Live in council house but rent out my home

leveller2911 wrote: »

Tottyshouse wrote: »

leveller2911 wrote: »

If you feel your HA is massively inefficient get in touch with your tenant engagement officer (or whatever you HA calls them) give them your opinions and ask for answers. Inefficiency and bad practice is allowed to flourish because most people will complain on an annonymous forum - but they won't actually complain to the people involved. If every dissatisifed tenant made their views clear to their Director of Housing and/ or the old Housing Corp (can't recall the names of the two bodies it was split into as that was after my time) you may see changes.

Appreciate your sarcasm but it's ok - I will trot out the standard HA spiel. It is NOT illegal to have an untaxed car on private land if you have the relevant sorn. I assume you were privy to whether those tenants had that.

Unless the police stop the offender in the act of driving the untaxed vehicle there is little anyone can do. You don't expect the police to sit and watch who are the ones who have the power to act, but you for some reason think HA staff should spend all day watching them.

Clauses in tenancy agreements are a sort of unofficial "contract" between the Housing Provider and the tenant. I personally think putting in clauses that you cannot enforce is a way to ensure compliance from the majority who do not realise they are unenforcable.







We are digressing a bit but I will reply to your post.

I can only comment on our HA but as an example tenants complained regarding untaxed,unroadworthy,un insured cars being driven daily.The cars were parked on the drives (HA property) 23 hrs a day and they expected the Police to sit in a car and wait for them.It took the tenants 2 years to go through the complaints procedures (stage 1, 2 and 3). Then finally to the Housing Ombudsman so there really is no point whatsoever complaining.The HA blamed the Police for "not removing the vehicles from the highway". The cars were parked on HA property,clauses in the tenancy agreement etc and they still failed to act. What is the point of putting these clauses in tenancy agreements if they have no teeth to act, its rediculous.

I personally wrote to the SE director of my HA who phoned me twice asking me to put on hold our complaint to allow the HA to try and get the tenants to comply.

Nothing personal but your post could have been read from an autocue, its exactly what the tenants were fobbed off with and when they did complain it took 2yrs and still no action.In truth many tenants have no faith in HA,s and would rather take action themselves and who could blame them.

Stage 2 IIRC was a panel made up of tenants from Brighton who visited the site and made the decision that the HA should act and remove the vehicles.The HA spent money on getting the panel to the site, lunch out etc and then took absolutely no notcie of their decision. Total incompetance.

Appreciate your time ,thanks..

Appreciate your sarcasm. Thanks, but it's ok - I will trot out the standard HA spiel form my autocue. It is not illegal to have an untaxed car as long as it is not on a public road and you have the relevant sorn. I assume you were privy to whether those tenants had that.

Unless the police stop the offender in the act of driving the untaxed vehicle there is little anyone can do. You don't expect the police to sit and watch who are the ones who have the power to act, but you for some reason think HA staff should spend all day watching them.

Clauses in tenancy agreements are a sort of unofficial "contract" between the Housing Provider and the tenant. I personally think putting in clauses that you cannot enforce is a way to ensure compliance from the majority who do not realise they are unenforcable. Rent arrears are apparently a grounds for eviction - it is very difficult to get an evicition on those grounds alone. The tenant, whether they are a fine upstanding individual or life's detritus making other people's lives a misery, are given the benefit of the doubt by the Judicial system.

It's not right. It isn't however the fault of the staff at your local Housing Office who do not make the laws. I am no longer in social housing but I am now a private landlord. My most recent tenant left her social housing property to move into my private let due to the anti social behaviour of other tenants. She was the one complying with her tenancy agreement - the others were not yet she was the one who had to leave for her safety and sanity.

It is not a fair system - but that's what happens when you make social tenancy agreements so completely and utterly secure. Housing providers often look like they are doing nothing yet more often than not their hands are tied by the law - and the reality that Judges do not like to evict.

HappyMJ wrote: »

Use the living room as a bedroom and don't have a living room.

Tottyshouse wrote: »

Councils cannot evict a tenant. That is what I keep repeating. Council's can take steps to get an eviction notice that has to be granted on the basis of housing law by a Judge. Judges are very very reluctant to evict even the most nightmarish tenants breaking god knows how many tenancy clauses.

The OP has not said he declared himself homeless to get a social housing property. He did not say he had the BTL property when he took the tenancy. That is why I have said I would be very interested to see if Housing provider would A) seek a possession order and be granted it.