BLB Solicitors
  • +01225 755656
  • enquiries@blbsolicitors.co.uk
BLB Solicitors
  • +01225 755656
  • enquiries@blbsolicitors.co.uk
  • Home
  • Services for You
    • Conveyancing Solicitors
    • Leasehold Solicitors
    • Property Dispute Solicitors
    • Divorce, Family Law and Mediation
    • Lifetime Planning and Wills
    • Probate and Estate Administration
    • Equity Release Solicitors
    • Retirement Property Conveyancing
    • Personal Injury Compensation
    • Medical Negligence Solicitors
  • Services for Business
    • Commercial Property
    • Commercial Property Disputes
    • Corporate & Commercial Legal Advice
    • Estate Management Solicitors
  • BLB Solicitors Locations
    • Almondsbury Solicitors
    • Bath Solicitors
    • Bristol Solicitors
    • Bradford on Avon Solicitors
    • Swindon Solicitors
    • Trowbridge Solicitors
  • About Us
    • Our Team
    • Working for BLB
    • BLB Solicitors – How we work
    • Making Payments to BLB Solicitors
    • Instructing BLB Solicitors
    • Terms of Business
    • Complaints Policy
    • Interest Policy
  • Blog
  • Contact Us

Home » Letting agent’s “No DSS” policy held to be discriminatory

Property Dispute Resolution
Letting agents sign on property following eviction
Jul 17th, 2020

At BLB Solicitors, our goal is simple – to deliver you clear, practical legal advice and cost-effective solutions. We hope you enjoy exploring our Blog. If you can’t find what you’re looking for, please do contact us.

Letting agent’s “No DSS” policy held to be discriminatory

In a judgment hailed by Shelter UK as “momentous”, a judge at York County Court has ruled that a letting agency’s “No DSS” policy discriminated against a disabled, single mother. The charity says the decision should be the “nail in the coffin” for discriminating against prospective tenants who receive Housing Benefit.

Although the Department of Social Security to which “DSS” refers is now defunct, in recent years it has become a common shorthand for refusing to consider prospective tenants if they receive Housing Benefit. Shelter says that almost two-thirds of private landlords either do not let, or are reluctant to let, to such tenants.

The case

The Claimant, a 44-year old mother of two who suffers from ADHD, anxiety and depression, was searching for a new home after being served with a Section 21 Notice by her landlord. The Court heard that the agency refused to consider her application despite her having excellent references, a part-time job, having always paid rent on time, having a professional guarantor and offering six month’s rent in advance, thanks to a loan from her parents. The agency’s decision, she said, resulted in her becoming homeless and having to move into a hostel with her children.

The case was supported by the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC).

District Judge Victoria Mark ruled that the Claimant had been indirectly discriminated against due to her sex and disability, in contravention of the Equality Act 2010. The agency was ordered to pay the Claimant damages of £3,500. The judge said:

“This overall picture is also borne out by the simple calculation which shows that, whilst women make up 50.6% of the population, they constitute 61% of housing benefit claimants.

“It is therefore evident that women are substantially more likely than men to claim housing benefit and thus more likely to be adversely affected by a ‘No DSS’ policy.”

She added, “Again, it is clear that a ‘No DSS’ policy puts or would put persons who are disabled at a particular disadvantage.”

Online portals

This judgment follows a move last year by major online lettings portals Zoopla and Rightmove, to ban the use of “No DSS” adverts on their websites.

Comment

This is a very important judgment. Although, as a County Court judgment, it is not binding on other courts, in the absence of a defence under the Equality Act 2010, that the discriminatory practice is “a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim”, it would seem highly likely that other courts would come to the same decision. In this case, no such defence was raised, and for letting agents, it’s difficult to imagine how such a defence could reasonably be upheld.

However, it’s important to note that while a blanket policy of refusing potential tenants because they claim Housing Benefit is unlawful, it does not mean that potential tenants who claim Housing Benefit cannot be refused.

In principle, this decision must apply to landlords as well as to letting agents. For it not to do so would seem perverse. With that in mind, it’s important to remember that there are still some, albeit mostly older, mortgages which contain a condition that the property may not be let to Housing Benefit claimants.

BLB Solicitors
Request a Call Back

Recent Articles

  • Compensation for tree root damage
  • Profits à prendre: an introduction
  • Do I need planning permission for a fence?
  • I was promised the house: Can you enforce a verbal promise?
  • Can a right of way be removed?

Newsletter Sign-up

* indicates required

Share this article

You may also like...
  • Feb 17th, 2025
    Rights of light explained
    Read Article
  • Mar 3rd, 2025
    I was promised the house: Can you enforce a verbal promise?
    Read Article
View All Related Articles
Get in-touch today
Contact Form

Left Column

Right Column

Centre

 
Sending
  • Bristol Solicitors

    0117 905 5308
  • Bath Solicitors

    01225 462871
  • Bradford on Avon Solicitors

    01225 866541
  • Swindon Solicitors

    01793 615011
  • Trowbridge Solicitors

    01225 755656
  • Almondsbury Solicitors

    0117 905 5308
Authorised & Regulated by Solicitors Regulation Authority (No. 636644)
©2025 BLB Solicitors | Terms | Privacy | Legal