Landlord to evict 200 tenants - because they received housing benefit

First topic message reminder :


Buy-to-let property supremo shuts door on housing benefit tenants
One of Britain's best-known landlords, who owns nearly 1,000 homes, has sent out 200 eviction notices

One of Britain's best-known landlords has issued eviction notices to every tenant who is on welfare, and told letting agents that he will not accept any more applicants who need housing benefit.

Fergus Wilson, who with his wife Judith owns nearly 1,000 properties around the Ashford area of Kent, has sent the eviction notices to 200 tenants, saying he prefers eastern European migrants who default much less frequently than single mums on welfare. He says the move is purely an economic decision and points out that private landlords are running a business.

"Rents have gone north, and benefit levels south," he said. "The gap is such that I have taken the decision to withdraw from taking tenants on housing benefit. From what I can gather just about all other landlords have done the same. Our situation is that not one of our working tenants is in arrears – all those in arrears are on housing benefit."

A key factor for Wilson and other landlords is that it is impossible to obtain rent guarantee insurance for a tenant on housing benefit. This type of insurance is sold to landlords and is designed to cover the rent if the tenant stops paying for any reason.

Another issue Wilson raises is the number of tenancy applications landlords receive for each property.

"Tenants on benefits are competing with eastern Europeans who came to the UK in 2005 and have built up a good enough credit record to rent privately. We've found them to be a good category of tenant who don't default on the rent. With tenants on benefits the number of defaulters outnumbers the ones who pay on time," he said.

"Single mothers on benefits have been displaced to the bottom of the pile; sympathy for this group is disappearing. There aren't enough places for people to live."

Dan Wilson Craw, a spokesman for campaign group Priced Out, says he is dismayed to hear Wilson's announcement: "Evicting tenants because you're suddenly upset about new government policies is unbelievably heartless, and could lead to more people deciding not to claim benefit for fear of losing their home, and sinking further into poverty," he said, "This is just one symptom of a wider housing market that is simply not working in the consumer's interests. The instability and poor conditions that private tenants have to deal with would not be tolerated in any other market."

Wilson's decision comes after figures from the National Landlords' Association published in December, which showed that the number of private landlords letting to people on benefits has halved to just one in five.

Problems for tenants on benefits seem likely to get worse when universal credit is introduced. Under the scheme, six means-tested benefits, including housing benefit, will be combined into one monthly payment. Tenants on benefits will need to budget and pay the rent to their landlord themselves.

Universal credit started to be introduced in April 2013 and it is predicted that all claimants will be moved to the scheme by 2017.

The Wilsons shot to prominence in 2006 when it was revealed that they had built up Britain's biggest buy-to-let empire, sometimes snapping up a property every day in the early part of the decade.

Wilson is not the first large-scale landlord to raise concerns about low-income tenants. Last month Kevin Green, a landlord with more than 700 properties in Wales, said he may stop letting to people on welfare.

http://www.theguardian.com/money/2014/jan/04/buy-to-let-landlord-evicts-housing-benefit-tenants

Don't get sick, don't lose your job, don't have a zero hours contract, don't be on minimum wage, if you do, make sure you have warm clothes so you can live on the street.

Sassy wrote:Britain is witnessing the emergence of "benefit blackspots" as welfare claimants are forced to move out of the towns of their choice after being evicted from rented housing by private landlords.

Housing charity Shelter has warned that entire UK communities could become claimant-free zones, after the Guardian revealed on Saturday that one of Britain's best-known landlords has sent out eviction notices to every tenant who is receiving benefits. Fergus Wilson, who owns almost 1,000 properties in Kent, has also informed letting agents that he now refuses to accept applicants who need housing benefit.

The charity said that a number of other landlords had already taken the same action. The issue has raised the prospect of claimants being clustered in the least desirable locations throughout Britain, and forced into the worst quality housing.

Roger Harding, director of policy and communications at Shelter, said: "It is very worrying. If this policy continues over the long term, we will see blackspots in the country where people on housing benefit simply cannot find anywhere reasonable. There'll be areas where, if you lose your job or become ill, and you try and fall back on housing benefit, it won't be high enough for you to find somewhere. Unless you have savings, you're going to move town."

Harding said there were 500,000 people currently claiming housing benefit in the private sector, many of whom were at risk as rents rise and benefits are squeezed. "It is an awfully large number and includes pensioners and people in work who can't afford their rent. This could affect any area where future rents really outstrip inflation and where there is a lot of pressure on the rental market."

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/jan/04/eviction-tenants-housing-benefit-blackspots

Starting to happen already.   Councils outside London are beginning to be overrun with people who can't afford to live there, or who can't pay their rent because of bedroom tax, and now won't be able to get accommodation if they are on housing benefit.   And these are working people.

Well that just means more and more people will take the option of not having letting their landlord know they are on benefit. Legally people have the right to not have their landlord know - I have researched this since yesterday, and any council acting otherwise is acting contrary to the law.

sphinx wrote:

Sassy wrote:Britain is witnessing the emergence of "benefit blackspots" as welfare claimants are forced to move out of the towns of their choice after being evicted from rented housing by private landlords.

Housing charity Shelter has warned that entire UK communities could become claimant-free zones, after the Guardian revealed on Saturday that one of Britain's best-known landlords has sent out eviction notices to every tenant who is receiving benefits. Fergus Wilson, who owns almost 1,000 properties in Kent, has also informed letting agents that he now refuses to accept applicants who need housing benefit.

The charity said that a number of other landlords had already taken the same action. The issue has raised the prospect of claimants being clustered in the least desirable locations throughout Britain, and forced into the worst quality housing.

Roger Harding, director of policy and communications at Shelter, said: "It is very worrying. If this policy continues over the long term, we will see blackspots in the country where people on housing benefit simply cannot find anywhere reasonable. There'll be areas where, if you lose your job or become ill, and you try and fall back on housing benefit, it won't be high enough for you to find somewhere. Unless you have savings, you're going to move town."

Harding said there were 500,000 people currently claiming housing benefit in the private sector, many of whom were at risk as rents rise and benefits are squeezed. "It is an awfully large number and includes pensioners and people in work who can't afford their rent. This could affect any area where future rents really outstrip inflation and where there is a lot of pressure on the rental market."

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/jan/04/eviction-tenants-housing-benefit-blackspots

Starting to happen already.   Councils outside London are beginning to be overrun with people who can't afford to live there, or who can't pay their rent because of bedroom tax, and now won't be able to get accommodation if they are on housing benefit.   And these are working people.

Well that just means more and more people will take the option of not having letting their landlord know they are on benefit.  Legally people have the right to not have their landlord know - I have researched this since yesterday, and any council acting otherwise is acting contrary to the law.

The only thing is though Sphinx, if you are renting through a letting agency, they will always usually ask for details of where you are working and sometimes details of your salary to prove you have the means to pay the rent. This is when they find out you will be claiming housing benefit, if not in work.

Sassy wrote:

Catman wrote:

I'm sure that there are plenty of nice landlords around, and they aren't all greedy as you are suggesting..These days private landlords rent out rooms in their own houses just as a means to make ends meet.

Unfortunately though, there are a lot as 'Grumpy old Git' describes.   In fact, landlords not keeping property in good order, the actual fabric of the buildings, is quite a problem in some areas.

If you have a good landlord, and I have, you have to count yourself lucky.

I consider myself one of the lucky ones too.

Just before I moved in, it was recently all renovated, big airy, spacious beachfront apartment, anything that needs fixed my landlord is on to it straight away, though I have had very few problems. No rent increase in the 3 years I've been there. And this is a landlord who has many properties that he looks after himself and not through a letting agency.

Costa wrote:

sphinx wrote:

Well that just means more and more people will take the option of not having letting their landlord know they are on benefit.  Legally people have the right to not have their landlord know - I have researched this since yesterday, and any council acting otherwise is acting contrary to the law.

The only thing is though Sphinx, if you are renting through a letting agency, they will always usually ask for details of where you are working and sometimes details of your salary to prove you have the means to pay the rent. This is when they find out you will be claiming housing benefit, if not in work.

People can and will lie - or claim self employment.

I mean there is some missing data in this story.
Are the 200 hundred all the tenants claiming benefit or just the ones who have defaulted?
Were they all claiming benefit when they took out the lease or have they moved onto benefit during the course of the lease?
Are they unemployed claimants or working claimants?

I mean sure any landlord can refuse to let to people who are unemployed when they apply but what about people who loose their jobs? Or who work and are entitled to benefits?

