Noobie House Letting Question....
Discussion
My kid (23, single mum, part time worker, has benefits to top up her income) is moving from one let to another (due to being closer to her job)
She has found 99% of places won't consider her due to benefits (fair enough) - but she has found one place and I'm wondering if this is right....
She is paid up till 9th August (she paid for 12 months up front last year as the only way to get a place back then) so wants to move as close to that as possible. They want her to take the new place 8th July - under 3 weeks away. She can't afford (and doesn't want!) to rent 2 houses for July so asked if they could compromise on 1st Aug - They have said no and she should get a loan or (aren't they nice!) they can wack up the rent so (over the next 6 months) she pays the extra month via her monthly's anyway.
Am I am too close to this to see that this is all fair enough and how renting works - or is this someone with enough money for more than 1 house getting someone with no money to borrow some to give to him! I'm no huge fan of what the buy to let situation has done to housing in this country but sit pretty much on the fence of it, in general. But this feels a bit off to me.
Am I being soft?
She has found 99% of places won't consider her due to benefits (fair enough) - but she has found one place and I'm wondering if this is right....
She is paid up till 9th August (she paid for 12 months up front last year as the only way to get a place back then) so wants to move as close to that as possible. They want her to take the new place 8th July - under 3 weeks away. She can't afford (and doesn't want!) to rent 2 houses for July so asked if they could compromise on 1st Aug - They have said no and she should get a loan or (aren't they nice!) they can wack up the rent so (over the next 6 months) she pays the extra month via her monthly's anyway.
Am I am too close to this to see that this is all fair enough and how renting works - or is this someone with enough money for more than 1 house getting someone with no money to borrow some to give to him! I'm no huge fan of what the buy to let situation has done to housing in this country but sit pretty much on the fence of it, in general. But this feels a bit off to me.
Am I being soft?
Haven't done one of these for aaaages, BUT, DSS used to have a leeway to pay rent in respect of two places for a very limited period in the sort of circumstances you're describing. Whether they still do or not I don't know.
She needs to engage with the benefits people at the pay grade level where decision making is in the official's remit. That might not be so easy to access.
She needs to engage with the benefits people at the pay grade level where decision making is in the official's remit. That might not be so easy to access.
My thinking was - if you're letting a flat that is free in under 3 weeks....do you EXPECT to have someone move in that fast and act as they are doing.....or do you expect a couple of weeks gap as no big deal. Forget my kid for sec.....would they expect ANYONE wanting that place to do the same? Seems an odd way to do business (otherwise they should put in the add "only apply if you can move it NOW")
What the new place landlord COULD do especially if they're accustomed to DSS tenancies is make the rent monthly in arrears which would push the excess rent payment potentially into the very long distant future.
As to quick return to occupancy following ending of a tenancy, often a property's returned only requiring a quick clean up as soon as the keys are back with a new tenant already lined up and going in the same day. Like a hotel room with one out at noon and the next in at 3.
As to quick return to occupancy following ending of a tenancy, often a property's returned only requiring a quick clean up as soon as the keys are back with a new tenant already lined up and going in the same day. Like a hotel room with one out at noon and the next in at 3.
Edited by selmahoose on Wednesday 19th June 16:00
selmahoose said:
What the new place landlord COULD do especially if they're accustomed to DSS tenancies is make the rent monthly in arrears which would push the excess rent payment potentially into the very long distant future.
As to quick return to occupancy following ending of a tenancy, often a property's returned only requiring a quick clean up as soon as the keys are back with a new tenant already lined up and going in the same day. Like a hotel room with one out at noon and the next in at 3.
I assumed that was the case - but thought that happens because, in advance, they advertise the place and get the overlap sorted. Here they are caught out at 3 weeks left and getting my kid to bail out their sAs to quick return to occupancy following ending of a tenancy, often a property's returned only requiring a quick clean up as soon as the keys are back with a new tenant already lined up and going in the same day. Like a hotel room with one out at noon and the next in at 3.
Edited by selmahoose on Wednesday 19th June 16:00
tty planning 
The landlord will probably be looking down the barrel of 1 possibly 2 months mortgage, with no income, in order to fit in around someone else's plans. Although 3 weeks does seem a bit harsh.
I'm a landlord and gave my current tenants 2 weeks rent free to make moving between properties easier. If it was longer than a month and I had other potential tenants ready to move in straight away then I probably wouldn't have been as obliging.
Depends on whether your daughter is willing to call the landlords bluff or not. BTW, is she dealing directly with the landlord or through an agent? The communication between landlord and agent might not be as good as it could be.
I'm a landlord and gave my current tenants 2 weeks rent free to make moving between properties easier. If it was longer than a month and I had other potential tenants ready to move in straight away then I probably wouldn't have been as obliging.
