my younger generation thread a few days ago that living in rented accommodation with poor prospects was quite OK for my generation. I suspect that most people who commented had financial security. While this is a scandle MPs will not change anything as most have a vested interest in the BTL market and see the tax payer propping it up as something positive.
Where were up to 40 ADDITIONAL properties required in this ONE case, magically come from? Which money tree would be used to fund the building AND furnishing of those 40 properties?
I really doubt that anyone makes a 'handsome profit' at the bottom end of the market. I have got to know other local landlords, and we all operate at the very edge of profit or loss. The economies of scale just don't work. If you are renting a property for £3000 a month, a new boiler might wipe out two months profit. If you are renting a property for £300 a month, it might wipe out 20 months profit. Ditto with voids: if a property is being let for £300 a month, the council tax and insurance will wipe out a year's profit for every two months a property is empty.
Some landlords might have an appreciating asset of course. It's just luck. A town can go into decline - the properties I own are worth nearly half what they were worth 10 years ago - and there you are, stuck with a worthless (and very time-consuming) asset. It makes me laugh, though not very hilariously, when I see people going on and on about 'fat cat landlords' and proposing special draconian taxes for them.
The best I can say is that as a landlord who houses vulnerable tenants (mainly probation referrals, ie ex prisoners who would not qualify for social housing) at least I AM plugging a gap. Tax that if you can.
I'm not saying it's all hunky dory, but there must be some council culpability there too? They are after all our guardians of central government funds otherwise known as "the money of all of us"