'No Rent Supplement' to be outlawed

by the seaside

iainBB wrote: »

Of course we all know the difference no one is is saying that . Discrimination is choosing a person over another person based on race gender. Etc.

Regardless if personal or not.

And sometimes discrimination is OK and sometimes it isn't. And these rules are sometimes codified into law. Generally the difference is between personal and commercial transactions.

The_Morrigan

You can refuse people because the property you are letting out is not suitable for them or their lifestyle.
I live in a two bedroom apartment, when I was looking for a lodger I refused people in the following circumstances:

RA - because it's not always permissible under the rent a room scheme
Single parents with kids - because the apartment is not suitable for children
Couples - the apartment is not big enough for three grown adults to live in harmony

It's my house and I have to feel comfortable with the person who is living there, both in respect of my property, my belongings and myself. It would be the same for a tenant who is in situ and looking for a replacement or the landlord who is trusting his house to a person/family.

by the seaside

The_Morrigan wrote: »

You can refuse people because the property you are letting out is not suitable for them or their lifestyle.
I live in a two bedroom apartment, when I was looking for a lodger I refused people in the following circumstances:

RA - because it's not always permissible under the rent a room scheme
Single parents with kids - because the apartment is not suitable for children
Couples - the apartment is not big enough for three grown adults to live in harmony

It's my house and I have to feel comfortable with the person who is living there, both in respect of my property, my belongings and myself. It would be the same for a tenant who is in situ and looking for a replacement or the landlord who is trusting his house to a person/family.

I would think you could refuse to rent your property to somebody because they didn't seem like they would look after it, and they may or may not be on RA. I think this will be unenforceable except that it will stop advertising 'No RA'.

Consider that in the UK the Race Relations Act 1968 outlawed the notorious 'No Blacks, No Dogs, No Irish' housing discrimination, but even now discrimination remains:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-24372509

"99% of my landlords don't want Afro-Caribbeans or any troublesome people."

The lettings manager at National Estate Agents, Willesden, said: "When someone [African-Caribbean] comes in, we won't advise them of this property.

"Even if it does get [asked about] we make up an excuse, to be honest with you."

When a black researcher asked to view the property, the National agent told him: "I'm sorry, that one's gone."

The property was still on the market - and a white researcher got offered a viewing.

runawaybishop

iainBB wrote: »

Of course we all know the difference no one is is saying that . Discrimination is choosing a person over another person based on race gender. Etc.

Regardless if personal or not.

There are exemptions for discrimination based on gender though, an example would be recruiting female nursing staff to take care of female patients so as to protect the dignity of the individual.

iainBB

runawaybishop wrote: »

There are exemptions for discrimination based on gender though, an example would be recruiting female nursing staff to take care of female patients so as to protect the dignity of the individual.

I would agree. but back to the property business transactions of discrimination based on financial circumstances.

Landlords always picking one person over another based on some criteria. Financial being one major part which is now going.

This is not landlords specific its discrimination that could affect mortgage credit cards applications. Etc.

runawaybishop

iainBB wrote: »

I would agree. but back to the property business transactions of discrimination based on financial circumstances.

Landlords always picking one person over another based on some criteria. Financial being one major part which is now going.

This is not landlords specific its discrimination that could affect mortgage credit cards applications. Etc.

If youare entrusting an asset worth hundreds of thousands of euro to a stranger you should definitely be discriminate on who you select. Someone with good finances means if they mess about you can go after them. Its difficult to recoup losses from someone with no finances.

iainBB

runawaybishop wrote: »

If youare entrusting an asset worth hundreds of thousands of euro to a stranger you should definitely be discriminate on who you select. Someone with good finances means if they mess about you can go after them. Its difficult to recoup losses from someone with no finances.

Of course you would. That is my point . but this is now against the law.

MarkAnthony

iainBB wrote: »

Of course you would. That is my point . but this is now against the law.

It's at the bill stage still AFAIK.

runawaybishop

iainBB wrote: »

Of course you would. That is my point . but this is now against the law.

Ah right, I'm with you now. I;d say you can still ask to see bank records though to see if the tenant can pay for damages etc -

Grandpa Hassan

iainBB wrote: »

I would agree. but back to the property business transactions of discrimination based on financial circumstances.

Landlords always picking one person over another based on some criteria. Financial being one major part which is now going.

This is not landlords specific its discrimination that could affect mortgage credit cards applications. Etc.

That's not discrimination and will not be part of any law. The ability to assess risk is part of business.....you're not going to lend money to someone who can't afford it. And so an assessment will be made based on the repayment ability of the individual. Ironically, it was the lack of discrimination which largely led to the financial crisis....with banks lending to anyone and everyone of whatever socioeconomic status

Fkall

iainBB wrote: »

Of course that was not my intention.

these questions where taken from landlords website on how to choose a tenant. I modify them to remove all the work direct question.

There must be some legal issues here as many companies use income as a way of choosing clients .

Car finance for example
They need to know can you afford the repayments.

Credit card companies off the top of my head .

Any application that asked you for income statement eg mortgage applications.
They ask for bank statements. Employer ref. Are they now illegal ?

Many years ago when I used to rent, you were often asked to supply a bank reference confirming your ability to pay the stated rent.

I can see a return of this practice

The_Conductor

Fkall wrote: »

Many years ago when I used to rent, you were often asked to supply a bank reference confirming your ability to pay the stated rent.

