We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
PLEASE READ BEFORE POSTING: Hello Forumites! In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non-MoneySaving matters are not permitted per the Forum rules. While we understand that mentioning house prices may sometimes be relevant to a user's specific MoneySaving situation, we ask that you please avoid veering into broad, general debates about the market, the economy and politics, as these can unfortunately lead to abusive or hateful behaviour. Threads that are found to have derailed into wider discussions may be removed. Users who repeatedly disregard this may have their Forum account banned. Please also avoid posting personally identifiable information, including links to your own online property listing which may reveal your address. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Renting: Security of tenure
Gorgeous_George
Posts: 7,964 Forumite
Hi
A number of threads see tenants complaining about (the lack of) security of tenure - and quite understandably so. Nobody wants to be forced into making a move with all the stress and heartache that can involve. People move away from family and friends, kids have to find new schools.
Of course, LLs are often constrained by their lender's rules. Many can only offer a maximum of a 12 months AST. Without these constraints, I believe ASTs can be valid for upto 2 years.
At the end of a fixed term, tenancies often move to 'periodic' where the LL can ask for repossession of the house in 2 months. Tenants can give just one month's notice if they choose to leave. Hardly ideal for either party.
Would it be possible to have a 3, 6 or 12 month rolling fixed term tenancy? This would effectively see either party being able to end the agreement by giving 3, 6 or 12 months' notice without exceeding the lender's constraint. Would this allay some of the fears that tenants have?
Your thoughts please.
GG
A number of threads see tenants complaining about (the lack of) security of tenure - and quite understandably so. Nobody wants to be forced into making a move with all the stress and heartache that can involve. People move away from family and friends, kids have to find new schools.
Of course, LLs are often constrained by their lender's rules. Many can only offer a maximum of a 12 months AST. Without these constraints, I believe ASTs can be valid for upto 2 years.
At the end of a fixed term, tenancies often move to 'periodic' where the LL can ask for repossession of the house in 2 months. Tenants can give just one month's notice if they choose to leave. Hardly ideal for either party.
Would it be possible to have a 3, 6 or 12 month rolling fixed term tenancy? This would effectively see either party being able to end the agreement by giving 3, 6 or 12 months' notice without exceeding the lender's constraint. Would this allay some of the fears that tenants have?
Your thoughts please.
GG
There are 10 types of people in this world. Those who understand binary and those that don't.
0
Comments
-
Hi GG - in a word, yes! In three words, yes, yes, yes
Though I think part of the trouble is the absence of a chain-type scenario when moving from one rental to another - everyone is in it entirely for themselves which can mean a choice of missing out on your next house because it's empty and you haven't yet given notice - or paying rent on two places at once. It makes looking and choosing even harder, which just adds to the fear at the beginning.0 -
It would certainly seem an improvement - I guess something like when an AST comes to an end it is automatically renewed on the same terms but with a breakpoint halfway through.
I would also change the legislation so that an S21 not enforced (within a reasonable amount of time) is not valid."Mrs. Pench, you've won the car contest, would you like a triumph spitfire or 3000 in cash?" He smiled.
Mrs. Pench took the money. "What will you do with it all? Not that it's any of my business," he giggled.
"I think I'll become an alcoholic," said Betty.0 -
It would be a start. Ideally I would like the balance to swing entirely the other way. At the end of the day noone is forcing anyone to be a landlord so they can get out of it if they want, on the otherhand everyone has to live somewhere and many tenants have no choice but to rent - therefore it's entirely reasonable that the law should favour them.
I think tenants should have unlimited security of tenure - as long as they pay rent on time, don't trash the house or cause excessive nuisance to the landlord or do anything else illegal - why not?0 -
It would give security, but also lose out on flexibility - for example, if a tenant had to leave early due to a change in circumstances, or if the Landlord has to sell / be reposessed, but everyone's tied into a 12-month agreement.