I mean Universal Credit will make the whole argument defunct anyway because all living benefits are being merged into one so then there will be no difference between the working single mum who currently gets working tax credits and child tax credits and the unemployed single mum currently getting housing benefit.

In fact UC is going to make this sort of behaviour by landlords far more difficult and landlords will instead be reduced to only evicting those not paying. How dastardly of the nasty RW government to try and bring in a system that reduces the differences between those working and those not working   

sphinx wrote:

Costa wrote:

The only thing is though Sphinx, if you are renting through a letting agency, they will always usually ask for details of where you are working and sometimes details of your salary to prove you have the means to pay the rent. This is when they find out you will be claiming housing benefit, if not in work.

People can and will lie - or claim self employment.

I mean there is some missing data in this story.
Are the 200 hundred all the tenants claiming benefit or just the ones who have defaulted?
Were they all claiming benefit when they took out the lease or have they moved onto benefit during the course of the lease?
Are they unemployed claimants or working claimants?  

I mean sure any landlord can refuse to let to people who are unemployed when they apply but what about people who loose their jobs?  Or who work and are entitled to benefits?

I mean Universal Credit will make the whole argument defunct anyway because all living benefits are being merged into one so then there will be no difference between the working single mum who currently gets working tax credits and child tax credits and the unemployed single mum currently getting housing benefit.

In fact UC is going to make this sort of behaviour by landlords far more difficult and landlords will instead be reduced to only evicting those not paying.  How dastardly of the nasty RW government to try and bring in a system that reduces the differences between those working and those not working   

How very myopic in a R/W way sphinx, You are deluded if you think THAT will be the scenario, instead it is FAR more predictable that those working single mums on tax credits will ALSO be getting that nice little letter from their landlord, after all, why should the landlord care...its not as if there is going to be a shortage of well heeled customers from foreign climes anytime soon is there

grumpy old git wrote:

sphinx wrote:

People can and will lie - or claim self employment.

I mean there is some missing data in this story.
Are the 200 hundred all the tenants claiming benefit or just the ones who have defaulted?
Were they all claiming benefit when they took out the lease or have they moved onto benefit during the course of the lease?
Are they unemployed claimants or working claimants?  

I mean sure any landlord can refuse to let to people who are unemployed when they apply but what about people who loose their jobs?  Or who work and are entitled to benefits?

I mean Universal Credit will make the whole argument defunct anyway because all living benefits are being merged into one so then there will be no difference between the working single mum who currently gets working tax credits and child tax credits and the unemployed single mum currently getting housing benefit.

In fact UC is going to make this sort of behaviour by landlords far more difficult and landlords will instead be reduced to only evicting those not paying.  How dastardly of the nasty RW government to try and bring in a system that reduces the differences between those working and those not working   

How very myopic in a R/W way sphinx, You are deluded if you think THAT will be the scenario, instead it is FAR more predictable that those working single mums on tax credits will ALSO be getting that nice little letter from their landlord, after all, why should the landlord care...its not as if there is going to be a shortage of well heeled customers from foreign climes anytime soon is there

And the landlord is going to know what benefits his tenants get how exactly?

Because Sphinx, we live in a society where money can buy you anything, including information. get real.
Not to mention the "gossip network," social media etc...

Ah right so landlords are this shadowy bunch of super rich who have money to spare on gaining private information on tenants.

As for the gossip network and things - you know exactly which of your neighbours are claiming which benefits do you? I will give you a clue - people dependent on benefits are so paranoid about being investigated they dont give the information to anyone. The reality is that most people keep their benefits status to themselves now - the change to universal credit will make it even more difficult to tell who is and is not on benefits especially with the way it will blend into zero hours contracts and temporary jobs.

Sphinx, where i live the only time I get to know when a neighbour is on benefits is when the poor old sod (who I know was previously working) has to sell up due to redundancy etc, because the system hates a loser, even though the system CREATES the losers. In other words I dont have NEIGHBOURS on benefits...thats not of course to say there are none in the village but, they aint neighbours.

AND it will be easy for landlords to get round this. there is NOTHING to stop them making it part of the tenancy agreement that you may NOT be on benefits, and that you agree to them making the necessary checks, just as certain people/bodies can do with your medical records and criminal background.

there is no element of coercion of course, if you dont agree then you dont get the tenancy, it becomes part of your private contract with the landlord and is perfectly legal, there is NO law that stops you signing away those rights.

