DSS why are all your properties stopping DSS renters?

The rents are set by the condition of the property and by the local average rent of similar rental types.

If this is above the benefit cap, then why is this a Landlords fault?

It’s not all profit, there are many escalating costs that landlords have to shell out on. Many have mortgages to pay on said property. Are they meant to be out of pocket for housing someone?

Why don’t you blame the DSS for not setting the benefit cap higher?

Or start looking at cheaper properties that do not exceed the benefit cap?

They are out there as my adult child is trying desperately to find somewhere right now.


The reason your tenants on Pip have housing benefit that covers your monthly rent is due to people who receive Pip for disabilities makes them excempt from the housing benefit cap meaning housing benefit will cover all rent at their descretion.

Hello,C,I sent you a reply but I don’t know if this one will show first not very technical apologies.l would love for you to read thread for Amy who is on here landlord relating to DSS and people who want housing.I am in receipt of PIP like the one or two tenants you mentioned and beg you to see it from a tenants view.We the tenants have the same fears as landlords as your goodself,I’m so scared of going private because of the horror stories about landlords.I have two disabled grandchildren who I have to move soon to be closer to their new college in September and even though I’m top priority for a house I still haven’t been able to get one due to supply and demand so housing officer advised to look privately,this scares me ,what will I do if the landlord wants to give notice in a year or not fix things,if I end up homeless I don’t know what I would do ,also I’d be disqualified from the housing list too if I go private.I just want a forever home for my two disabled grandchildren.I hear landlords ranting on about the risks involved such as not being able to pay their mortgage,well they are in a good position to get one in the first place and it grinds me to hear them complain about the very people they target to pay for a house for them.Im a grandmother who has always paid my rent be it through work or as now full-time carer on universal credit and Pip .What I’m trying to get across is it goes both ways and people on DSS get a undeserved bad rap.

You are targeting the wrong people with your vitriol.

I suggest you take your campaigning to the council, and ask them why they don’t protect landlords with direct rent payments, after all that’s what your benefits are intended for.


chris 35 Absolutely right. But the Local council will never do that . They prefer the stick to the carrot. Direct payments can be stopped by the Tenant at a whim . no matter what a future tenant says . That is why I avoid benefits tenants apart from the 2 great ones I already have. You cannot trust the Local Authority , their staff will LIE to you


Chris,sorry if I came across vitriol,no intentions of upsetting anyone.I agree the housing benefit office should make all rental payments directly to landlords ,any tenant who wants to pay through their own accounts is setting up for trouble and shouldn’t be considered,stir clear of them.I wouldn’t dream of holding housing benefit money in my account it’s not mine it’s the landlords.Once again sorry.


Hi Tonia the thing is L/A never listen to landlords They have their own agenda and cannot be moved. Sefton council in liverpool used to have regular landlords meetings But the drivel they came out with!!.. I was very vocal… " do any of you actually rent out properties ???" so were other landlords You get nowhere … Big surprise ,after a year they stopped the meetings !!


I agree Chris,why on earth would council put hundreds of pounds into a tenants account to pay a private landlord , they already know the tenant is in financial need ,you wouldn’t put roast chicken on a poor persons table then tell them not to eat it.As landlords have you considered getting enough signitures together to present to parliament asking them to give you the right to receive housing benefit directly from council?100.000 signitures I believe you need.

Typical! When their policies and practices are indefensible, they retreat behind closed doors.

1 Like

Anne_Marie is right about the government wanting to stop people discriminating against DSS but sadly their proposed actions are likely to result in more not less discrimination and here is a summary of the reasons.