Depends on whether your daughter is willing to call the landlords bluff or not. BTW, is she dealing directly with the landlord or through an agent? The communication between landlord and agent might not be as good as it could be.
RTB said:
The landlord will probably be looking down the barrel of 1 possibly 2 months mortgage, with no income, in order to fit in around someone else's plans. Although 3 weeks does seem a bit harsh.
Although he's looking to cover his own gamble - if she walks will he really get someone in within 3 weeks? They both have something to loose so you'd think they compromise......instead of telling a kid on benefits to get a payday loan so the landlord is happy and doesn't have to budge.Tiggsy said:
Although he's looking to cover his own gamble - if she walks will he really get someone in within 3 weeks? They both have something to loose so you'd think they compromise......instead of telling a kid on benefits to get a payday loan so the landlord is happy and doesn't have to budge.
Exactly. Depends who has the strongest hand and the most to lose. Does your daughter want to call his bluff or not? I'd say she's looking at properties too soon. You're asking a LL to committ to her and receive no income for 6+ weeks. During this time the LL has bills to pay. Mortgage. Water. Electric. Gas. Council Tax.
Last place I let the tenants said they wanted the place and moved in 12 days later.
If your daughter wanted my place then I'd simply say if it's still available mid July then you can have it.
Last place I let the tenants said they wanted the place and moved in 12 days later.
If your daughter wanted my place then I'd simply say if it's still available mid July then you can have it.
^^^ This.
Most landlords can’t afford both money wise and risk wise to hang on to something for someone as a favour.
I do laugh at comments like this though -
“or is this someone with enough money for more than 1 house getting someone with no money to borrow some to give to him!”
It’s isn't about affording more than one house. In fact it’s the opposite. If the house wasn’t rented out then most landlords couldn’t keep it.
The idea that all landlords are wealthy is way off the mark. Very “Daily Mail”.
Unfortunately lots of landlords with nice properties in nice areas, who I might add, have spent a lot of money on buying and renovating the house, simply don’t want young single parents who are on benefits.
I always state no pets, smokers, students or DSS. It’s just basic risk assessment.
Most landlords can’t afford both money wise and risk wise to hang on to something for someone as a favour.
I do laugh at comments like this though -
“or is this someone with enough money for more than 1 house getting someone with no money to borrow some to give to him!”
It’s isn't about affording more than one house. In fact it’s the opposite. If the house wasn’t rented out then most landlords couldn’t keep it.
The idea that all landlords are wealthy is way off the mark. Very “Daily Mail”.
Unfortunately lots of landlords with nice properties in nice areas, who I might add, have spent a lot of money on buying and renovating the house, simply don’t want young single parents who are on benefits.
I always state no pets, smokers, students or DSS. It’s just basic risk assessment.
it may be harsh for your daughter, but asking a LL to wait for 6 weeks is a bit strong, thats potentially 2 months mortgage, 2 months council tax and 2 months utilities to cover.
Worst Ive ever had was an empty flat for 4 weeks, and usually its a lot quicker.
Plus, and you might not want to hear this, but benefits tenants are quite often more trouble than theyre worth, so if you have them as tenants then you tend to be a stickler for rules and procedures.
Delayed benefits means delayed rent, and with the best will in the world the LL is having to deal with a 3rd party in the equation (the council) who can be right arses
Worst Ive ever had was an empty flat for 4 weeks, and usually its a lot quicker.
Plus, and you might not want to hear this, but benefits tenants are quite often more trouble than theyre worth, so if you have them as tenants then you tend to be a stickler for rules and procedures.
Delayed benefits means delayed rent, and with the best will in the world the LL is having to deal with a 3rd party in the equation (the council) who can be right arses
Tiggsy said:
My kid (23, single mum, part time worker, has benefits to top up her income) is moving from one let to another (due to being closer to her job)
She has found 99% of places won't consider her due to benefits (fair enough) - but she has found one place and I'm wondering if this is right....
She is paid up till 9th August (she paid for 12 months up front last year as the only way to get a place back then) so wants to move as close to that as possible. They want her to take the new place 8th July - under 3 weeks away. She can't afford (and doesn't want!) to rent 2 houses for July so asked if they could compromise on 1st Aug - They have said no and she should get a loan or (aren't they nice!) they can wack up the rent so (over the next 6 months) she pays the extra month via her monthly's anyway.
Am I am too close to this to see that this is all fair enough and how renting works - or is this someone with enough money for more than 1 house getting someone with no money to borrow some to give to him! I'm no huge fan of what the buy to let situation has done to housing in this country but sit pretty much on the fence of it, in general. But this feels a bit off to me.
Am I being soft?
