nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Current landlord refusing HAP

Enbee92

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

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

machalla

lawrencesummers wrote: »

You think or you know?

Dependent on whether it's a first letting or not it will or if it's a vacant letting under the definition.

https://www.revenue.ie/en/property/rental-income/irish-rental-income/what-expenses-are-not-allowed.aspx

Please point out where the above is wrong and add to the discussion.

lawrencesummers

The_Conductor wrote: »

In theory.
In practice- the tenant reduces, or stops the payment to the local authority- and the landlord suddenly, without any notice, has the entirety of the rent stopped- and no-one in the local authority will talk to him/her on GDPR grounds.
While you may imagine its rare- unfortunately, the stats at the RTB speak otherwise.

And if the tenant was paying the full rent themselves the same would happen. That’s just part of the risk of being a landlord

lawrencesummers

machalla wrote: »

I don't think any of that is tax deductible if it's a first letting. Pre letting expenses like these are not allowable. Estate agent fees and solicitors would be I think.

You think or you know?

The_Conductor

lawrencesummers wrote: »

You have a far far higher chance of getting the rent paid with hap tenant experiencing income trouble than without.

In theory.
In practice- the tenant reduces, or stops the payment to the local authority- and the landlord suddenly, without any notice, has the entirety of the rent stopped- and no-one in the local authority will talk to him/her on GDPR grounds.
While you may imagine its rare- unfortunately, the stats at the RTB speak otherwise.

machalla

lawrencesummers wrote: »

The downside, which you might need to not mention is that a council engineer can call around and audit the house to ensure it is up to scratch, so the landlord might have to spend some money to ensure boilers are serviced, electrics are certified, windows upstairs have safety latches, smoke and carbon monoxide alarms, but all theses costs are tax detectable anyway.

HAP is good for landlords once they are legitimate in declaring their taxable income and registered with PRTB, if hey are not then they will avoid it like the plague.

I don't think any of that is tax deductible if it's a first letting. Pre letting expenses like these are not allowable. Estate agent fees and solicitors would be I think.

Graham

MOD WARNING

Anyone attempting to identify the OP and/or the location of the property will be met with a swift forum ban.

OP, if there are aspects of your housing which you would like to keep private or which you think may identify you or the property. STOP POSTING THEM

lawrencesummers

Enbee92 wrote: »

I've explained all of this to him and he won't budge. I'm not sure what his issue is as when I asked him for his reasons (so I could try to ease his concerns) he wouldn't give me any. I'm guessing that he thinks if I leave he can get more money off someone else, which is probably true as we're in a rent controlled area so he can't increase the rent more than 4% every two years, so if he were to start a new agreement with another tenant he could ask for more from the onset. However, I share this house with a montessori, it's far from an ideal situation as there is no privacy and the downstairs is a shared space, so we share the kitchen and garden. We're used to it now, but they would struggle to find someone else who is willing to share their house with 25 children during the week. But I guess in the rental crisis at the minute people will take anything.

Did you offer to increase the rent? It won’t cost you anything, or very very little

lawrencesummers

Dav010 wrote: »

I don’t think this is entirely correct.

Payment from the Council is not guaranteed, if the tenant stops paying their portion to the LA, the Council very quickly cease paying the Landlord.

Also, someone more informed might confirm this, I think HAP payments are backdated to application date only in certain situations , payment typically begins from the date of approval.

It appears there is more to this story, OP has other issues with the LL, a new thread has been opened.

Sure if the tenant stops paying it can cause problems, but with Hap they pay less and it’s based on their income, so if their income drops what they pay drops. You have a far far higher chance of getting the rent paid with hap tenant experiencing income trouble than without.

ted1

<SNIP>

[Deleted User]

<SNIP>

[Deleted User]

Enbee92 wrote: »

Yes, I now have in writing that he is refusing to accept HAP and that if I want to stay in the property then I can't apply for it. I have a year left of the part 4 tenancy..

Your LL could be in the running for idiot LL of the year for putting that in writing, unless there is a reason for refusing it as a result of being unable to commit to 2 year agreement, like his intention to end your tenancy next year at end of cycle, as is his right.

[Deleted User]

lawrencesummers wrote: »

HAP is guaranteed to be paid, the landlord doesn’t have to worry about the tenant missing work because they are sick or losing their job. It offers a lot of security for the landlord as the state is footing the bill.

If you are approved then they will pay it. It may take a few weeks but they will backdate the payments from when the application goes in, so if you can cover the first month and agree that once he gets back paid he can refund you what you paid it will work out and he won’t be short.
.

I don’t think this is entirely correct.

Payment from the Council is not guaranteed, if the tenant stops paying their portion to the LA, the Council very quickly cease paying the Landlord.

Also, someone more informed might confirm this, I think HAP payments are backdated to application date only in certain situations , payment typically begins from the date of approval.

It appears there is more to this story, OP has other issues with the LL, a new thread has been opened.

lawrencesummers

There is a downside to HAP for landlords, but there is also a major upside.

It’s possible that you can avoid all the legal issues and complaints and get him onside by explaining the advantages to him.

HAP is guaranteed to be paid, the landlord doesn’t have to worry about the tenant missing work because they are sick or losing their job. It offers a lot of security for the landlord as the state is footing the bill.

If you are approved then they will pay it. It may take a few weeks but they will backdate the payments from when the application goes in, so if you can cover the first month and agree that once he gets back paid he can refund you what you paid it will work out and he won’t be short.

You could also agree to an increase in the rent, if your not at the limit then you can agree to increase the rent to the limit and what landlord doesn’t love more rent.

The downside, which you might need to not mention is that a council engineer can call around and audit the house to ensure it is up to scratch, so the landlord might have to spend some money to ensure boilers are serviced, electrics are certified, windows upstairs have safety latches, smoke and carbon monoxide alarms, but all theses costs are tax detectable anyway.

HAP is good for landlords once they are legitimate in declaring their taxable income and registered with PRTB, if hey are not then they will avoid it like the plague.

[Deleted User]

Enbee92 wrote: »

Just an update:

LL has since officially refused to renew lease if I pursue HAP, I have this in writing. However, when I asked for his reasons he went quiet and have heard nothing since. My feeling is that he has sought advice and been told by that person that he's not allowed to refuse HAP and is thinking of a way to back pedal. I've been advised by the council, the prtb and the WRC to notify him of my intent to make a formal complaint to the WRC. He then has a month to respond before I make the complaint and if he doesn't respond or the response is unsatisfactory then I am to make the complaint and take things from there.

My landlord lives a very comfortable life we'll say. Lives in one of the biggest houses in one of the nicest areas of South Dublin. I'm not exaggerating when I say he has a cinema in his house. He has multiple properties that he lets, all of which the mortgage has been paid off on as he has bragged about in the past, so I have a feeling he is just slightly out of touch with social welfare and its rules. Hopefully once he knows he'll change his tune and this can all be dealt with without too much conflict.

Thanks everyone for your help

The letter actually states that he is refusing HAP, as opposed to your interpretation that he does not want to accept it?

As previous poster said, if you are coming to the end of your part 4 cycle, the LL can end your tenancy at the end of the cycle. You are expected to stay in your HAP accommodation for 2 years, is he refusing it based on the fact that he is entitled to end your tenancy sooner than that?

FishOnABike

Just check where you are in your part four tenancy cycle. You don't need to renew a lease in a part four tenancy but notice of termination can be given without any other reason other than coming to the end of your part four tenancy term.

How many years are in your current part four tenancy and where you are in that cycle might depend on when your tenancy commenced, how long you are there and when you last renewed or signed a lease.

If your rent hasn't been increased by the maximum allowed under the residential tenancy act / rent pressure zone legislation each year, your landlord might apply the maximum increase allowed at the next rent review. It might be worth getting advice on the specifics of your situation about this.

YFlyer

Having a tenant on HAP in a shared accommodation is a disaster. Especially during Autumn and Winter when they have the heating on for the day.

FishOnABike

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: »

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.

Rent supplement did not pay the full rent, the recipient had to pay a means assessed amount of their rent, with a minimum contribution of €30.

As a tenant has an interest in keeping a roof over their head I can't see the logic in saying there's too much temptation not to pass it on to the landlord.

We don't insist groceries are paid for directly by the Department of Employment Affairs and Social Protection in case a person walks out of a shop without paying for them.

