Is this what people on HAP are doing …? (Illegal)

[Questionsquest]

First poster here signed up to purely ask this so I hope it gets some notice.

I am on the hap trying to find o somewhere for MONTHS. I know the story it’s an effort landlords aren’t bothered I know…

I saw someone sat on a group on Facebook that people that have hap a lot of them add a couple hundred on at the side in cash, this is obvosely without haps permission.

For example hap are funding me €1850 plus I can add on 159€ so I will not be approved or allowed to rent above €2009….. so this is what people are saying is happening, landlords/agencies are coming to agreement with tenant sending off hap papers that the property listed is €1700 for example but the tenant is paying a couple hundred in cash only because of the crisis and they can afford it and want it. I just don’t know how there bringing it up with landlords or agencies it’s illegal!!!!

For my own research I tried it out of course the estate agent just said they need hap to approve the rent.

I really don’t understand…. But this is why I can’t find anywhere

Opinions?

 

[cremeegg]

People boasting about the dodgy things they have done and the clever stunts they have pulled, is a lot more common than people actually doing these things.

Most landlords or agents wouldn't be interested in this, there are too many pitfalls. It is not hard for a landlord to get a tenant, why would they get involved with that type of messing.

As for finding a place, it must be difficult, all I can say is I hope it works out for you.

 

[Simpli]

First poster here signed up to purely ask this so I hope it gets some notice.

I am on the hap trying to find o somewhere for MONTHS. I know the story it’s an effort landlords aren’t bothered I know…

I saw someone sat on a group on Facebook that people that have hap a lot of them add a couple hundred on at the side in cash, this is obvosely without haps permission.

For example hap are funding me €1850 plus I can add on 159€ so I will not be approved or allowed to rent above €2009….. so this is what people are saying is happening, landlords/agencies are coming to agreement with tenant sending off hap papers that the property listed is €1700 for example but the tenant is paying a couple hundred in cash only because of the crisis and they can afford it and want it. I just don’t know how there bringing it up with landlords or agencies it’s illegal!!!!

For my own research I tried it out of course the estate agent just said they need hap to approve the rent.

I really don’t understand…. But this is why I can’t find anywhere

Opinions?

I think you're mistaken. There's nothing illegal / against the rules with taking on a lease which is more than the HAP amount, if you are willing to subsidise / make up the shortfall, assuming i've read and understood your point correctly.

 

[cremeegg]

I think you're mistaken. There's nothing illegal / against the rules with taking on a lease which is more than the HAP amount, if you are willing to subsidise / make up the shortfall, assuming i've read and understood your point correctly.

Are you sure that is correct. My understanding is that it is not allowed.

The tenant's income has been assessed as part of the HAP process, and their contribution to the rent determined. If they then demonstrate an ability to pay extra that would undermine the basis on which they are receiving HAP

 

[Sconeandjam]

This depends if you are on sw or working full time and earning a certain amount.
If you apply for Hap you are assessed on your income.
If you are on social welfare you pay a minimal amount and the council pays the balance. If you have been accepted and your income increases you are then reassessed. If you are at risk of being homeless as the rent is above the allowed the council are allowed up to 30% more than the allowed.

You will pay more if working and the property cost is higher than allowed for your family dynamics you can pay extra directly to the landlord. This often happens if you go from sw to working full time. This is allowed.

 

[Purple]

Are you sure that is correct. My understanding is that it is not allowed.

The tenant's income has been assessed as part of the HAP process, and their contribution to the rent determined. If they then demonstrate an ability to pay extra that would undermine the basis on which they are receiving HAP

from this link;

Additional rent payments and deposits​

If your rent is more than the HAP limits allowed for your household, you must pay the additional amount directly to your landlord. However, your local authority must make sure that your tenancy is sustainable, so you will not get a HAP payment if you can’t afford the rent.

If your landlord needs a deposit, you will have to pay this yourself. The local authority will not pay it for you. In certain circumstances, you may be able to get assistance from the Department of Social Protection to help with paying your deposit. If you are in emergency homeless accommodation, your local authority may help with a deposit.

It is allowed as long as the lease states the full amount. Topping up the rent with a cash payment in addition to the amount stated on the lease is not allowed.

The good news for the tenant is that they can now avail of the rent a room scheme so in addition to the €44,000 a year they don't have to earn to pay the €18,500 a month in rent they can also get a €14,000 a year tax free income by renting a room. That's an additional €28,000 they don't have to earn. So getting HAPS and renting out a room gives the same net income as someone earning €72,000 a year. If your also in receipt of job seekers allowance then someone in a private rented property who can't rent out a room would have to have a gross income of around €96,000 a year to end up with the same net income as you.

OP, look at it this way, the State is paying for a home for you and you just have to top it up by €159 a month. You can then charge someone €1166 a month to live in your spare room. You can make a €1000 a month profit. You'll have all the rights of a tenant and the schmuck living in your box room will have none.

 

[DannyBoyD]

Tenants were always allowed to avail of rent-a-room tax relief.

And anyone who is a guest never acquires tenancy rights; neither do they have the tenants responsibilities. That doesn't make them a fool.

I'm open to correction, but I understood that HAP approval is based on appropriate sized property for the claimant?

 

[Purple]

Tenants were always allowed to avail of rent-a-room tax relief.

True.

And anyone who is a guest never acquires tenancy rights; neither do they have the tenants responsibilities. That doesn't make them a fool.

It kind of does if they have a higher income than their landlord and so don't get a (almost) free house from the State. They work hard and have a good income and as a result have a much lower disposable income and no home of their own. What would you call them?

I'm open to correction, but I understood that HAP approval is based on appropriate sized property for the claimant?

Yes, based on each child having their own bedroom and how many children were in the household at the time the application was approved. Children sharing a room seems to some gross violation of their human rights, unless their parents are actually paying their own way.
If someone is having their rent paid from money taken from their neighbours in the form of taxes (HAPS) then any rent a room income should be deducted from their HAPS payment.

Then again, the State might buy the house for them (again using their neighbours money) and then they can just rent the room out without receiving HAPS.

 

[DannyBoyD]

They work hard and have a good income and as a result have a much lower disposable income and no home of their own. What would you call them?

I would call them people who "work hard and have a good income"; I would not insult them.

 

[Purple]

I would call them people who "work hard and have a good income"; I would not insult them.

Using their taxes to give a house that they can't afford to someone who earns far less so that they can then rent a room in the house they are paying for is insulting them enough.

Allowing their landlord to not pay any tax in the rent they receive is really rubbing it in.

 

[DannyBoyD]

Using their taxes to give a house that they can't afford to someone who earns far less so that they can then rent a room in the house they are paying for is insulting them enough.

I've no idea what this means

Allowing their landlord to not pay any tax in the rent they receive is really rubbing it in.

Property owners pay tax on the rent they receive, be that HAP or not.

Tenants have always been able to claim rent-a-room tax relief; are you proposing that this should be removed?

 

[Purple]

I've no idea what this means

I think that's the problem.

Property owners pay tax on the rent they receive, be that HAP or not.

Not if they are renting a room under the tax exempt scheme.

Tenants have always been able to claim rent-a-room tax relief; are you proposing that this should be removed?

I'm proposing that income from the rent a room scheme be deducted from any HAPS payment the householder receives. They should not be able to gain a substantial tax free income from an asset that they are being given the use of by the State at no cost to them, or a very low cost to them.

I'm pointing out that someone on an income high enough to not qualify for HAPS can find themselves renting a room in a house that their taxes are paying for, from a person with a much lower earned income but who, due to very generous social transfers, enjoys a far higher quality of life and will have a far higher disposable income.

I'm offering my opinion that such an arrangement is fundamentally unfair and unjust.

My apologies if that is unclear, it seems that my grasp of the English language is not what it could be.

 

[DannyBoyD]

Not if they are renting a room under the tax exempt scheme.

Property owner renting out a property they own, registered with RTB etc., pay tax on that rental income, regardless of HAP tenants or not. But I think you understood that.

I'm proposing that income from the rent a room scheme be deducted from any HAPS payment the householder receives. They should not be able to gain a substantial tax free income from an asset that they are being given the use of by the State at no cost to them, or a very low cost to them.

This would place HAP claimants on a different tax regime to any other tax payer. I don't think that's feasible. Would you have the same restriction on those who rent social housing? That is also provided at considerable expense to the State.

I'm pointing out that someone....can find themselves renting a room...from a person with a much lower earned income ...

Indeed - but the remainder of your suppositions about higher quality of life and disposable income are just that.

Question is - what are the numbers on this?

How many HAP claimants have spare space to rent out a room?

Would I be correct in saying that the majority have one or more dependent children? In my experience most parents spend the overwhelming majority of their income on their children.

I'm not sure I begrudge the additional family income if they are prepared to accept the inconvenience of having a stranger in their home. Plus the fact that there is one more person with a roof over their head.

 

[Purple]

Property owner renting out a property they own, registered with RTB etc., pay tax on that rental income, regardless of HAP tenants or not. But I think you understood that.