If a get-out clause were built in, the security would go... so I'm not sure how you can win! Although, I suppose there's always the option to "mutually agree" to end the contract early... what if the tenant doesn't agree???
I just don't know, George - I'm going round and round in circles here...Mortgage | £145,000Unsecured Debt | [strike]£7,000[/strike] £0 Lodgers | |0 -
While we're on the subject banks should be required to take over tenancies if they repo & to let without permission should be criminal fraud."Mrs. Pench, you've won the car contest, would you like a triumph spitfire or 3000 in cash?" He smiled.
Mrs. Pench took the money. "What will you do with it all? Not that it's any of my business," he giggled.
"I think I'll become an alcoholic," said Betty.0 -
I'd be happy with that so long as I could get the tenants actually evicted and out of the property within 14 days of a major breach of their tenancy agreement or within say 14 days of being 2 months in arrears. Currently the court system means waiting several months, usually without any rent coming in, before the tenant can be removed.moneysavinmonkey wrote: »I think tenants should have unlimited security of tenure - as long as they pay rent on time, don't trash the house or cause excessive nuisance to the landlord or do anything else illegal - why not?A house isn't a home without a cat.
Those are my principles. If you don't like them, I have others.
I have writer's block - I can't begin to tell you about it.
You told me again you preferred handsome men but for me you would make an exception.
It's a recession when your neighbour loses his job; it's a depression when you lose yours.0 -
Hasn't BTL lending been cut back enough for you already Guy? Can't see that one "flying" in the real world. Maybe just give judges a nudge and tell them to allow 56-90 days for possession in such cases so that the tenant gets the best part of two/three month's notice to vacate?Guy_Montag wrote: »While we're on the subject banks should be required to take over tenancies if they repo & to let without permission should be criminal fraud.A house isn't a home without a cat.
Those are my principles. If you don't like them, I have others.
I have writer's block - I can't begin to tell you about it.
You told me again you preferred handsome men but for me you would make an exception.
It's a recession when your neighbour loses his job; it's a depression when you lose yours.0 -
Not until that last BTL landlord is hanging by piano wire from a lamppost!;)BobProperty wrote: »Hasn't BTL lending been cut back enough for you already Guy?Can't see that one "flying" in the real world. Maybe just give judges a nudge and tell them to allow 56-90 days for possession in such cases so that the tenant gets the best part of two/three month's notice to vacate?
Ok, that may just be acceptable."Mrs. Pench, you've won the car contest, would you like a triumph spitfire or 3000 in cash?" He smiled.
Mrs. Pench took the money. "What will you do with it all? Not that it's any of my business," he giggled.
"I think I'll become an alcoholic," said Betty.0 -
BobProperty wrote: »I'd be happy with that so long as I could get the tenants actually evicted and out of the property within 14 days of a major breach of their tenancy agreement or within say 14 days of being 2 months in arrears. Currently the court system means waiting several months, usually without any rent coming in, before the tenant can be removed.
Does your mortgage provider evict you from your house in 14 days if you get into mortgage arreras....
seriously - why is it that tenants should have less rights than people who rent from the bank!0 -
No they have to go through the courts and it takes several months. Same as a landlord getting a tenant out. What's your point? Did I say this should apply to mortgage holders? NO. I said IF the TENANTS breach THEIR OBLIGATIONS.moneysavinmonkey wrote: »Does your mortgage provider evict you from your house in 14 days if you get into mortgage arreras....
seriously - why is it that tenants should have less rights than people who rent from the bank!A house isn't a home without a cat.
Those are my principles. If you don't like them, I have others.
I have writer's block - I can't begin to tell you about it.
You told me again you preferred handsome men but for me you would make an exception.
It's a recession when your neighbour loses his job; it's a depression when you lose yours.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.4K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.7K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.4K Spending & Discounts
- 245.4K Work, Benefits & Business
- 601.2K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.6K Life & Family
- 259.2K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards