Forum Home → Discussion → Housing costs → Thread
Unregistered landlord
Client’s landlord refuses to register so UC are refusing to pay his housing costs element. Is it correct that they can do this?
Register with who?
The local authority
This is because, in Scotland, there is a requirement that most landlords obtain registration and they will be in trouble if they don’t register (https://scotland.shelter.org.uk/get_advice/advice_topics/renting_rights/landlord_registration/about_landlord_registration)
I don’t understand how a lack of registration could have any impact on whether housing costs are payable or not.
This is my confusion. The guy has a commercial tenancy and pays rent regularly. He is liable to make payments for the rent so I don’t understand what difference his landlord’s intransigence makes to his entitlement
This is my confusion. The guy has a commercial tenancy and pays rent regularly. He is liable to make payments for the rent so I don’t understand what difference his landlord’s intransigence makes to his entitlement
There is seemingly a distinction which lives in the head of some case manager in UC land, but not in reality.
It’s not too uncommon a situation….
I agree that decision makers, including HB officers in pre-UC times, have a habit of refusing benefit for conduct which has its own entirely separate consequences. Landlords who don’t comply with regulatory requirements risk incurring such consequences, but it doesn’t mean they aren’t landlords.
However, a casual approach to regulatory requirements can raise a question over commerciality. There is a lot of case law on commerciality. It has been described as a “difficult and elusive” concept, and there is no single fact which on its own determines whether a tenancy is or is not on a commercial basis. But one of the factors that can weigh against it being commercial is when the landlord does not comply with regulatory requirements - this can be an indication that the attitude of the landlord and tenant to one another is insufficiently “arm’s length” and businesslike. For example, you convert an outbuilding without planning permission and rent it to a family member. You know they won’t complain about it so you can safely risk it. You wouldn’t dream of doing anything like that for a publicly advertised let. This is one little weight placed on the non-commercial side of the scales. It’s not the stonking great 5lb one, maybe a 2oz or something like that.
I have a hunch that OP’s client is a relative or close acquaintance of the landlord, is that correct?
I have a hunch that OP’s client is a relative or close acquaintance of the landlord, is that correct?
Not a relative but, on reflection, the rent charge of £200 per month (low even by local standards) seems designed to be just about affordable without claiming benefit and thus attracting attention. Client could afford it when he was working but on £300 odds UC is living on £100 per month
Have a look at Shelter Scotland webpage on:
Jim
Have a look at Shelter Scotland webpage on:
Jim
Thanks. My client might be on a sticky wicket if that happens as plenty farmers round here would rather heve empty properties than register and rent out
The RPN/RPO stuff is interesting. It is quite a far cry from the English system. Still, it seems to me that unless one of there is actually one of these in place, the rent is payable and so is UC - subject to any broader argument about commerciality in which it may be a factor.
Thanks, folks. I advised my client that I would be happy to support him to challenge the UC decision but he has stated that the landlord would rather not rent the house at all than go through hoops. While the client may be able to challenge any eviction proceedings, he was not willing to upset the landlord as he cannot face moving from his home of 8 years and wishes to tough it out on £25 per week UC and pay the rent himself! This may be manageable if he is found to have LCWRA.