LOL - I bet you more of your neighbours are on benefits than you realize. Anyone who gets working tax credits is, after all on benefits.

As for landlords making part of the tenancy agreement get real. People who rent are the ones who cannot afford to buy which means huge numbers of them will be getting tax credits which means they will be on UC when it changes over - and no landlord is going to cut out well over half their potential market.

Not to mention that peoples situations change - Ms Smith rents a 2 bed flat for her and her child declaring she is not getting benefits, she trips at work and is injured so has to have time off, the company pay statutory sick pay meaning she claims tax credits - does the landlord evict her? She has always paid her rent on time and is still paying her rent on time and has not broken the tenancy agreement in one iota other than needing to claim benefits. Lets say he does try to evict, by the time the court hearing comes through she is back at work and no longer claiming benefits so is no longer in breach of contract.

Or what about Mr Green - single man rents 2 bed house no benefits. Meets someone gets married still lives there, still no benefits. Wife gets pregnant, baby is born and bang its child tax credits. Still not in arrears with rent though. So does landlord want claiming benefits and paying rent or not claiming benefit and not paying rent?

Correct me if I am wrong Grumpy old Git, but am I right in thinking that you mean you don't have NEIGHBOURS on benefits - because you don't have NEIGHBOURS, hence those that are on benefits live too far away from you for you to know? Am I right?

Sphinx, in certain areas, not too far away from you, councils don't have enough money because the villages are full of second homes that pay minimal rates and pubs and shops are shutting in these villages because so many homes are second homes and said pubs and shops are not being used? So these people are destroying the very framework of village life.

Sassy wrote:Sphinx, in certain areas, not too far away from you, councils don't have enough money because the villages are full of second homes that pay minimal rates and pubs and shops are shutting in these villages because so many homes are second homes and said pubs and shops are not being used?    So these people are destroying the very framework of village life.

Yes and I have already clearly stated what I think should be done about that.

Sassy wrote:Correct me if I am wrong Grumpy old Git, but am I right in thinking that you mean you don't have NEIGHBOURS on benefits - because you don't have NEIGHBOURS, hence those that are on benefits live too far away from you for you to know?   Am I right?

nope

grumpy old git wrote:

Sassy wrote:Correct me if I am wrong Grumpy old Git, but am I right in thinking that you mean you don't have NEIGHBOURS on benefits - because you don't have NEIGHBOURS, hence those that are on benefits live too far away from you for you to know?   Am I right?

nope

Then could you point me in the right direction lol - you mean you live in an area where no one talks! Now I'm bemused.

sphinx wrote:Ah right so landlords are this shadowy bunch of super rich who have money to spare on gaining private information on tenants.

As for the gossip network and things - you know exactly which of your neighbours are claiming which benefits do you?  I will give you a clue - people dependent on benefits are so paranoid about being investigated they dont give the information to anyone.  The reality is that most people keep their benefits status to themselves now - the change to universal credit will make it even more difficult to tell who is and is not on benefits especially with the way it will blend into zero hours contracts and temporary jobs.

Well you appear to know loads of people who are on benefits including some that are doing very well and some who are just cheats.

So how does that square with what you have said above?

lmao

Hi Andrea.

Thanks for the apologies you nob heads.

Quill in particular.

I can spot them a mile off.

BigAndy9 wrote:lmao

Hi Andrea.

Thanks for the apologies you nob heads.

Quill in particular.

I can spot them a mile off.

You did indeed Andy. I added a lol as well.

Irn Bru wrote:

BigAndy9 wrote:lmao

Hi Andrea.

Thanks for the apologies you nob heads.

Quill in particular.

I can spot them a mile off.

You did indeed Andy. I added a lol as well.

Aye, you're alright Iron.

Nothing wrong with having a bit of a laugh - i'm not saying I knew for sure it was her - just thought it would be funny to say it was.

And then others had to be sad little tw4ts (quim).

I did it because we've seen it all before on British forums haven't we?

Irn Bru wrote:

sphinx wrote:Ah right so landlords are this shadowy bunch of super rich who have money to spare on gaining private information on tenants.

As for the gossip network and things - you know exactly which of your neighbours are claiming which benefits do you?  I will give you a clue - people dependent on benefits are so paranoid about being investigated they dont give the information to anyone.  The reality is that most people keep their benefits status to themselves now - the change to universal credit will make it even more difficult to tell who is and is not on benefits especially with the way it will blend into zero hours contracts and temporary jobs.