Most agents/landlords wont wait for more then say 3 weeks for a tenant to move in. The aim is to let the property with the shortest void period to the best tenant.She has found 99% of places won't consider her due to benefits (fair enough) - but she has found one place and I'm wondering if this is right....
She is paid up till 9th August (she paid for 12 months up front last year as the only way to get a place back then) so wants to move as close to that as possible. They want her to take the new place 8th July - under 3 weeks away. She can't afford (and doesn't want!) to rent 2 houses for July so asked if they could compromise on 1st Aug - They have said no and she should get a loan or (aren't they nice!) they can wack up the rent so (over the next 6 months) she pays the extra month via her monthly's anyway.
Am I am too close to this to see that this is all fair enough and how renting works - or is this someone with enough money for more than 1 house getting someone with no money to borrow some to give to him! I'm no huge fan of what the buy to let situation has done to housing in this country but sit pretty much on the fence of it, in general. But this feels a bit off to me.
Am I being soft?
Your daughter is not the best tenant due to benefits and wants a long gap. No one is forcing her to rent this property - its up to her. Making a comment about rich landlords -v- poor tenants is so far off the mark and also shows a resentment and lack of understanding and into how renting works and the costs involved.
Your daughter only has to pay 1 weeks holding deposit which she could then after 6 weeks change her mind and lose but has kept the owner waiting. Even if signed the contract if she is on benefits its not going to be worth taking her to court.
As others have said its a business - she is negotiating the terms and if 99% of other people wont rent to her she is not in a strong position to negotiate if she wants that property. I'll say it again - she is not being forced to rent that property its pretty good the owner will even consider her. bear in mind the longer she dithers the more likely the property will be rented to someone else.
Tiggsy said:
My kid (23, single mum, part time worker, has benefits to top up her income) is moving from one let to another (due to being closer to her job)
She has found 99% of places won't consider her due to benefits (fair enough) - but she has found one place and I'm wondering if this is right....
She is paid up till 9th August (she paid for 12 months up front last year as the only way to get a place back then) so wants to move as close to that as possible. They want her to take the new place 8th July - under 3 weeks away. She can't afford (and doesn't want!) to rent 2 houses for July so asked if they could compromise on 1st Aug - They have said no and she should get a loan or (aren't they nice!) they can wack up the rent so (over the next 6 months) she pays the extra month via her monthly's anyway.
Am I am too close to this to see that this is all fair enough and how renting works - or is this someone with enough money for more than 1 house getting someone with no money to borrow some to give to him! I'm no huge fan of what the buy to let situation has done to housing in this country but sit pretty much on the fence of it, in general. But this feels a bit off to me.
Am I being soft?
Most agents/landlords wont wait for more then say 3 weeks for a tenant to move in. The aim is to let the property with the shortest void period to the best tenant.She has found 99% of places won't consider her due to benefits (fair enough) - but she has found one place and I'm wondering if this is right....
She is paid up till 9th August (she paid for 12 months up front last year as the only way to get a place back then) so wants to move as close to that as possible. They want her to take the new place 8th July - under 3 weeks away. She can't afford (and doesn't want!) to rent 2 houses for July so asked if they could compromise on 1st Aug - They have said no and she should get a loan or (aren't they nice!) they can wack up the rent so (over the next 6 months) she pays the extra month via her monthly's anyway.
Am I am too close to this to see that this is all fair enough and how renting works - or is this someone with enough money for more than 1 house getting someone with no money to borrow some to give to him! I'm no huge fan of what the buy to let situation has done to housing in this country but sit pretty much on the fence of it, in general. But this feels a bit off to me.
Am I being soft?
Your daughter is not the best tenant due to benefits and wants a long gap. No one is forcing her to rent this property - its up to her. Making a comment about rich landlords -v- poor tenants is so far off the mark and also shows a resentment and lack of understanding and into how renting works and the costs involved.
Your daughter only has to pay 1 weeks holding deposit which she could then after 6 weeks change her mind and lose but has kept the owner waiting. Even if signed the contract if she is on benefits its not going to be worth taking her to court.
As others have said its a business - she is negotiating the terms and if 99% of other people wont rent to her she is not in a strong position to negotiate if she wants that property. I'll say it again - she is not being forced to rent that property its pretty good the owner will even consider her. bear in mind the longer she dithers the more likely the property will be rented to someone else.
If you are in FT work then we as agents would only consider her with a Guarantor - ie you - But 23 is pretty young and the risk level will be high for the owner. Dont delay otherwise she will lose it.
Edited by superlightr on Thursday 20th June 09:52
Tiggsy. Please believe this. There are landlords and agents who see your kid and her tenancy as potentially ideal.
They really really don't want yet another Polish family on a holiday letting expedition until they save up enough to go home. Or a nice young couple and kid parking up short term till the local housing association offer comes through. Or, even worse, a pair of young professionals on a stepping stone to ownership or a better job in a different town and the next stage in their mobile nomadic trek to whatever grass is greener dream they come up with next.
