Enbee92 wrote: » Hi all, I've been living at this address for 7 years, on rent supplement for 5. I've been asked by the council to apply for HAP (as they are phasing out RS). I filled in my part of the application, sent the landlord his part to fill in, and last night received a text in reply saying: "If you wish to take on another fixed term lease we would expect the same payment terms and conditions as per the previous lease. Can you please let me know as soon as possible if you wish to proceed" Which I have interpreted as no hap or pack your bags. I've done my research, and as far as I can tell, he cannot refuse HAP. I have contacted the council, Threshold and the PRTB and am awaiting response, but after an entirely sleepless night worrying about the possibility of having to house hunt in this current climate, I would appreciate hugely if anyone could give me some peace of mind. TIA
ted1 wrote: » He hasn’t refused HAP, what you need to do is pay for the first month. And let HAP pay the rest. HAP is poorly designed in that it goes against every rental system in the world and pays the landlord at the end of the month. If you cover that month the rest should fall into place
Graces7 wrote: » You have done and are doing all the right things.. Hang on in there; I know how worrying it is from experience. No harm meanwhile to start looking round. A niggle in my mind re Part 4 tenancy ? Others here will know more than I do
Enbee92 wrote: » I have contacted the council, Threshold and the PRTB and am awaiting response
karenalot wrote: » Would you not just contact your landlord and clarify before reporting the situation to all the above? No he can’t refuse HAP, nor should he bother with fixed terms leases as Part 4 rights outweigh them.As a decent tenant you should ensure that you have enough funds in the bank to cover any delayed payments that might arise with the switchover.
FishOnABike wrote: » If HAP is fit for purpose there should be a seamless transition between rent supplement and HAP payments. Unfortunately this is not the way it always works. It is not reasonable to expect a person receiving rent supplement to have possibly several months rent set aside in savings to cover the inadequacies of the system.
karenalot wrote: » Would you not just contact your landlord and clarify before reporting the situation to all the above? No he can’t refuse HAP, nor should he bother with fixed terms leases as Part 4 rights outweigh them. As a decent tenant you should ensure that you have enough funds in the bank to cover any delayed payments that might arise with the switchover.
Xterminator wrote: » Hi OP i think it fair to say your landlord should not be expected to forgo timely payment of rent. that appears to be his primary concern, not the refusal of HAP. i understand you bring concerned, but surely you can see his point of view too?
Enbee92 wrote: » Absolutely, and as I said in an earlier post, if there is any delay in payment to him I will seek an urgent needs payment from social welfare to cover it. I simply cannot afford to pay it all myself, but I will absolutely do everything in my power to ensure he doesn't miss a month's rent as I understand that he too has a mortgage to pay for. This is not the issue at hand, however. My question was simply to get advise on what I should do if he does actively refuse hap. Thanks for your response
Dav010 wrote: » He can’t legally refuse HAP, if he accepts RS, I don’t see why you are assuming he would not accept HAP. He is making certain you know your obligations. If you are unable to pay rent yourself, you need to make contingency now for any delay in changing from one rental supplement to the other. It will be no use looking for a SW payment after rent payment date has passed, you will be in arrears.
Enbee92 wrote: » I'm just wondering what my options are if he does officially refuse hap. The wording of his text is what has me believing he is going to try to refuse it, as he says if I want to continue the lease he expects the same payment terms and conditions... Which is currently x amount on the 19th of every month... The amount won't change but the date will. I have reassured him in the letter I attached to the application that he would receive the same amount, and that any arrears incurred as a result of the switch over would be ammended
kceire wrote: » HAP is paid in on the last Wednesday of the month. he may need payment by the 19th in order to satisfy his own standing orders for other payments including insurance, mortgage etc So you assuring him any arrears will be fixed is not the answer, arrears should not occur. Can you arrange for HAP to be paid to yourself and you continue to pay the rent on the 19th as agreed?
ted1 wrote: » The 19th might just also be the date the OP moved in.
FishOnABike wrote: » I think that may be the problem. Any arrears could cause problems in turn for the LL paying their own bills. The payment date of 19th might also be so the LL can be sure funds are in their account in time to pay their own bills. As it stands if rent is not paid by 19th, a fourteen day notice can be issued on 20th and if the arrears are not cleared in full this can be followed two weeks later by notice of termination. The transition from rent supplement to HAP needs to ensue the LL is not, even temporarily, out of pocket. If HAP is paid on the last Wednesday of each month then this will need to be agreed with the LL and a bridging payment of roughly a month and a half's rent paid during the transition to move the rent day out to the last Wednesday and ensure the rent continues to be paid in advance. This is assuming the transition takes less than a month. It doesn't help that rent supplement and HAP are administered by two different organisations and seems to be set up more to suit them than their clients.
Browney7 wrote: » So in the case of Hap, does the LL refund the last payment they receive to the tenant when the tenant moves out if the tenant makes a payment to cover the month in arrears at the start?
FishOnABike wrote: » If HAP payments were made to the tenant (as was the case with rent supplement) these wouldn't be so much an issue as the tenant would be able to use the payment towards rent for their new accommodation.
karenalot wrote: » Paying full rents directly to tenants was proven to be a disaster. Too much temptation to not pass on to the landlord.
ted1 wrote: » karenalot wrote: » Paying full rents directly to tenants was proven to be a disaster. Too much temptation to not pass on to the landlord. Agreed, I had a tenant move out and several months later had a call from the council asking how it was that they were paying for two different tenants. Turns out the tenant who moved out, moved back to her parents , never told the council and was pocketing the money.