I can see a return of this practice

It was called a 'bank guarantee'- and it was typically valid for 12 months from date of issue of the doc. Bank of Ireland charged £50 for them- I think I got them personally once or twice (back in the '90s). They still issue them in the commercial sector- though they are rare now- it used to be that deposits were required for importing licenses for various commodities- a regime that has largely been dismantled over the past 15 years- and is now rare.

Nice sideline for banks- they only issue them to people with impeccable finances- and there are a long list of strings attached to them- to safeguard the bank should things go pear shaped.

It would be an interesting route to go- definitely- and it is a practice that has worked in the past.

beauf

I can see a lot of people time being wasted now, tenants especially. They'll have to go see a lot more properties and interviews with LL before they find something. Will be hard to prove discrimination.

by the seaside

beauf wrote: »

I can see a lot of people time being wasted now, tenants especially. They'll have to go see a lot more properties and interviews with LL before they find something. Will be hard to prove discrimination.

I think the only cases of discrimination will be if someone if stupid enough to advertise 'No RA'.

iainBB

Before this and after this it will be the same amount of landlords that will accept RA.

It will be a time wasting exercise for LL and RA individuals. I will try my hardest to filter on the phone to save every one time.

Grandpa Hassan

by the seaside wrote: »

I think the only cases of discrimination will be if someone if stupid enough to advertise 'No RA'.

Which is actually worse for RA tenants as they are now going to waste a whole load of time looking at places for which the LL will not rent to RA tenants instead of having that filter laid out up front (however harsh a filter it is)

snubbleste

by the seaside wrote: »

I think the only cases of discrimination will be if someone if stupid enough to advertise 'No RA'.

Eh no.
Read post #1

evo2000

could you not just pay up front at first then when its too late to turn back start dishin em out the RA, you could also record the whole thing if they decide to change the sec u mention RA bring it to the authority's and get the LL done.

Imo rent allowance shouldnt be a problem unless the persons a scumbag in which cases you ll have a fair idea after meeting them.. references from previous LL could help aswell.

Greenmachine

All houses for rent or sale are required to have a BER cert. 95% of rentals for Dublin fail to list a BER rating. This is just another meaningless rule. While I sympathise with those receiving RA who can't find accommodation, I think the system has to change, where the landlord is paid directly by community welfare. Assess their entitlement and route it all through community welfare. Deduct rent allowance and recipients contributions and pay to the landlord and pay the remainder to Welfare recipient.

The Spider

evo2000 wrote: »

could you not just pay up front at first then when its too late to turn back start dishin em out the RA, you could also record the whole thing if they decide to change the sec u mention RA bring it to the authority's and get the LL done.

Imo rent allowance shouldnt be a problem unless the persons a scumbag in which cases you ll have a fair idea after meeting them.. references from previous LL could help aswell.

Nope, I'd want to see employment references and bank statements.

The_Morrigan

evo2000 has been thread banned and is not permitted to reply.

Eldarion

The Spider wrote: »

Nope, I'd want to see employment references and bank statements.

I have a feeling asking for employment references would be a no no.

Some poor unaware landlords are gonna get slapped hard with discrimination suits to set precedents on what's allowed and what's not allowed on this one I fear.

The Spider

Eldarion wrote: »

I have a feeling asking for employment references would be a no no.

Some poor unaware landlords are gonna get slapped hard with discrimination suits to set precedents on what's allowed and what's not allowed on this one I fear.

Employment references would be standard no? The bank certainly ask for them.
Surely when it comes to who you rent to you have a right to some background information.

iainBB

It's not just landlord legislation its discrimination legislation this has wider implementation here then RA and landlords.

If I understand it any situation that would require you to hand over employment info or income info. Such as rental property or credit cards application and mortgage.

Grandpa Hassan

Eldarion wrote: »

I have a feeling asking for employment references would be a no no.

Some poor unaware landlords are gonna get slapped hard with discrimination suits to set precedents on what's allowed and what's not allowed on this one I fear.

I disagree. There is no way the legislation will end up going that far. You're basically saying that you're not allowed to check if someone can afford it. Which would make things a free for all, and undoubtedly take a large number of rental properties off the market. There is no way I would rent out my place to someone whose capacity to pay was unknown. I'd rather leave it empty or sell it

Grandpa Hassan

iainBB wrote: »

It's not just landlord legislation its discrimination legislation this has wider implementation here then RA and landlords.

If I understand it any situation that would require you to hand over employment info or income info. Such as rental property or credit cards application and mortgage.

It is the lack of scrutiny of affordability which led to the financial crash. The banking regulator would never allow legislation like this to apply to banks....they are actually moving the other way. And the banking regulator makes the rules

ElizKenny

All a landlord has to do do is wait for people to offer up the information/proof about job and income.
It will become the norm that when you go looking to rent you will just offer this.
If someone doesnt offer it then the landlords will just assume RA, no way. And can just ignore that person without saying anything.

iainBB

ElizKenny wrote: »

All a landlord has to do do is wait for people to offer up the information/proof about job and income.
It will become the norm that when you go looking to rent you will just offer this.
If someone doesnt offer it then the landlords will just assume RA, no way. And can just ignore that person without saying anything.

I agree 100%.

ec18

ElizKenny wrote: »

All a landlord has to do do is wait for people to offer up the information/proof about job and income.
It will become the norm that when you go looking to rent you will just offer this.
If someone doesnt offer it then the landlords will just assume RA, no way. And can just ignore that person without saying anything.

Is this not the norm already? It has been in any place I've looked at renting.

iainBB

ec18 wrote: »

Is this not the norm already? It has been in any place I've looked at renting.

Well before you or the landlord could bring it up. Now the LL can't. There is a difference