They really really DO want your (preferably unattractive) daughter and her (younger the better) kid in their house till the kid is at least 16 because they want her longterm stable tenancy buying the property back from the bank rather than having to find 10 different tenancies to achieve the same thing and all the void and cost hassle between them.
It isn't really THAT difficult to find the right landlord or agent unless you live in an area too small to have much choice in which case you're just going to have to put up with the credit-checking bank account scrutineers who all seem to think benefits are a less secure form of rent than private sector wages. Are they daft?
They really really don't want yet another Polish family on a holiday letting expedition until they save up enough to go home. Or a nice young couple and kid parking up short term till the local housing association offer comes through. Or, even worse, a pair of young professionals on a stepping stone to ownership or a better job in a different town and the next stage in their mobile nomadic trek to whatever grass is greener dream they come up with next.
They really really DO want your (preferably unattractive) daughter and her (younger the better) kid in their house till the kid is at least 16 because they want her longterm stable tenancy buying the property back from the bank rather than having to find 10 different tenancies to achieve the same thing and all the void and cost hassle between them.
It isn't really THAT difficult to find the right landlord or agent unless you live in an area too small to have much choice in which case you're just going to have to put up with the credit-checking bank account scrutineers who all seem to think benefits are a less secure form of rent than private sector wages. Are they daft?
selmahoose said:
Tiggsy. Please believe this. There are landlords and agents who see your kid and her tenancy as potentially ideal.
They really really don't want yet another Polish family on a holiday letting expedition until they save up enough to go home. Or a nice young couple and kid parking up short term till the local housing association offer comes through. Or, even worse, a pair of young professionals on a stepping stone to ownership or a better job in a different town and the next stage in their mobile nomadic trek to whatever grass is greener dream they come up with next.
They really really DO want your (preferably unattractive) daughter and her (younger the better) kid in their house till the kid is at least 16 because they want her longterm stable tenancy buying the property back from the bank rather than having to find 10 different tenancies to achieve the same thing and all the void and cost hassle between them.
It isn't really THAT difficult to find the right landlord or agent unless you live in an area too small to have much choice in which case you're just going to have to put up with the credit-checking bank account scrutineers who all seem to think benefits are a less secure form of rent than private sector wages. Are they daft?
Thanks for all the replies. Situation now sorted - I spoke to another agent I knew (sort of...from school years ago) and they had a place and spoke to the landlord - explained she'd be ideal and I'm a good guarantor. Sorted!They really really don't want yet another Polish family on a holiday letting expedition until they save up enough to go home. Or a nice young couple and kid parking up short term till the local housing association offer comes through. Or, even worse, a pair of young professionals on a stepping stone to ownership or a better job in a different town and the next stage in their mobile nomadic trek to whatever grass is greener dream they come up with next.
They really really DO want your (preferably unattractive) daughter and her (younger the better) kid in their house till the kid is at least 16 because they want her longterm stable tenancy buying the property back from the bank rather than having to find 10 different tenancies to achieve the same thing and all the void and cost hassle between them.
It isn't really THAT difficult to find the right landlord or agent unless you live in an area too small to have much choice in which case you're just going to have to put up with the credit-checking bank account scrutineers who all seem to think benefits are a less secure form of rent than private sector wages. Are they daft?
Now here's my point about the original landlord - I get 100% it's a business and they want to make money. But they now have to hope they find someone else....of course, they may do and they are now also better off. But they may not and wish they'd compromised in the first place. And that was my only pooing really - I was surprised that, when two parties want X but are Y apart, that A and B don't negotiate to find somewhere in between (like most deals).
Tiggsy said:
selmahoose said:
Tiggsy. Please believe this. There are landlords and agents who see your kid and her tenancy as potentially ideal.
Situation now sorted - I spoke to another agent I knew (sort of...from school years ago) and they had a place and spoke to the landlord - explained she'd be ideal and I'm a good guarantor. .... I was surprised that, when two parties want X but are Y apart, that A and B don't negotiate to find somewhere in between (like most deals).In the end it means that those agents/landlords miss out on many potentially excellent tenancies. So?
selmahoose said:
Tiggsy said:
selmahoose said:
Tiggsy. Please believe this. There are landlords and agents who see your kid and her tenancy as potentially ideal.
Situation now sorted - I spoke to another agent I knew (sort of...from school years ago) and they had a place and spoke to the landlord - explained she'd be ideal and I'm a good guarantor. .... I was surprised that, when two parties want X but are Y apart, that A and B don't negotiate to find somewhere in between (like most deals).In the end it means that those agents/landlords miss out on many potentially excellent tenancies. So?
Gassing Station | Finance | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff