SUBLETTING BETTER THAN HOME SWAPPING
08/12/2009 11:08 am
This is in response to the Housing Minister initiative to give a £500 reward on people reporting on subletter and follows comments made in that thread....
Making some aspects of subletting legal would give tenants more choices, even better than home swapping, because it would allow them to go back to their home.
Once Home swapping was illegal and some people were against it, and now it is perfectly legal. Taking in lodgers was perceived as illegal and then became perfectly acceptable.
Making subletting legal is the next step in this progression.
If I am a student or I have got a job or for whatever other reason, I have to be in another part of the country for months on end paying for another rent there, why do I have to travel back to my social home every now and then just to show that I still live there, when I could let it to someone else and not pay double rent?
I think far better than home swapping, subletting would give freedom for tenants to move to other parts of the country over serious matters like jobs, studies, assisting relatives who are ill., etc.
Illegal subletting is happening anyway, with resources and money wasted in trying to control it. All to no one's benefit. So why not make it legal so everyone benefits for it?... This is a very sensible and positive groundbreaking proposal I am making, Any political party with some sense should steal this idea of mine right now and make it their policy.
Sort: Newest first | Oldest first
08/12/2009 11:29 am
The related article on this website I refer to full title is:
"Tenants offered £500 to shop subletting neighbours"
08/12/2009 11:37 am
I'm not aware that taking in lodgers was ever seen as illegal, it just seems extremely unlikely, the principle of social housing fundamentally is to meet the needs of those who require housing. It's therefore unlikely that someone in a RSL property should find themselves with a spare room, that's one of the reasons succession clauses are very tightly adhered to.
Also due to the (generally) large proportion of RSL residents eligible for assessed benefits (JSA,tax credits) there is little or no financial incentive as any income would be taken off any qualifying benefits.
In the examples of being a student or accepting a job in other parts of the country, that is a decision of your own making and should you wish to accept you should be prepared to move. Harsh, but explain to the thousands on local lists why you should be free to choose who takes on your property at your convenience, and what would happen upon your return, would you expect the people you chose to sublet to to get some sort of priority on local lists as you'll be making them homeless?
I applaud you for trying to come up with a solution but you'd be making an industry out of something that is unlikely to occur that often and would be open to many challenges and abuses.
08/12/2009 11:48 am
"...upon your return, would you expect the people you chose to sublet to to get some sort of priority on local lists as you'll be making them homeless?... "
It could work exactly as private subletting works. It's a term contract and at the end of it you are not making anyone homeless. The same applies when you have a lodger and their contract expires, you are not making the lodger homeless because s/he knew the terms of the contract. These people needed a place to stay before they were taken in and they still need a place to stay when they have to leave. As a subletter you have just given them time in between for them to do or sort out any interime need they might have if they wish to do so.
08/12/2009 2:13 pm
Kass, it's not a terrible idea but what's the point? You're not creating any more homes, just giving tenants more mobility. That's certainly a good thing, but I think your idea would lead to even more bureaucracy.
The landlord would need to agree to the sublet and, ideally, be satisfied that the new tenant was actually in housing need. They would also need to ensure that the rent being charged was not more than the first tenant was paying in the first place. Equally, the tenancy would have to be in a particular format to ensure that the incoming tenant did not have any security of tenure.
Finally, how would the 'moving' tenant get a home in the place that they're moving to? They would be way down the housing list given that they already have a permanent home elsewhere.
08/12/2009 2:40 pm
Tue, 8 Dec 2009 14:13 GMT
It is not complicated at all. The subletting should have nothing to do with people being in waiting housing lists. A subletter chooses her own sublettee as she would choose her own lodger. Each subletter can find their own sublettees, with adverts, etc... This DOES NOT EXCLUDE LA proposing to subletters their own list of potential sublettees. But it is a contract between the subletter and sublettee and not involving legally the social landlord. What I am proposing is not a solution to homelessness. This initiative is aimed at making social homes subletting legal. Yes, one of the benefits would be creating temporary accomodation for a lot of people (not necessarily on housing waiting lists) needing them, the other main benefit would be mobility.
And instead of swapping homes tenants could sublet their homes to each other, so that they could go back to their homes at the end of their contractts or go into a definite swapping homes contract, etc.
It's about giving social tenants more choices with their homes. If needing to move somewhere else in the rest of the country for job, sudy or other SERIOUS intent, might mean losing her home the social tenant is likely not to do so and she would lose a massing amount of opportunitities.
A law (emendament to the housing act, etc) should be changed/introuced to allow subletting whitin some acceptbale boundaries. All Social landlords have to do is to create procdures to make it as simpler and foul proof as possible. Having subletting as a breach of tenancy as it is now and trying to catch subletters, and all the rest is surely more expensive and community destroying than any of this would require.
As I said anyone would benefit from this.
