x
By using this website, you agree to our
use of cookies
to enhance your experience.
SEARCH
Search
STAY
CONNECTED!
Sign in
Sign in
New here? Sign up
Feedback
My Account
Feedback
Sign out
×
Make Today's Website as home page
Menu
Estate agent today
News
Features
Guides & Tips
NEW
Trade Directory
Archive
Advertise with us
Letting agent today
News
Features
Guides & Tips
NEW
Trade Directory
Archive
Advertise with us
Landlord today
News
Features
Guides & Tips
NEW
Trade Directory
Archive
Advertise with us
Property Investor today
News
Guides & Tips
NEW
Trade Directory
Archive
Advertise with us
Introducer today
News
Guides & Tips
NEW
Trade Directory
Archive
Advertise with us
Property Jobs Today
Home
Find a Job
Search Recruiters
Recruiters
New
Pete's
Personal Profile
View my company profile
Pete Smith
344
Profile Views
About Me
Send message
View company profile
Follow all comments made
my expertise in the industry
Pete's wall
Pete's
Recent Activity
You're not above the law Alan. If you break the law, you should face the consequences. It's comments like yours that make me think that the decision as to who to let to should be partially taken out of landlords' hands. But again, if you do act like you intend above, hopefully someone will take you to court and use these comments to get compensation.
From:
Pete Smith
16 March 2019 18:21 PM
I'm sorry to hear about your loss Mike Dudley. I would be careful what you say because it may come back to haunt you.
From:
Pete Smith
16 March 2019 18:18 PM
Well if the courts rule on it and you continue to refuse to let to people on housing benefit, you end up committing an offence. It would take a brave tenant but you could be sued. So consider that a business decision, do you want to risk being sued.
From:
Pete Smith
16 March 2019 18:16 PM
There's nothing wrong with refusing to let to someone on affordability. If someone is likely to be unable to pay the rent, then you can refuse. The level of LHA in an area would come into this calculation. However, refusing to let just on the basis they're on housing benefit is clearly indirect discrimination, i.e- it's a blanket rule which adversely affects people because of who they are, be they disabled or single mothers in part time work etc.
From:
Pete Smith
16 March 2019 18:12 PM
They can choose but they cannot break the law. That's what this is all about. People who don't understand this should not be landlords.
From:
Pete Smith
16 March 2019 12:05 PM
Lorem Ipsum dolor sit amet
Viewed From: Breaking News
Today 14:58
Lorem Ipsum dolor sit amet
Viewed From: Video Archieve
Today 14:58
Portal Discussions
Joined Group From: Your Community
Today 14:58
Lorem Ipsum dolor sit amet
Viewed From: Industry View
Today 14:58
Lorem Ipsum dolor sit amet
Viewed From: Industry View
Today 14:58
Lorem Ipsum dolor sit amet
Conversation Comment in: Interior Design
Today 14:58
×
Send a message
Message
×
Write on Wall
Message
×
Send a message
Reply to:
Message
Breaking News
Gove hits back at critics after Renters Reform Bill wins key vote
PropTech tool will help eviction process under Renters Reform Bill changes
More tenants borrowing to fund deposits on next property - claim
Rental market back to normal in Prime Central London says agency
Agents proud of the industry…not so keen on the system
Cheaper to buy than rent in every major British city - Rightmove
Extraordinary 200 amendments to Renters Reform Bill in Commons today
Propertymark not giving up on the Regulation of Property Agents
Foxtons’ internal lettings data shows market returning to normal
New Holiday Lets booking system rivals hotels, says supplier
Pete's Recent Activity
From: Pete Smith
16 March 2019 18:21 PM
From: Pete Smith
16 March 2019 18:18 PM
From: Pete Smith
16 March 2019 18:16 PM
From: Pete Smith
16 March 2019 18:12 PM
From: Pete Smith
16 March 2019 12:05 PM