Tenants offered £500 to shop subletting neighbours
Neighbours will receive £500 to turn in social tenancy fraudsters, housing minister John Healey announced today.
Launching a crackdown on around 10,000 council and housing association homes, Mr Healey said he was handing over the details of around 8,000 possible cases of unlawful subletting to councils and housing associations.
Members of the public will be able to make tip-offs over the internet, by email or through a dedicated hotline. Anyone providing information leading to the recovery of the first 1,000 homes will receive a £500 bounty.
The Audit Commission has suggested that as many as one in 20 social homes in some inner-city areas could be sublet or unlawfully acquired.
Mr Healey said: ‘We can’t allow cheats to hang onto the tenancies of council houses they don’t need and don’t live in.
‘I want people to feel the system for housing families who need homes is fairer and that’s why I’m launching this national crackdown on tenancy fraud.’
Mr Healey also launched guidance on good practice for landlords on tackling unlawful subletting, which was written by the Chartered Institute of Housing.
Sarah Webb, CIH chief executive, said: ‘Unlawful subletting and occupation of scarce affordable housing is worse than theft. In addition to the financial loss to the public, it also means some families are missing out on a decent, affordable home and all that this can bring.
‘CIH believes that making the best use of existing housing is essential and I am delighted that we have been asked to write this guidance which provides landlords and local authorities with good practice and legal advice to support them to clamp down on these unlawful practices.’
David Orr, chief executive of the National Housing Federation, said: ‘Tackling unlawful subletting is an important part of housing associations’ commitment to supporting those in housing need.’
View results 10 per page | 20 per page | 50 per page
Have your say
You must sign in to make a comment
Readers' comments (31)
richard paris | 30/11/2009 7:10 pm
I am not condoning tenancy fraud or unlawful sub-letting of social housing BUT excuse me - some MPs have been blatantly unlawfully claiming expenses on their second homes - we await possible CPS prosecution for criminal fraud.
No-one is highlighting owner-occupiers who might be sub-letting in breach of loan covenant/mortgage deed - perhaps similar condemnation from Housing Minister in order to be 'fair' and 'consistent' is called for.
And there maybe a £500.00 'bounty' for 'grassing up' one's social housing neighbour - do they really not expect many allegations, some of which might just turn out not to be true!!
I am not condoning tenancy fraud or unlawful sub-letting BUT maybe, just maybe there is some differential application of moralistic standards here!!
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
kass | 01/12/2009 6:43 am
Instead of giving money for more housing officers to have smaller patches alloowing them to look after tenancies issues properly (including subletting) now social tenants are told to get on their bike and make some money bounty hunting on their neighbours. With estates where close to 70% of residents already keeping diaries and other checks on their neighbours, this will increase their neighbours watching activities even more.
I though John Healey was all right... Well, not anymore. With populist initiatives like this, he will soon lose any credibility he was attempting to achieve.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Harry Lime | 01/12/2009 8:38 am
The snooping angle notwithstanding, this has a real chance of getting some results, although the irony of it will be that many of those illegally subletting are in real housing need and will simply trot off down the local council and probably have to be put up in very expensive temporary accomodation and then still leapfrog many of the thousands still in the waiting list. Still £500 vs £60k+ for grant on a newbuild? It also neglects to say that it will be the Local Authority or HA that will have to stump the legal costs of getting out the sub lettee.....
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Jay | 01/12/2009 8:49 am
So where are all these newly evicted 'sub-tenants' going to end up? I appreciate that of course subletting restricts availability in the market for families and the like but we have to understand that those who are living in sub-tenanted properties are probably on the fringes of the housing allocation policy and the likelihood is they are going to end up back in the Housing Office seeking accommodation. Now of course yes that's fair to be assessed against others who are probably in more housing need, but lets not forget people are living in these properties - maybe even people who will not have access to social housing through the normal process.
Again a bad idea unbelievably not given any thought beyond the press office. What's needed is reform on how tenancies are managed by the provider; regular contact. In my 7 years of being a tenant of a housing association l heard from the local office 1 in connection to my tenancy. Secure tenancies for life in local authorities only compound the issue of sub-letting.
I had respect for John Healey and what he was trying to do, clearly he has been told to grab a few headlines.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
kass | 01/12/2009 8:57 am
"Harry Lime | Tue, 1 Dec 2009 08:38 GMT
...Still £500 vs £60k+ for grant on a newbuild? It also neglects to say that it will be the Local Authority or HA that will have to stump the legal costs of getting out the sub lettee..... "
I really do not think so. I envisage quite a few (if lucky! because there might be lots of them) court cases out of this coming out of all the hate it will provoke in communities for wrong and improper reporting. It is enough a couple of court cases or even a murder coming out of this and the whole financial investment will be wiped out... The added hate, mistrust and suspicion it will bring into communities will end up costing an awful lot more and it will last god knows for how many years if not genenrations.
Add it all up and you'll see what disaster this move is.
The only reasonable solution to this is to have housing officers will smaller patches who can keep closer contact with each single tenancy.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
karen | 01/12/2009 9:24 am
I'll be very interested to see how many people are evicted, what happens to those evicted, and how much time and money is wasted investigating erroneous allegations.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Dave Hollins | 01/12/2009 9:34 am
I blame the Audit Commission and Steve Bundred for hyping this up, as I recall they said there were 200,000 illegally sublet social homes, based on no real evidence, now they've come up with a list of 8,000 across the whole country that are worth investigating further.
Even at these figures it is worth a new initiative, social housing is like gold dust and it is important they get let to people who have been given highest priority through the allocations system. And it is plain wrong for tenants who don't need the home anymore to be profiteering.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Melvin Bone | 01/12/2009 9:35 am
They'll be lucky to get a dozen a year with this scheme.
Still its an excellent way to annoy that neighbour you do not like.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Tom | 01/12/2009 12:00 pm
The only reasonable solution to this is to have housing officers will smaller patches who can keep closer contact with each single tenancy.
What?
I have lived in my council house for 34years and never had contact,or need of contact with a housing officer.
Officer??? where is the need for them,most people just live their life,without them.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Peter | 01/12/2009 12:14 pm
Well it is Christmas, 500 quid will come in handy in the new year to pay off the rent arrears! But there is one catch. You only get the money if you are in the first one thousand properties where the landlord has successfully got the property back. I think you probably have more chance of winning the lottery.
It doesn't say where the money is coming from and who is going to administer it.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment