This topic was closed on 11 March 2019. If you have a problem which is similar to the issues raised in this topic, then please start a new thread and you will get help and support there. If you would like to post up some information which is relevant to this particular topic then please flag the issue up to the site team and the thread will be reopened. - Consumer Action Group

Hi, Hi, Currently rent a two-bedroom flat for £612 per month. The property is with a registered social landlord under their intermediate rent scheme/homebuy. 20% cheaper market rents to help people who want to save for a mortgage in the future. The property I occupy is not for sale so I have made no committment to buy it nor did they do any checks to actually ensure I am saving for a mortgage. However, my worry is I am probably going to loose my job in the New Year, well its highly likely. I'm worried that I am going to be homeless as the RSL will serve notice on me. I'm on an AST, does anyone know if the rules are different because its an intermediate rent property - could they say I no longer meet the criteria? which hardly seems, fair, you would think it makes more sense to keep a good tenant, let him claim housing benefit for a couple of months whilst he tries and get himself back on his feet. Then saying that as I an under occupying they probably wouldnt pay full HB anyway so I would probably have a shortfall. Any advice on this type of thing is greatly appreciated.

Hi all, I'm a bit confused about my credit report. I asked for my credit score from experian in April 2010 and it came back as 700. At he beginning on July a CCJ reached six years and has dissappeared. I then asked for my credit score again and it came back as 670, which is worse than before. I have a notice of correction on a search whilst they look in to it and I am slightly over my credit limit on two accounts, which will rectify itself when they update the credit report this month. Other than that, all my accounts are paid on time all the time. Any idea, what's going on? why is my credit report worse than before and when will it correct itself? even though those two accounts are now in order will it be something like 12 months before the credit score improves? confused.com :-?

Hi all, I am hopin you can either give me some advice or point me in the right direction. I am trying to help my mother sort out her debts. She owes lloyds Bank £3542 from a loan she took out in 1996. (I think she only borrowed around £1500 to start with but interest has been accruing for years as she went through a period of not paying it at all). Anyway, about a year ago she gave in to their harrassment and started paying them £5.00 a month. She has maintained the agreement for over a year but now they have said she has been on the scheme for the maximum time, interest is restarting and they want £100 per month. In a nut shell, she is on a low income and living hand to mouth after essential bills are paid. She cannot pay what is being asked of her. If they carried on suspending interest she would be able to up the payments to about £15.00 per month but they are having non of it. Where does she stand? - he only option is to tell them to go and sing for the money and wait 6 years for it to become statute barred and come off her credit report. Which may be the best option as (1) she cant afford to repay it and (2) her minimum payments will probably need to be continued until the day she dies, with money still being owed. Anything you can advise would be helpful. Cheers

Thanks guys, the letters have been sent off recorded delivery today (from my mother) so there should be no problems with them replying. I will let you know when I get a response.

Hi, I am trying to help my mother sort out her financial problems. She has been unwell and had burried her head in the sand for a long time. She is receiving mountains of letters from these three companies about different debts. I have checked her credit report and none of them are listed, she recalls having various credit cards and things up to 10 years ago, but certainly not within the last 6 years. I have emailed the three companies explaining the distress this is causing my mother, she has bags of letters at her home. I have said the debts are all statute barred and they should therefore not be chasing them. I have asked for an apology and confirmation the matter is closed within the next 10 days (wishful thinking!) and I have copied in the enquiries mailbox at the OFT. Any advice you can offer is greatly received.

Does a letting agent have to give you your deposit back within a set time? I moved out of my tenancy two weeks ago and now they are ignoring me. They keep saying they will look in to it and call me back and are not replying to my e-mails. They said in their letter that they would check the inventory when I left and subject to the property being left in a clean condition and there being no damage that it would be transferred by BACS. All I am trying to get them to tell me is when I am 'likely' to get it back, I am not demanding it today albeit it would be nice. It would seem they are not so customer friendly when your not wanting to take on one of their properties.

They have said they will renew the tenancy but want the full six months in advance, which i simply can't afford. I have emailed them and said I wanted to pay monthly and would be willing to pay 1 month in advance (they already have a deposit and 1 months rent when I first took on the tenancy). Looks like its homelessness for me if i can't find another tenancy who will accept me by the beginning of december. The damn ccj gets deleted next year - thank god!

Hi, I am hoping someone will be able to provide me with some advice on my housing situation. In June 2009 I took on a private tenancy with a letting agent, the tenancy is for 6 Months. Because of my poor credit record (I have a CCJ which expired Jun 2010 but all other bills are paid on time and have been for Years) I had to pay the six months rent in advance. The tenancy ends in December but I would like to extend it, I have kept the property in perfect condition and would have no problems paying the rent but I am presuming that the letting agent will require me to apply again and sign a new tenancy agreement which will include credit checks and the likes of.... I don't have the money to pay six months in advance this time, I could probably stretch to two but do you think this will be a big problem or that I could loose the tenancy? I have nowhere else to go and this is really worrying me, I also don't have anyone who could be a guarantor - my credit record will be fully repaired in June 2010 when I shouldn't have this problem. I presume I will be issued with a section 21 soon as it's near on the 4th month, what should I do? HELP PLEASE

Hi Poochball, did you ever find out which credit reference agency they used? the property I wanted was snapped up before I could apply but another one has come up so going to try.

