Everday Discrimination

THE DISCRIMINATION WE FACE EVERY DAY

I would like some place bigger to live. I have ASD and dyspraxia and for that reason alone, life is difficult in one room and a bathroom.

Now it isn't really asking for the earth to think that a private landlord, when you are honest enough to disclose, tell them your true situation,
maybe to understand, empathise and help you with renting out what's available.

The housing situation if you are on long-term benefits is not good. The letting agents only want employed persons and the very few that will
take housing benefit applicants will require a guarantor, because of their credit reference check protocol.

What I think makes my situation worse is that my rent is paid directly to any landlord by the council, a discretionary situation and one
which ought to show a landlord that it is guaranteed income for them; I could not default on rent, I never see it.

Here is a sadly all too familiar exchange when I approach a private landlord, enquiring about a small flat to rent; these are copies from emails.

After my first enquiry...

JONATHAN: Apologies for the delay. The property is on Purbeck Road. If you would like to view let me know.

ME: Yes I would please, thank you, town centre is fine.

JONATHAN: Great. When would you like to view? I can do pretty much anytime from tomorrow onwards.

ME: Hello Jonathan. I would like to view tomorrow PM. My rent would be paid directly to you each month (discretion Bournemouth council).
I do work in a shop but part-time. I have very good references. I am single, no children or pets and do not smoke. I have some minor disabilites and have support workers.
I also have funds to pay any deposit and rent in advance to you. I need to move because the studio flat I have is too small for my needs.
If this is acceptable and you are able to show me around the property then please reply.

There is no reply for over a day. I have been through this kind of situation so many times before. Firstly they don't want you because you are not working but worse
still is that they waste time by not stating that in the adverts so when I am honest to give as much details as are appropriate really, you get this typical reaction and behaviour.
It stands out like a sore thumb and I really will call them out on my suspicions; it's their reactions that give themselves away, like this one pretends to have conveniently
missed my email and surprise surprise, accomodation is no longer available.

ME: As expected. My money is as good as anyone's. But mention disability and people don't want to know. Carry on discriminating.

JONATHAN: I'm not sure how but I did not see your last message. There have been so many coming through and work has been increasingly stressful that the flat has been somewhat in the back burner.
I have absolutely no problems with disability, however the insurance company I use for the buildings insurance specifies no benefits absolutely.
However I do have a number of tenants on disability benefits. As if missed your message it is now the case that both flats have been let.
My sincere apologies and I wish you the best going forward.

ME: Sure you do. You couldn't make it up. Except you just did.

Of course. I expect my email got lost in the post. See how he has weaved his way around it, imagining probably that I will not be able to see through it. And watch how his sincerity dissolves in a matter of seconds.

JONATHAN: Wow. Thank god I didn't have to take someone like yourself on as a tenant! Enjoy your hate filled life.

Hate-filled life, er I can't think of anyone I hate but what I dislike intensely are false people and those who are motivated only by money and greed. vis a vis many private landlords. My parting shot was...

ME: And how fortunate to avoid a deceitful and dishonest landlord. There are so many of you out there.

  • Putting an individual at a disadvantage because of something related to a disability is the very definition of discrimination

    It's not related to disability though, many disabled people work, many people who aren't disabled don't work.

    Statistics can only be used to argue for a situation to be defined as discrimination, not against it.

    That's a logical fallacy, they can be used to argue either way, and prove either way depending on the numbers.

    The landlord's insurance is not the tenant's problem.

    You're right, it's not the tenants problem, it's the landlords, it's also the landlords right to conduct their business how they see fit so long as they are within the law, which they are.

    If they are in the housing business then they need to follow the law, just like everyone else. If that means slightly less of a fat profit for them, then so be it.

    They are within the law, there is nothing illegal in refusing to rent to people on benefits, you might think that it should be illegal, but it's not. 

  • Putting an individual at a disadvantage because of something related to a disability is the very definition of discrimination, and that "proportionate means to achieve a legitimate aim" thing does not apply to raw profit.

    Statistics can only be used to argue for a situation to be defined as discrimination, not against it.

    The landlord's insurance is not the tenant's problem.

    It all stems from greed. If they are in the housing business then they need to follow the law, just like everyone else. If that means slightly less of a fat profit for them, then so be it.

  • I think the solution might be not to disclose until closing the deal.

    They still generally need you to pass credit checks, it's part of their non-payment insurance and without it most won't let, even if it means the property being empty for a few more weeks.

    There must be some agency who is willing to fight this kind of injustice on people's behalf.

    From a legal standpoint it's not discrimination, they aren't discriminating against you because of a disability but refusing to conduct a service based on a risk profile because of the source of income. The statistics show that issues with non-payment for people on benefits are an order of magnitude higher than for those in employment, add in the the inability to get non-payment insurance for people on benefits (or sometimes insurers will specify no benefits income full stop due to higher risk of property damage) and you have a solid and legitimate business case for not letting to people on benefits. 

    It might seem unfair but the are private individuals looking to receive a return on their investment, taking into account a level of calculated risk.

  • The problem is brought about because of the majority unfortunately. Landlords can't get non-payment insurance (or have to pay a lot more for it) if someone is on benefits rather than employed. Courts are much quicker to evict people (repossession order) for non-payment who have jobs than people on benefits. I have a friend who is a landlord and they apply these rules to their properties because he's had major issues in the past with people on benefits (and he's disabled himself, he used his injury payment to buy property to give himself a long term income).

    Landlords aren't there to provide a social service, they are providing themselves with an income. It may seem a little harsh but they are looking for a return on their investment, no different to shares in a company (they may even do it through shares in a company), bond yields etc.

  • I agree. I don't even reveal the 'A' word. Just being in receipt of housing benefit is enough. And this isn't some isolated case. I experience it time after time and why I posted it on here to give the problem some air space. I am essentially a fair and honest person but recently said to my probation officer, you know, being honest often doesn't help you at all.

  • I had this exact conversation with someone last week. I think the solution might be not to disclose until closing the deal. Sometimes honesty does not get you anywhere. What exactly does an insurance company care about whather a tenant is on benefits? If they do have a problem, that's discrimination arising from a disability, or indirect discrimination (I get those two mixed up) but they get away with it because nobody ever calls them on it. People are always too desperate trying to find a place to live that they don't have time to be reporting dirty landlords to the authorities.There must be some agency who is willing to fight this kind of injustice on people's behalf.