![\"\"](\"https:\/\/dev.withcreative.co.uk\/lforl\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/11\/shutterstock_376474198-1024x1024.jpg\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
Councils and private landlords could, and should, work together. That\u2019s a bold statement, we know, and one that might seem to be nigh-on impossible given this week\u2019s news story about Havering Borough Council.<\/p>\n
If you\u2019ve missed it, here\u2019s a summary:<\/p>\n
\u00a0A private landlord let a property on a 12-month tenancy to a woman who was in receipt of housing benefit. Rent arrears began to accumulate and the landlord served notice that the tenant should leave at the end of the year. The tenant moved out on the agreed date but, the following day, the tenant asked the letting agent for keys to the property because the council had said she should have waited until she was evicted. Apparently, the council advised that if the agent would not give her access, she should get a locksmith and move back in anyway. <\/em><\/p>\n That is what seems to have happened, and the landlord, still with \u00a32,000 of arrears, has now to wait for and pay the costs of an eviction. The council has claimed the woman made herself voluntarily homeless by moving out at the end of her tenancy and that therefore, they had no need to rehouse her. Eviction would, of course, change that situation.<\/p>\n This, folks, is what we\u2019re up against.<\/p>\n People need houses and landlords need tenants \u2013 it should work, but it won\u2019t while councils pull tricks like this one. Effectively, by encouraging the former tenant to reoccupy the property, they\u2019ve appropriated the landlord\u2019s property and deprived him of the chance to earn legitimate income from it. The council, meanwhile, claims that the tenant had the \u2018legal right\u2019 to break back into the property. It\u2019s a mess, with both sides adamant that they\u2019re in the right.<\/p>\n Unfortunately, this isn\u2019t the only incidence of councils stretching the boundaries of acceptable behaviour. Letting agents often charge a fee for a simple reference relating to a departing tenant. Some argue that these fees are excessive for ticking a few yes\/no boxes, but some councils routinely charge double, or even triple, the amounts agents levy.\u00a0 Sheffield Council\u2019s fee is \u00a360 plus VAT.\u00a0 Hull charges a whopping \u00a372.<\/p>\n This is a broken system, and we could spend hours, days and weeks debating the reasons we have come to a situation like this, but what we really need to know is how we solve the problem. And we do know it can be solved. Some councils have very good relationships with landlords in the private sector. What\u2019s more, many landlords benefit from arrangements where housing benefits can be paid directly to them should a tenant get into arrears, protection they wouldn\u2019t otherwise enjoy.<\/p>\n But, reading stories like this one, who can blame landlords who won\u2019t even contemplate letting to tenants on benefits. Councils should realise that their actions have consequences. They might think they\u2019re working in the best interests of the individual tenant, but practical and sensible arrangements with private landlords can \u2013 and should \u2013 form part of the overall housing equation.<\/p>\n