And anyone who rents a room under the rent a room scheme does not pay tax on that income. But I'm sure you understood that.

This would place HAP claimants on a different tax regime to any other tax payer. I don't think that's feasible.

Why is it not feasible?

Would you have the same restriction on those who rent social housing?

Yes.

That is also provided at considerable expense to the State.

Increasing the State's tax revenue would result in considerable net expense to the State? Is the State sector really that inefficient?

Indeed - but the remainder of your suppositions about higher quality of life and disposable income are just that.

Or mathematics, if you choose to apply logic and reason.

Question is - what are the numbers on this?

I don't know. Do you?

How many HAP claimants have spare space to rent out a room?

In 2018 there were 10,000 Council owned social houses in Dublin that were under occupied. With the additional HAPS homes included it's reasonable to suppose that the figure is far higher nationally. At what number does it start to matter?

Would I be correct in saying that the majority have one or more dependent children? In my experience most parents spend the overwhelming majority of their income on their children.

In my experience most parents spend the majority of their income on their housing. You must be thinking of the parents who get a free house from their neighbours. That's kind of the point here.

I'm not sure I begrudge the additional family income if they are prepared to accept the inconvenience of having a stranger in their home. Plus the fact that there is one more person with a roof over their head.

I don't begrudge it either but I do think it's wrong that people with a higher income end up with a significantly lower net income after income taxes and housing costs than people on low incomes who are in receipt of large social transfers from their neighbours. I think it disincentives work and damages the social contract.

 

[cremeegg]

I think the issue here is that DannyBoy doesn't understand that what Purple is saying is reality, because it seems so far fetched. I'll make it much less PC:

A dole monkey who is gaming the system to get HAP despite working for cash on the side and who lives with his girlfriend 5 nights a week can rent out a spare room in the free gaff they are getting HAP for, and earn up to 14,400 tax free from renting out that room. They do not have to register with the RTB to do this.

The person they rent the room to, has no rights like an ordinary tenant, and may be a hard working middle income earner, in his 30's. He would have to be earning 90-100k, in order to be able to afford the 24,000 EUR after tax that the house would cost to rent (2k eur per month - conservative), (if it wasn't being paid by the state), plus the 14,400 being earned tax free from renting out the room. So that's 38,400 after tax earnings that are being worked for by the tenant, but are being given to the dole monkey for free. Before we even start talking about dole, back to education supports, heating / travel allowances or anything else.

It really does beggar belief if you do some sums. I will admit that this is neither the exception, nor the rule, but it happens too much in the state for it to be acceptable.

On first reading this I was put off by the needlessly unpleasant terminology. In fact it is a clear explanation.

If you want to convince anyone who does not already agree with you, I suggest choosing your words more carefully.

 

[Simpli]

This is a fictional person and written from the perspective of someone disgruntled with government policy, deliberately distasteful to add perspective and illumination to the explanation. It's something you'd expect to hear in a pub or something. I suspect the actual amount of people that the description applies to is in the sub 2% bracket so definitely not representational, but the fact that it is clearly government policy suggests that the system is disproportionate. Wasn't meant to be offensive.

 

[Purple]

This is a fictional person and written from the perspective of someone disgruntled with government policy. I suspect the actual amount of people that the description applies to is in the sub 5% so definitely not representational, but the fact that it is clearly government policy suggests that the system is disproportionate. Wasn't meant to be offensive.

If you could get income from the State worth well over €70,000 a year in gross taxable income terms and you knew there was no chance of ever getting in trouble for it why on earth wouldn't you do it?

 

[DannyBoyD]

So now posters are complaining about illegal activity.

- claiming Unemployment benefits while working is illegal
- claiming One Parent Family benefit while living with one's partner is illegal (children's birth certificates have nothing to do with it)

Tenants have always been allowed to claim rent-a-room tax relief; there is no illegal activity here.

 

[Purple]

So now posters are complaining about illegal activity.

- claiming Unemployment benefits while working is illegal
- claiming One Parent Family benefit while living with one's partner is illegal (children's birth certificates have nothing to do with it)

Tenants have always been allowed to claim rent-a-room tax relief; there is no illegal activity here.

Yep, the illegal activity is ubiquitous where I'm from and where I work but that doesn't change how wrong the legal activity is.
It is not good for society when social transfers from those on high incomes to those on low incomes leave those on low incomes better off than those on high incomes.

 

[Brendan Burgess]

Folks

When someone uses offensive language in a post, please do not respond. The post and your response will be deleted.

If you see offensive language, either ignore it or report it.

This wastes a lot of the moderators' time.

People can make their points without being offensive.

Brendan