  1. There is not enough housing either in existence or being built. A lot of problems would be solved by increasing the housing supply both let and owner occupied. Housing is expensive and requires investment. Since 1980 both Conservative and Labour governments have sold off social housing to the tune of 1.5m dwellings (source Shelter). This is the opposite of investment; it is disinvestment and cash raising. When these dwellings end up in private hands they have fewer occupants. To boot social dwellings are precious. Once people get them they stay in them and some use the tenure rights to bring in younger relatives at some point so that the tenure in a family becomes perpetual. So the supply of social housing is even less than it appears.
  2. The social housing shortage has to some degree been taken up by LAs subcontracting to the private sector. In 1988 (Conservative) the law changed enabling private landlords to evict with no fault and this spawned the growth of buy to let landlords backed by loans. So to some extent the pressure from the social housing sector was absorbed by the private sector. The buy to let sector was treated as a business and as such the interest on the loans was relievable against tax.
  3. The Conservatives (again) reversed this policy and announced the phasing out of this relief in 2015 over a 4 year period. This made letting with mortgage backing uneconomic for many and resulted in a fall of private sector let property. It was not instant; partly because of the phasing and partly as it is a momentous decision to stop being in business. (Some 60 pc of landlords let just one property). One catalyst for selling is where there has been a nightmare tenant usually described in terms of either antisocial behaviour or arrears or both. It is the last straw for many landlords who sell as a result. The buyers are mortgage eligible people on steady incomes and typically this again results in fewer occupants per dwelling exarcerbating the housing crisis particularly for DSS tenants.
  4. Of course governments never blame themselves for such problems. Tenants are not at fault and someone has to be blamed. Pressure groups supporting tenants typically left wing come to the rescue with anti landlord rhetoric. The government (and Labour are no different) latch on to this scapegoating. The idea that is likely to become law is that the same principles of tenure will apply to the private sector as to social housing - essentially making it very difficult to evict even when eviction is highly appropriate.
  5. This will and already is as landlords are expecting it to happen result in less available property; less investment in property; more choosy landlords and higher prices.
  6. The above analysis is a bit of an over- simplification but basically holds true. It is a complicated matter and sadly the housing crisis is getting worse. The starting point should be to encourage investment. It is not going to come from government so the government should try to encourage it from the private sector. Chopping and changing the law unfortunately has a negative effect as does making it harder for landlords. Government should ask itself what makes someone with capital invest in one asset over another? Answering that qustion would lead to a very different policy.

As a LL I feel for DSS There are two sides to every story. I had a tenant who hung on to the bitter end owing £1000 and left a mountain of dog ‘do’ and filth and another threaten to re- arrange my face! The few wreck it for the many!


Yes, like everywhere, unfortunately. Many good landlords suffer from a bad reputation because of a few rogue landlords. Many honest tenants are rejected because a few don’t pay their rent and destroy their flats. Many politicians actually try to do what they think is best for the people, but everyone only talks about those politicians who only think about their own profit.


Mortgage interest can still be offset against profit up to the basic 20% rate level.

Completely agree, but we’re talking about politicians here, who are far more interested in the sympathy for tenants vote than a common sense business approach.

I am a conscientious landlord, and completely agree with the safety legislation, apart from that the government have gone overboard, and the tenant bias by the courts and the deposit holding companies is abhorrent. A 5 year total loss in terms of wear and tear is ridiculous, that’s a typical refurb timeline for hotels, not residences, and should not override damage.

Also the criminalising of fee charges is outrageous, it’s a 2-way contract, and tenants should pay their share. They want accommodation as much as, if not more so than we want tenants in occupation, and should prove their suitability, as with other businesses e.g. mortgage / loan applications wherein they pay an application fee.
Finally a 5-week bond limit is derisory, and can easily be recouped by non-payment of rent, since eviction takes far longer than that.


I agree with you. I had one DSS tenant left me with massive £2188 bill. Every time I wanted to inspect the property her kids we unwell. Some appliances were in warranty and were showing error codes she continued to use them.
On discussion to deduct deposit she started threatening me. I worked hard to get this property and its absolutely unbelievable in condition she left. When she wanted the property she was showing pic of her kid and when were talking about deduction she said the house was filthy. Now mydeposit is saying I need Statutory declaration to get the deposit back. I need to spend more money to get partial money back.
So everything is in favour of the tenant. I like to maintain my property to high standard as I would like to Live. When you give to tenant and they make mess hide repairs its just not acceptable.
Government reduction in rebate to 20% is more difficult and it lead me to pay from my pocket.

1 Like

the 20 pc tax credit only neutralises the position if your total income including rental before interest is within the basic tax rate band. For someone who has a high debt ok a valuable asset it can turn a positive income into a cash bleed. So the impact depends on your personal circumstances. Even very small landlords can be impacted by this if they receive income from other sources e.g a pension.

As you and others have pointed out there are other body blow dealt.

if this had been your initial post you might’ve gotten better answers - but in your frustration you made multiple untrue statements and that’s the first thing people see and this genuine question is buried.

“Im on universal credit and they kindly pay my rent off £500 now i looked on open rent just to see who accepts DSS each and every one of the adds state No DSS but if you click on the X a box comes up stating the rent is not covered by the local benefits, so i found an add for a single room in a house share at £450 per month literally round the corner from me, and that little box popped up saying that this amount will not be covered by the benifits department. How dose this make sense, they pay mine at 500 but not cover 450 for a room. I feel its been put there by open rent and not the local benifit dept, we as dss people who are decent law abiding citizen’s are slamed by this”

If someone knows more about DSS - maybe they don’t cover as much for house shares?

I suspect the answer is that tenants are allowed to set that setting themselves and this landlord falsely believes it’s a true statement - and, yes, you can use those screenshots and potentially take action.

Of course the first and most reasonable action is to contact the landlord and explain how much you’re receiving and letting them know that is wrong.

I imagine you wouldn’t want action taken on you for an honest mistake. It’s fair to offer the same to the landlord.