08/12/2009 2:56 pm
How does the tenant know that the incoming tenant is a social tenant and not just someone taking advantage of a cheap rent?
08/12/2009 3:57 pm
Tue, 8 Dec 2009 14:56 GMT
Maybe sublettees have to be benefit and they would show proof of this.
On the other hand, the scheme can allow that the subletter can sublet to anyone she wishes, whether they are on benefit or just someone looking for a temporary cheap accomodation.
This would greatly being down rents in the private sector too, so I am sure private landlords would not like social subletting made available to the market.
Well, the scheme has to be sorted out in detail. I have not worked everything in detail here.
All I am saying this would be a sound progressive initiative, with enormous advantages for all, which would be much better than paying £500 to neighbours to shop subletters.
08/12/2009 4:13 pm
Sorry, Kass, but social housing is for poor people, not any old person who fancies a cheap house. For someone so concerned about protecting tenants' rents and the integrity of social housing, it seems perverse to allow profiteering amongst individuals.
08/12/2009 4:20 pm
Tue, 8 Dec 2009 16:13 GMT
I made it very clear that it is not up to me to work out the details of any such scheme, I gave different possibilities as examples as you did not seem to have a clue how it could work, and you pick one example up and start talking about perversity... Now How perverse is that?... It's obvious you are against this scheme, not interested to see it work, and set about finding the first fault you can see to condemn it. Well, how perverse is that?
08/12/2009 4:34 pm
Kass, I have a clue how it could work: not at all.
Of course I'm against it. I'm also against attaching feather to my arms using wax and trying to fly to the sun.
08/12/2009 5:34 pm
And of course it's NOT thanks to people with your attitude that from feathers and wax of those dreamers and pioneers now we got airlines taking people all over the world.
08/12/2009 6:19 pm
Icarus is a myth.....oh, never mind.
Yes, I'm sure Mr Boeing said "it's not up to me to think through the details"
08/12/2009 10:29 pm
And of course it's NOT thanks to people with your attitude that from feathers and wax of those dreamers and pioneers now we got airlines taking people all over the world.................
Kass I hate to throw a spanner in the works however, who would be responsible it the tenant that you sublet to destroys your home and was unable to fix due to no financial resources. Would you as the original tenant have to foot the bill, and could you afford the costs. There is an old proverb "you cant get blood out of a stone" have you the financial resouces to sue and what would be your chance of winning.
Your scheme requires a little more detail and a risk assessment on all the ramifications. Marks 2/10 can do better.
08/12/2009 11:43 pm
"Kass I hate to throw a spanner in the works however, who would be responsible it the tenant that you sublet to destroys your home and was unable to fix due to no financial resources. Would you as the original tenant have to foot the bill, and could you afford the costs. There is an old proverb "you cant get blood out of a stone" have you the financial resouces to sue and what would be your chance of winning."
What a lot of tosh... what is a lodger does all you say? What's the difference?
And what if this happens with private subletting is it not the same?
I would say 0/10 for not being able to see beyond your nose.
09/12/2009 8:57 am
Kass, the point of posting on a forum is surely to get a dialogue going, a debate? Therefore if people make points that you might not agree with, occasionally you might want to take the points on board, maybe just a little bit?
If you're going to fly to your own defence over every point, and you must acknowledge some of them have some relevance, then it only damages your position.
09/12/2009 9:45 am
..."Your scheme requires a little more detail and a risk assessment on all the ramifications. Marks 2/10 can do better."...
No one is damaging my position, what you are damaging is social housing if good ideas are not pushed forward.
Coming up with this idea about subletting I made it very clear in the thread that I do not have details, I made very clear that it might work on some instances, and really I made very clear this is worthwhile principle...
That housing professionals and others expect me to give the full and each detail and to sort out all the complexities of how this scheme would work and to serve it them on plate so they have all their questions answered and attacking me if they don't, it's not debate, it's plain idiocy.
These same professionals forget that all sorfts of schemes are presented by their highly paid professional colleagues working years and years on them and still come up with schemes and iniatives that make no sense. Well, I have not been working years on this idea, it just occurred to me.
It's an idea I have offered, if you like it YOU can make it work, you find the solutions and improvement to make it work and post them here.
09/12/2009 9:57 am
Sorry to get all "Dragon's Den" on you, but it appears no one likes it, therefore no one is going to make it work, and for those reasons, I'm out.
09/12/2009 10:22 am
"Wed, 9 Dec 2009 09:57 GMT
Sorry to get all "Dragon's Den" on you, but it appears no one likes it, therefore no one is going to make it work, and for those reasons, I'm out."
Well, who invited you in?
09/12/2009 10:28 am
I think you should listen to Harry, Kass. You seem to have an uncanny knack of antagonising members on this forum with your comments. If you continue, people will just see you as a thorn in their side rather than being someone who is interested in debate.
09/12/2009 10:36 am
Well, I am not interested in debate which is not aimed at making the tenants lot better.