The only problem with direct payment is that if a claim turns out to be not valid the council will come to the LL for refund of those LHA payments.

Therefore if I had a a LHA claimant who failed to pass LHA payments onto me I would apply for direct payment; but commence eviction proceedings.

If more LL did this LHA claimants would not think they can get away with not paying 2 months LHA to the LL as the resultant effect would be they would be evicted.

They would then be deemed to have made themselves homeless and would not be able to recive LHA.

Therer are more than enough tenants out there; so if your LHA tenant wants to take the p–s out of you then they will know what will happen if they fail to pas the LHA onto the landlord.

I would always advise the LHA tenant at the outset as to what WILL happen should they fail to pass on any part of the LHA payment.

The ramifications of not passing on the LHA is something I don't think many claimants think about or are even aware of.

It could be they would be homeless all because of failing to pay 2 months LHA to the LL.

If LL adopted this tough stance the message would soon get through to LHA claimants.

Perhaps then the councils would stop pursuing LL for refunds of LHA just because a claimant no longer qualifies for LHA.

A LL cannot be expected to know the minuatie of LHA claimants' domestic circumstances which will affect claims.

To make the LL liable in the event the claim turns out to be invalid is ridiculous as the LL has provided the accommodation in good faith and should not be liable for  a claimants domestic circumstances which may render them disqualified from receiving LHA.

Yes I follow yor advices to the letter the only thing I haven't done is download all my tenants from the past 5 years!

The logistics of going through all my files is depressing me and then to input!

You are totally correct in your advices and the first thing a prospective tenant signs is your LRS data form which I thoroughly explain about.

I state if they chose NOT to sign the consent then I will termiate the interview as I don't want a tenant who doesn't want to be on LRS.

Of course if you succeed in your rental payment history project we may have tenants demanding to go on LRS. that would be a turn up for the books, wouldn't it!?

It would be very interesting if you could ever persuade some of them; that is to have tenants advise that their behaviour has now changed as a consequence of their knowledge of LRS and what it does.

It would be a direct vindication proof of how effective the LRS services are.

After all didn't Jesus commend sinners who repented!!!?

PaulBarrett said:

The only problem with direct payment is that if a claim turns out to be not valid the council will come to the LL for refund of those LHA payments.

But it doesnt mean you have to pay it. The council only do it because they think there is more chance of getting it back from the landlord than the tenant and the landlords who dont to read up on the council rules and regs roll over and pay without question. In a nutshell the person who has to repay is the person who has witheld a material fact. So if a tenant starts working and the landlord lives miles away he cant know and be held reponsible but that doesnt stop the council from asking him first.

But if a tenant moved out and the landlord kept recieving payment for dates after he vacated there is no defence and the landlord should return the funds but you can still appeal over a few days here and there.

I recieve over 20k a month in housing benefit and havent had to repay the council for years unless it is a dispute of moving out dates and then only amounts to a few quid and as the tenant paid their first months rent inadvance 9 times out of 10 there is funds to return to the tenant anyway.

I have many many tenants with some form of housing benifit (not all) and as long as you go in with your eyes open AND READ UP ON THE RULES AND REGS OF HB it isnt really a problem. Where a lot of landlords go wrong is they get a HB tenant apply for their property and believe everthing the persons says such as:

1 Its guaranteed

2 It wont stop

3 you will never have to worry about getting it.

Knowledge is everything and you never stop learning

Yes but you will get at least 2 letters from the council and a letter before action before any legal action started and if you bury your head in the sand and ignore them you deserve a ccj.

There is a appeal process with the council that has 3 stages I have only had to do the first one which is a reply explaining why it is the tenant responsible.   I have never had to prove anything.

I do acknowledge differant councils behave in differant ways and may be more rigerous in chasing overpayments but they still have to abide by the rules and regs which are all the same.

I imagine there have been many landlords over the years who have had knowledge of a dodgy claim or had a scam going with the tenant. The council are obviously first going to request repayment from the person who recieved the LHA and if that is the landlord it is one of the pitfalls of taking on a benefit tenant and recieving the payments direct.

If I was in a area that had a bigger pool of tenants to choose from I guess I would take a lot less LHA or none at all. But I can honestly say it doesnt cause me many problems, it takes up more time  but can have its benefits. It isnt for the inexperienced landlord.