Neither do we insist that an employer pays rent or mortgage payments directly to a landlord or bank in case their employee decides to spend their money on something else.

Why should rent support be treated any different?

As it stands HAP appears to be she worst of both worlds. It introduces a third party to the landlord tenant relationship but the rental agreement remains solely between the landlord and tenant. In doing so it introduces a layer of inflexible bureaucracy that seems to suit neither.

As a tenant no longer directly pays their landlord there may be a time lag before the tenant becomes aware of any problem with payment. The first indication might be a fourteen day notice to pay rent due. If the problem cannot be resolved within that fourteen days it can be followed immediately by a twenty eight day notice of termination.

Burocracies seldom move fast. As the tenant has more at stake they have a greater incentive to resolve matters than done anonymous bureaucrat in an office or call centre somewhere.

HAP might be more attractive (or less unattractive) to landlords if rent payment was guaranteed by the council. If a tenant is so irresponsible as to not pay their contribution then this should be managed between the council and tenant either by agreement or by order garnishing their wages or social welfare payment not by failing to pay the landlord multiples of this amount.

ted1

Old diesel wrote: »

Your replacement tenant was on Rent allowance too?????.

Yes tenants in that house have always been on Rent allowance. Generally single mums, currently retired travellers. A lovely family , no hassle in 7 years so far.

Old diesel

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.

Your replacement tenant was on Rent allowance too?????.

ted1

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.

davindub

Op FLAC and the WRC are the best public advisory and enforcement body respectively when dealing with the equal status act.

The_Conductor

OP- there is no indication whatsoever from the text that your landlord sent you that he/she intends to refuse HAP.
If they are already in the system accepting RS- there is no reason that they wouldn't accept HAP- providing of course that you don't alter the terms of the lease by moving from one system to another. Also- you have to ensure that arrears do not arise- not fix them when they do arise- ensure proactively that they don't arise.

Some local authorities are more amenable to paying HAP upfront- possibly with an enhanced deposit- to ensure that their tenants are no worse off than any other tenants- and to ensure that landlords are paid rent in a standard manner.

The person who commented that HAP seems to be setup to suit local authorities and not tenants or landlords- unfortunately is making a very valid observation- the manner in which the scheme is administered is a mess and landlords and tenants are expected to pick up the pieces whenever anything goes wrong- and very often things do go wrong.

Gumbo

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?

No, because HAP is paid in arrears.
So if the LL is paid directly, they are paid the last Wednesday of the month for the month that has passed.

Edit - just read your post again if it’s set up like this then I’d continue to pay the LL at the start of every month and get the HAP paid directly to me as a tenant as opposed to the LL if possible.

karenalot

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.

Paying full rents directly to tenants was proven to be a disaster. Too much temptation to not pass on to the landlord.

karenalot

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.

Yes obviously there SHOULD be a seamless transition but as it stands there is not. It is also not reasonable to expect landlords to supplement tenants who they are providing a service to.

I say this as someone who has hap tenants.

FishOnABike

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?

Whrn the tenant gives notice to their LL they can advise the council of their moving date. Whether the council can stop payment before the end of the month and transfer payment seamlessly to a new LL is another question.

As long as HAP is paid in arrears there will always be problems with the transition between one rental property and another.

People don't always move neatly at month end / month start and a deposit and rent in advance needs to be paid to a new LL.

An independent third party escrow system gir deposits, transferrable between tenancies would go a long way towards solving the problem if the need for overlapping deposits.

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.

The more one looks at the HAP scheme the more apparent it becomes that it was not designed by people who have had any experience in depending on the private rental market and social supports to keep a roof over their head.

Enbee92

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?

That's a good question actually... Presumably they'd have to. Similar to the deposit I guess

Browney7

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?

Enbee92

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.

The 19th is the date that I moved in. I'll be doing everything I can to ensure the landlord isn't out of pocket, even if I have to get a loan to pay it myself. I will reaffirm that to my landlord that he will not be out of pocket and hopefully that eases his concern. Thanks

Enbee92

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?

The 19th is the date that I moved in. I'll be doing everything in my power to ensure arrears don't occur. As it stands I'm paying on the 19th for the month ahead, so if there's a delay with the switchover I should be covered for at least that month, and following that I'll have to take out a loan or an urgent needs payment from the social welfare to cover the difference