Thursday, 09 February 2012

What is the difference between a Secure and Assured Tenancy

Posted in: Need to Know | Ask the Experts

21/07/2010 4:47 pm

reuben8

reuben8

Location: Coalition Britain
Posts: 2

I live in social housing - the house was council up until 2003, it is now a Housing Trust. I had a secure tenancy (I've lived in the house since 1982) now I have an Assured tenancy. What is the difference and do I retain all my rights?

Further, as I live in a street property I am asked to pay deinfestation, a caretaker and this year an amount for 'management fees', is this right?The street properties are being refurbished (EU funding) but the language being used by the Trust has changed - twice lately I have been reminded that I do not own the property when I have asked that a shower I paid to install is kept - is this right

Sorry I realise there are three separate issues but I really do see a difference in the way I am being treated since the Trust (Tenant led) took over.

Unsuitable or offensive? Report this discussion

Post a reply

Sort: Newest first | Oldest first

Author

Message

Winston Smith

Winston Smith

Posts: 16

22/07/2010 1:54 pm

Hi Reuben

I am not a legal expert, but I would of thought that if your Council home was taken by Housing Trust you would have retained your Secure Tenancy, and not Assured Tenancy.

One way to ascertain this is to check whether you are covered by the "Fair Rent Act"  (which was abolished by the Tories in the late eighties).

ie: do you have your rent assessed annually by a Fair Rent Officer at your Local Authority?

There are limited differences between Secure  and Assured Tenancy though, other than your housing trust can charge "market Rents" for your home therefore, much higher rents than when covered by the Fair Rent Act.

Hope this is helpful

Kindest regards

Roger P Murphy

Unsuitable or offensive? Report this reply

Kev Dupree

Kev Dupree

Posts: 25

29/07/2010 4:00 pm

Hi reuben,

As roger says i would be surprissed that if you had a secure tenancy before the take over, why you would now have an assured tenancy? It may be worth querrying this with your landlord as secure tenancies have slightly more rights.

The main ones being assured tenants do not have the right to buy, but instead have the right to acquire (this may not be important due to the length of time you have been in the property) Right to aquire is not as attractive as the discounts offered as less than those for RTB.

There are also some more suitable differences, succession for example. An assured tenant can only be succeeded by their spouse whereas a secure tenant can be secured by any member of the family (as long as they have lived with them for a year)

Assured tenants also have less rights in relation to lodgers and a few other minor issues.

In general a secure tenancy would be preferable from a tenant's point of view as it offers more rights.

I'm unsure about your "service" charge issues, hopefully someone else can help you with this aspect.

Unsuitable or offensive? Report this reply

kass

kass

Posts: 629

30/07/2010 2:24 pm

A good aspect of secure tenancy is that the landlord can only put up the rent every 2 years, instead for assured tenancy I am told it is every year.

Looks like secure tenacies have been stopped and assured tenancies borught in to rip off tenants increasing the rent every year.

Tenants sould campaign to bring back secure tenancies, at least for tenants who have been living in the same property for some time.

It is unaccceptable that even residents living 30 40 years and more in the same property should not be secure tenants.

I think every tenants who has lived in the same property for at least 4 years shouold be automatically made secure tenant.

Unsuitable or offensive? Report this reply

Expert post

Abimbola Badejo

Abimbola Badejo

Posts: 94

02/08/2010 3:49 pm

The Housing Act 1985 makes clear that for a tenancy to remain a secure tenancy, the landlord and tenant condition must be satisfied. The landlord condition is that the landlord must be a one of the prescribed public sector bodies. Once the landlord ceases to be such a body such as when the ownership of the property changes from a local authority to a housing association, the tenancy ceases to be a secure tenancy and becomes an assured tenancy.
I have experience of the housing transfer process which is is known as a stock transfer. For a stock transfer to go ahead, the secretary of  state must approve the transfer. The secretary of state will not approve the transfer unless satisfied that in effect the majority of secure tenants who vote are in favour of the transfer. In order to get a positive ballot, what normally happens is that the incoming landlord makes certain promises to the existing secure tenants. The most significant promise is that so far as possible, the existing council tenants are to retain most of their rights after the transfer to the new housing association landlord. For example council tenancies have a right to buy their property. Assured tenants do not. However in the new tenancy agreement to the new assured tenants following the transfer, the right to buy is preserved. Council tenants also have a right to pass their tenancy on during their lifetime but assured tenants do not. This right is preserved in the new tenancy agreement given to  former secure tenants when they become assured tenants. Other matters such as repairing obligations, remain the same irrespective of whether the landlord is a local authority or a housing association.
So you are in law an assured tenant and you need to check your tenancy agreement to ensure that your landlord is allowed to levy the charges you have mentioned. I suspect that the tenancy agreement will allow them to impose such charges. Most of those tenancy agreements tend to provide that the landlord will consult with tenants before introducing new charges so check  your tenancy agreement to see what it says on this issue. In respect of your shower, I suspect that the association are carrying out decent homes works which involves refurbishing bathroom and kitchens. I am sure that some landlords have a policy that they will not force tenants to have new baths or showers where tenants do not want one unless there are health and safety reasons why the bathroom needs to be changed. So please raise that with your landlord.

Unsuitable or offensive? Report this reply

Rate this topic

  • 1 star out of 5
  • 2 stars out of 5
  • 3 stars out of 5
  • 4 stars out of 5
  • 5 stars out of 5

You must be signed in to rate.

Post a Reply

You must sign in to rate this topic or make a post

sign in register

Why not register?

Registration allows you to sign up for newsletters, comment on articles, add posts in the forums, quiz our panel of experts, and save articles and jobs in the My IH section.

Register now

Newsletter Sign-up

More Newsletters

Most active members

People are discussing

tags Accountability, advice, affordable housing, Allocations, antisocial tenant, arrears, Best Practice, care and support, careers, comment, council, council housing, councils, discrimination, discussion, eviction, HA renting, help, homelessness prevention, Housing, housing association, housing associations, housing policy, rent, urgent

Most discussed

Most recent posts

  • From F451, 09/02/2012 7:04 pm in Benefit levels

    Yes nonny - clothing is not essential either - indeed without clothing who needs wardrobes. The savings are endless.

  • From Nigel Rogers, 09/02/2012 6:48 pm in am i homeless

    Assuming your daughter isn't an adult  and that she is staying with you permanently, you most certainly should be accepted as a homeless family.I am intrigued as to why any Housing Options Team should take a different view.

  • From Sam van Deventer, 09/02/2012 1:49 pm in Information on damp

    Well Stevie, the problem here is that the symptomns of damp and condensation is identical and some times exacerbated by the fact that in some cases strucutural damp creates perfect conditions for condensation to excell in.  So for the untrained eye distinguishing between the two is impossible most of the times.  Excessive condensation can in many case still by classified as a building defect if the right preventative measure have not been taken when carrying out improvements to a building.  However life style choices does also play a big role in excessive moisture in homes

  • From F451, 08/02/2012 3:21 pm in Problem tenants

    Here here mrkfm

  • From keepingitreal, 06/02/2012 9:04 pm in Static rent arrears

    I'm no expert but I would treat these arrears as any other debt would be treated. Social Landlords could take good practice from the private sector when it comes to debt collection, and be proactive rather than reactive. For example, I once got two credit card bill mixed up and paid the wrong bill, just two days later the bank were on the phone asking me not, could I pay, but when I was going to pay and how much I was going to pay. I am certain that if this sort of approach were taken towards arrears, tenants ...

  • From Laurence Nasskau, 06/02/2012 5:53 pm in Mutual excahnge and new tenancies

    Of course the changes will have an impact on Mutual Exchanges. Most of the posts here refer to security of tenure although Paul's question was about mutual exchanges.  I am redrafting our Mutual Exchange Policy and asking our Exec to consider the impact that affordable rents will have - i.e.  If you have a social rent and exchange into an affordable rent tenancy, you take on that tenancy including its rent.

  • From Spellbinder , 01/02/2012 4:19 pm in under occupy

    If you mean are you breaching your tenancy by underoccupying, then the answer is no. 

  • From David Blythen, 30/01/2012 8:33 pm in Should separate Communal areas have separate electricity meters?

    @Will Nixon,

  • From Eddie Blaze, 30/01/2012 10:24 am in Advice about change of use

    Thanks for your response. 

  • posted Anonymously, 28/01/2012 8:00 pm in Being forced into private rented accomodation

    Sounds like you have gotten some very poor advice from the LA. When you went to court ( I take it you were on a Assured Shorthold tenancy or a licence?) did you mention that the LA had told you to stay put until the landlord evicted you? Unfortunately you are in the world of temp accommodation, where the local housing allowance is king. It might be the council is paying the max permitted for that property £900 and the new couple are covering the shortfall? As for the Housing Officer leaving....housing has massive turn over of staff, the ...