Terms & Conditions

[Anonymous]

Hi,

We have received a few claims where a local Housing Association appears to be acting as agents for private landlords. Please click on this link to see what it says on their website: [url]http://www.thames-housing.co.uk/private%20sector.htm[/url]

Can anyone tell me if I should be referring these claims to the Rent Officer or not?

Thanks for your help.

[junderwo]

Back in 1996(!) the DWP differentiated between HAMAs (housing association as managing agent) and HALs (housing association leasing).
The former were subject to referral and the latter were not (unless unreasonably expensive/overlarge).

Unless your housing association are leasing the properties from the private landlord the rents would need referring to the Rent Service.

[Anonymous]

Whilst not disagreeing with Junderwo, why not contact Wandsworth and/or Croydon Councils and to see how they deal with them?

[Bobkirkpatrick]

The chances are the housing association is leasing the properties from private landlords, and then letting them to homeless families nominated by a local authority. The tenants will have assured shorthold tenancies with the housing association – therefore there is no requirement to refer the rents to the RO unless they are deemed to be unreasonably high.

This is a fairly common situation across London in particular, with several large associations having temporary housing sections which have similar arrangements. Notting Hill, for example, has over 3,000 temporary units currently in management. The rents being charged reflect the rent paid to the private landlord over the life of the lease (3 – 5 years in general) plus a management fee. It should not be forgotten that these schemes are run in conjunction with local authorities’ Homeless Persons Units, and are set up because local authorities do not have the resources to house their homeless families themselves.

A degree of co-operation – between the association, HB section and HPU – is essential to the smooth running of these schemes.

[Anonymous]

In my view these properties should be referred to the RO to establish a market rent. Since the private landlord is getting the full rent from the HA they are garunteed an income.
You could theoretically have ex council stock brought under the right to buy leased to a HA which then charges twice the Council rent .

[Anonymous]

In my view these properties should be referred to the RO to establish a market rent. Since the private landlord is getting the full rent from the HA they are garunteed an income.
You could theoretically have ex council stock brought under the right to buy leased to a HA which then charges twice the Council rent .

[Kevin D]

Stuart: Assuming Thames is the actual L/L, and also assuming that Thames is an RSL (it appears they are), what would be the basis for referring to the R/O?

Unless the rent is unreasonably high, or dwelling appears to be overaccomodated, I don’t see a way of referring. I’m not convinced that a referral can be made just to get a rough idea of whether an ROD would be lower than the rent charge. Also, an ROD doesn’t, in my view, necessarily establish a market rent. It simply establishes a “Maximum Rent” for HB purposes which may only coincidentally reflect a market rent.

Just some thoughts.

[John Smith]

Hi all; We have a case where a registered social landlord has allegedly leased a property from a private landlord. The tenant is severely disabled and has a live in carer, who is funded by the LA and not provided by the Housing Assocation. The charges appear, on the face of it, to be excessive.

Firstly, there is a core rent, labelled as "Rent paid to landlords" of close on £170 per week. Then come the various charges, such as Central Office Costs of close on £30 per week, bad debts & voids of close on £25 per week, and furniture replacement of more than £25 per week. Bearing in mind that this is not an HMO, why are their voids, etc, and who spends £25 per week on furniture – social services would be aware of the tenant was trashing the house.

It would seem to me that, although they are a registeted social landlord, in this case, they have put some other hat on as it were.

Any thoughts on how to treat such a rent would be appreciated.

Thanks, John

[Julian Stanbury]

If the landlord is a not for profit registered provider and the accommodation is not exempt accommodation, regardless of looking like they have a unusual hat on, the landlord beneath said hat is still a registered provider.

I think your considerations start with commerciality/abuse and if you are happy the arrangements pass muster you should consider referring to the rent officer if you think the rent is unreasonably high.

The analysis in CPAG to Schedule 2 para 3(2) suggests you may want to comparing the rent to other suitable accommodation, so if your accommodation is niche and there are no alternatives out there then the costs will be reasonable.

You can then look at what service charges are ineligible or understated, but often what landlords list as service charges (voids) aren't serivce charges and so cannot be dealt with by Schedule 1.

[John Smith]

Thanks for your help, Julian.

John

[Author]

Posts