View Full Version : just wondering

12-04-2010, 18:22 PM
Hi there,
I'm a landlord with a few properties and they have been tenanted for a while with not to many problems, they are housing benefit tenants all with direct payment,
No problem there then.
My pal who has been in India for the last ten months left me to look after his flat with a 17 year old girl with a baby 18 in a few months.
she is in receipt of housing benefit and keeps being late paying as she has to scratch round from her family for the shortfall as she keeps spending some of it.( surprise surprise)
I sent her and her mum down to the benefits office to insist on direct payment but there was no way it was going to happen unless she was declared a druggie or with post natal depression blah blah blah.
the girl says no way as the social would get involved. Fair comment.
We have a guarantor but the ast. finishes in 2 months.
there is a clause in the agreement that says
"the guarantor continues until the tenancy ends and the tenant leaves the property"

Question is, is the guarantor liable after the fixed term ends, and is there anyway to get direct payment to the landlord?

appreciate the help, KP.

12-04-2010, 18:25 PM
Anybody under 18 has no legal liability and even if there is a guarantor it is unlikely that you will be able to enforce it. Anyway you're not the landlord so you can't really do anything.

12-04-2010, 18:38 PM
Thanks Paul,
about what I thought,
surely the benefit section should not be paying her the money though if she has no liability?
and why is the guarantor unenforceable?

13-04-2010, 07:36 AM
and why is the guarantor unenforceable?I suggest that the tenancy agreement was not drafted correctly and has ended up as an AST. It should have been a non-Housing Act Tenancy in the name of the guarantor if you wanted to make the guarantor liable, with the under 18 occupant named as a permitted occupier.