Its not particularly complex, don't worry - I have ranted on a bit but thats just my irritation with local authorities trying to shun their duties until the person is actually roofless. They have accepted a full duty to you, thats the hard part over - they now need to make you an offer which takes into consideration your needs, support networks etc. You need to be realistic with the offer you receive, they can't give you something they haven't got - they can also assist you find another private sector rental but they cannot discharge their duty to you (as its an assured shorthold tenancy) unless you agree to it. If they offer you temporary accommodation, or you want it - then take it. Don't make any spur of the moment decisions, think things through first. I see so many people refusing offers, which is after all accommodation of last resort, as they don't like them and then they end up with nothing following the review as the council have done everything they are supposed to do. I wish you well, read the code of guidance - all will be explained. Who would have thought you have to go through this just to ensure you know your rights. I am no expert but do work in the field, you always have shelter on your side if you are unsure of anything.

Sorry, forgot to mention. It does not matter that the council have transferred their stock to a housing association - the housing association still accept the duty to re-house you using that stock, the council retains nomination rights on all registered social landlord properties. I.e. you will get re-housed by the housing association.

Here is the homeless code of guidance that all UK councils should be working too - it is effectively the rule book in plain english for housing officers to follow: http://www.communities.gov.uk/documents/housing/pdf/152056.pdf The problem with housing officers, especially is small boroughs is that they are not up to date with current legislation and case law. They tend to make decisions, like, 'you need to stay at the property until evicted' because that is what they have always done it and not been challenged. I would strongly advise you NOT to give notice or surrender the property back to the landlord as the housing officer may try and use some sort of lame intentionallity arguement to shun the councils duties. I would however have an open and frank discussion regarding your options and what the authority propose to do. Explain that they are effectively forcing the landlord to go to court and get a warrant against you, which will force you to leave and leave you incurring costs (around 150 pound) and that decision is unlawful (the aweys case is relatively new so they may not be aware of it, if they don't that is not your issue - all councils have a legal services department they can call on for advice.) The question is why should you pay the court costs when the council have accepted a full S.193 duty to you as a homeless person? by doing so they have accepted you as homeless and put that decision in writting so technically they have also accepted that whilst you may have accommodation, it is not reasonable for you to continue to reside there for one more day (if they thought it was, they would have accepted the lesser S.195 'threatened with homelessness' duty), which you say they have not. In terms of temporary accommodation, councils often harp on that they have limited resources. Irrespective of that, it is a duty of every authority to comply with the law and ensure your legal right to temporary accommodation is honoured. What arrangements are you making for your furniture when the bailiffs come knocking to kick you out? has the housing officer discussed his/her duty to ensure that arrangements are made to protect your belongings? It all seems very lame to me, they may be a small council but they are still obliged to follow the same law as the biggest - they cannot say sod off to Newcastle as we have no properties or force you to stay in a property pending the bailiffs turning up to turf you out - not only is it unlawful but it is plain wrong to treat vulnerable people in this way. Read the code of guidance (above) Chapter 7, Chapter 14 (the difference between being threatened with homeless or accepted as homeless) and Chapter 17 - you will know more than the housing officer by the time you meet them, they should already know it. If they mess you around, know your rights, contact shelter or a solicitor specialising in homelessness/housing/public law: The Law Society - Find a solicitor

Same here, mine was for 2500 - should find out in the week (Fingers crossed )

Have the authority accepted that you are 'homeless' or 'threatened with homelessness'? (you will need to read you letter) If they have accepted that you are 'threatened with homelessness' then they are duty bound to ensure that accommodation does not cease to become available to you. They normally do this by mediating with excluders/landlords, resolving housing benefit issues, looking at income maximisation and discretionary rent payments to get your landlord to agree another term of residence. As you say, your S.21 is yet to expire and the authority have adeqate time to try and resolve the situation, albeit most don't bother and just let the tenancy run its course in the hope that they can secure you an offer of accomodation before you become roofless. If they have accepted you as 'homeless' then they are accepting that it is not reasonable for you to continue to occupy your current accommodation. You may want to stay there but technically you don't have too and they are duty bound to provide you with temporary accommodation NOW until a permanent offer is made. This has been covered in the court of appeal, it also applies to ALL councils - see link here ---> ://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2008/48.html - if the authority force you to stay at the property until an eviction warrant is served you should be warned that you are likely to incur the costs - the council cannot insist on this being done, if they are, they are acting unlawfully as per the above caselaw and I would seek the advice of a local law firm quoting the aweys judgement. I would certainly be clarifying whether the council are going to pay the court costs on your behalf? There is an article on it here :Housed: Adding a Local Authority as a party to costs. I know this doesnt answer how long you will be waiting for an offer but thought you should know. Good luck!