Well you appear to know loads of people who are on benefits including some that are doing very well and some who are just cheats.

So how does that square with what you have said above?

Uh I serve as an unofficial benefits advisor as I have a reputation for strict confidentiality and accuracy.

sphinx wrote:

Irn Bru wrote:

Well you appear to know loads of people who are on benefits including some that are doing very well and some who are just cheats.

So how does that square with what you have said above?

Uh I serve as an unofficial benefits advisor as I have a reputation for strict confidentiality and accuracy.

You are doing voluntary work then and the cheats confide in you as well lol

And you are doing work which someone else would normally be paid for which is against the rules for people on benefits.

Irn Bru wrote:

sphinx wrote:

Uh I serve as an unofficial benefits advisor as I have a reputation for strict confidentiality and accuracy.

You are doing voluntary work then and the cheats confide in you as well lol

And you are doing work which someone else would normally be paid for which is against the rules for people on benefits.

It is no more voluntary work than when your mate asks for advice on which pub to visit or what to get his wife for Christmas. The people have no more guarantee that what I say is right than your mate does when you give him advice. (to be fair the most frequent thing I tell people is to go to citizens advice - who do not get paid either)

Also my advisor is well aware of exactly what I do and how and why - real voluntary work is an avenue we are exploring as a way to help me find paid employment and voluntary work is very definitely not against the rules at the moment but is positively encouraged.

You asked me how I know things - I know things because people tell me things, tell me things that they do not and would not tell other people.

sphinx wrote:

Irn Bru wrote:

You are doing voluntary work then and the cheats confide in you as well lol

And you are doing work which someone else would normally be paid for which is against the rules for people on benefits.

It is no more voluntary work than when your mate asks for advice on which pub to visit or what to get his wife for Christmas.  The people have no more guarantee that what I say is right than your mate does when you give him advice. (to be fair the most frequent thing I tell people is to go to citizens advice - who do not get paid either)

Also my advisor is well aware of exactly what I do and how and why - real voluntary work is an avenue we are exploring as a way to help me find paid employment and voluntary work is very definitely not against the rules at the moment but is positively encouraged.

You asked me how I know things - I know things because people tell me things, tell me things that they do not and would not tell other people.

Jobcentre Plus

If you’re getting State benefits, you can be a volunteer and, in nearly all cases, your benefits will not be affected. However, there are some cases where your benefits can be affected } for example, if you get a
subsistence allowance or if you’re doing what someone else would normally be paid for

Why on earth your advisor would let you do his/her job is a bit of a mystery when public sector workers are right in the firing line for cuts is it not?

So the cheats come to you as well and you say nothing to the DWP. Is that correct?

Irn Bru wrote:

sphinx wrote:


It is no more voluntary work than when your mate asks for advice on which pub to visit or what to get his wife for Christmas.  The people have no more guarantee that what I say is right than your mate does when you give him advice. (to be fair the most frequent thing I tell people is to go to citizens advice - who do not get paid either)

Also my advisor is well aware of exactly what I do and how and why - real voluntary work is an avenue we are exploring as a way to help me find paid employment and voluntary work is very definitely not against the rules at the moment but is positively encouraged.

You asked me how I know things - I know things because people tell me things, tell me things that they do not and would not tell other people.

Jobcentre Plus

If you’re getting State benefits, you can be a volunteer and, in nearly all cases, your benefits will not be affected. However, there are some cases where your benefits can be affected } for example, if you get a
subsistence allowance or if you’re doing what someone else would normally be paid for

Why on earth your advisor would let you do his/her job is a bit of a mystery when public sector workers are right in the firing line for cuts is it not?

So the cheats come to you as well and you say nothing to the DWP. Is that correct?

You missed a bit ...

If you’re doing what someone would normally be paid for } for example, if you’re working in a business or for a member of your family where they would usually pay someone to do the work - we will class this as unpaid work, not volunteering

Irn Bru wrote:

sphinx wrote:


It is no more voluntary work than when your mate asks for advice on which pub to visit or what to get his wife for Christmas.  The people have no more guarantee that what I say is right than your mate does when you give him advice. (to be fair the most frequent thing I tell people is to go to citizens advice - who do not get paid either)

Also my advisor is well aware of exactly what I do and how and why - real voluntary work is an avenue we are exploring as a way to help me find paid employment and voluntary work is very definitely not against the rules at the moment but is positively encouraged.

You asked me how I know things - I know things because people tell me things, tell me things that they do not and would not tell other people.

Jobcentre Plus

If you’re getting State benefits, you can be a volunteer and, in nearly all cases, your benefits will not be affected. However, there are some cases where your benefits can be affected } for example, if you get a
subsistence allowance or if you’re doing what someone else would normally be paid for

Why on earth your advisor would let you do his/her job is a bit of a mystery when public sector workers are right in the firing line for cuts is it not?

So the cheats come to you as well and you say nothing to the DWP. Is that correct?

Christ my advisor would laugh at the idea of me doing her job. I do not do her job. People come to me and say "this has happened what do I do" and I tell them what I would do in their position. I tell them my experiences and what I have learned through research. If what I am doing is similar to anything it is a CAB advisor - you know a voluntary position.

No the cheats do not come to me - because they get told own up or I will report. However I do get told so and so is doing this why cant I do it. Also the only cheat I have said is widely spread and boasted about is the crisis loan one - which is.

FGS Sphinx, you have absolutely no evidence for that and CRISIS LOANS HAD TO BE PAID BACK, they were stopped in instalments out of benefit.

Guys I give advice and opinions - like I do on here. I do not make any claims as to accuracy and I as standard tell people to go see professionals.

People choose to come to me is all

Well I certainly hope you don't, because you don't know where housing benefit comes from.

sphinx wrote:

Irn Bru wrote:

Jobcentre Plus

If you’re getting State benefits, you can be a volunteer and, in nearly all cases, your benefits will not be affected. However, there are some cases where your benefits can be affected } for example, if you get a
subsistence allowance or if you’re doing what someone else would normally be paid for

Why on earth your advisor would let you do his/her job is a bit of a mystery when public sector workers are right in the firing line for cuts is it not?

So the cheats come to you as well and you say nothing to the DWP. Is that correct?

Christ my advisor would laugh at the idea of me doing her job.  I do not do her job.  People come to me and say "this has happened what do I do" and I tell them what I would do in their position.  I tell them my experiences and what I have learned through research.  If what I am doing is similar to anything it is a CAB advisor - you know a voluntary position.

No the cheats do not come to me - because they get told own up or I will report.  However I do get told so and so is doing this why cant I do it.  Also the only cheat I have said is widely spread and boasted about is the crisis loan one - which is.

So your evidence for all this cheating is no more than idle gossip. And you use that to dismiss reports about the effects all this is having on people who are really struggling. Seriously!!!

Bit like people who scream at people who don't look disabled when they have a disabled sticker and park in a disabled bay, but have a very bad heart condition, or some other disease that doesn't give outward signs.

Sassy wrote:FGS Sphinx, you have absolutely no evidence for that and CRISIS LOANS HAD TO BE PAID BACK, they were stopped in instalments out of benefit.

They are not limited to people on benefits. Again I can only report my own experiences which I do.

But maybe I better stop doing that because after all people get paid to do that so I must be breaking the rules doing unpaid work. Maybe I better be a good girl and go sit on the sofa and watch TV like a sick disabled person should do because if I am making the effort to gain experience or skill at anything I must be breaking rules.

Irn Bru wrote:

sphinx wrote:

Christ my advisor would laugh at the idea of me doing her job.  I do not do her job.  People come to me and say "this has happened what do I do" and I tell them what I would do in their position.  I tell them my experiences and what I have learned through research.  If what I am doing is similar to anything it is a CAB advisor - you know a voluntary position.

No the cheats do not come to me - because they get told own up or I will report.  However I do get told so and so is doing this why cant I do it.  Also the only cheat I have said is widely spread and boasted about is the crisis loan one - which is.

So your evidence for all this cheating is no more than idle gossip. And you use that to dismiss reports about the effects all this is having on people who are really struggling. Seriously!!!

Yeah cause I never always believe the first thing that is said to me and never seek confirmation   

Oh do give over, you have no evidence, crisis loans had to be paid back, and you don't even know where housing benefit comes from.   Yes, I think you should stop giving advice frankly.   It takes training to give the correct advise, and you haven't had it.   If you want to do voluntary work fine, but don't practice on your neighbours with something you have had no training for.   Your experiences are your experiences, and your circumstances are not the same as anyone else.   And don't listen to tittle tattle.

sphinx wrote:

Irn Bru wrote:

So your evidence for all this cheating is no more than idle gossip. And you use that to dismiss reports about the effects all this is having on people who are really struggling. Seriously!!!

Yeah cause I never always believe the first thing that is said to me and never seek confirmation   

So you go and get all the circumstances and paperwork? Really? How?

Yeah and in the meantime when people keep asking me because I got it right so far?

I mean different situation but you have a person who has been vomiting for several days unable to keep anything down, and has had no urine output for over 24 hours. What do you do?

Sassy wrote:

sphinx wrote:

Yeah cause I never always believe the first thing that is said to me and never seek confirmation   

So you go and get all the circumstances and paperwork?   Really?   How?

I'm Psychic.

You tell them to go to a doctor.

Sassy wrote:You tell them to go to a doctor.

You have driven them to the A&E department because its the weekend.

The person is a known drug user who has seen their GP multiple times since the vomiting started with the diagnosis it is inflammation caused by drug use.

What should A&E staff do?

Who the hell cares, total irrelevant we are talking about housing benefit. So who pays housing benefit?

chuck em out and let em die...waste of oxygen.....

but dont divert the thread...

sphinx wrote:

Sassy wrote:You tell them to go to a doctor.

You have driven them to the A&E department because its the weekend.

The person is a known drug user who has seen their GP multiple times since the vomiting started with the diagnosis it is inflammation caused by drug use.

What should A&E staff do?

What has all this got to do with housing benefit?

Sassy wrote:Who the hell cares, total irrelevant we are talking about housing benefit.    So who pays housing benefit?

Housing benefit is on another thread.

Nice to know you show the same attitude as the doctors showed. Who does care about the drug addict - its their own fault they deserve it.

Irn Bru wrote:

sphinx wrote:

You have driven them to the A&E department because its the weekend.

The person is a known drug user who has seen their GP multiple times since the vomiting started with the diagnosis it is inflammation caused by drug use.

What should A&E staff do?

What has all this got to do with housing benefit?

The accuracy of my knowledge

combined with my own ethics.

Which are being challenged.

sphinx wrote:

Sassy wrote:Who the hell cares, total irrelevant we are talking about housing benefit.    So who pays housing benefit?

Housing benefit is on another thread.

Nice to know you show the same attitude as the doctors showed.  Who does care about the drug addict - its their own fault they deserve it.

No, it's on this thread

Re: Landlord to evict 200 tenants - because they received housing benefit

Read the thread title Sphinx.

And I've never heard anything so damn pompous in my life.   Because you are trying to avoid the question by posing another question that I tell you is irrelevant, I'M showing an attitude to a drug addict.   You couldn't make it up.

Or because this discussion is going nowhere as I cannot give accurate answers to defend myself without giving details that should be confidential I will resign. I see what I see and know what I know and if people want to disbelieve me thats fine. Aint gonna stop me trying to tell them though.

Also whether people believe me or not I can assure every one I do not do anything illegal or against the rules and my benefits advisor is fully informed as to everything I do - voluntary, unpaid (yep I am doing unpaid work) and day to day ordinary living. They are happy that what I am doing is as it should be.

Giving details that should be confidential? How can you do that if no names are involved? And you are the one that has been saying what people have been up to, nobody else.

So, you think councils will be able to use the money they pay out in housing benefit now for other purposes, but you don't know where that money comes from.

I am not having the housing benefit discussion on 2 threads.

sphinx wrote:Or because this discussion is going nowhere as I cannot give accurate answers to defend myself without giving details that should be confidential I will resign.  I see what I see and know what I know and if people want to disbelieve me thats fine.  Aint gonna stop me trying to tell them though.

Also whether people believe me or not I can assure every one I do not do anything illegal or against the rules and my benefits advisor is fully informed as to everything I do - voluntary, unpaid (yep I am doing unpaid work) and day to day ordinary living.  They are happy that what I am doing is as it should be.

Ok Sphinx I accept that you are doing nothing wrong but you are basing your beliefs on what people tell you about other people whilst dismissing other more factual evidence that contradicts what you say.

That's why you are being challenged.