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!
Question for landlords
Comments
-
Sarah, I am sorry, I shouldn't have been so aggresive in my post. N79 is offering some good advice here. Apologies once again.0
-
green_tree wrote: »Hi Sarah, i have been in similar situations with my flat that i rent out privately.
If he has moved out i would change the locks and keep his deposit. Get the flat back on the lettings market asap - in fact why bother with an agent to rent it? advertise it in the local paper, you will get lots of calls. Pick someone that you feel is right and do your ref checks and all the necessary paperwork and bobs your uncle!
Poor advice IMO - as highlighted by N79.
My view is that any LL who simply assumes a tenancy has been abandoned and then changes the locks and/or re-lets the property is a fool.
Have a look at paragraph 7 onwards here :not focusing on the moralities of the actual case in the report (which have been discussed over a good half a dozen pages in a separate thread ) but on what a LL should do rather than leaving him/herself open to an expensive legal action by a tenant.
Inexperienced LLs need to be especially careful - there are experienced tenants who know exactly how to lure a "green" LL into that particular trap.0 -
Good I'm glad that the T's deposit is protected because it means you have nothing to fear if you have to go to court.
I suggest that you offer exactly what you have said in your last post to your Tenant in response to a written request to surrender. If necessary, if they give the notice but refuse to pay then you can go to court for any money owed on top of the deposit.
It's worth remembering that it's a damages deposit.
The Deposit Protection scheme wont release it to you without the tennants approval, and the deposit can't be taken against non-payment of rent, only damage to the property.
The OP needs to come to an amicable agreement with the tennant.
The tennant sounds like a reasonable human being with a bad memory. If the tennant was a jerk planning to do a runner they wouldn't have paid Septembers rent.
Suggest the OP goes to see the tennant and has a reasonable, non-aggressive, non-dictotorial chat with them.Bankruptcy isn't the worst that can happen to you. The worst that can happen is your forced to live the rest of your life in abject poverty trying to repay the debts.0 -
The Deposit Protection scheme wont release it to you without the tennants approval, and the deposit can't be taken against non-payment of rent, only damage to the property.
Who says?
You are assuming the deposit is protected within the DPS. As Sarah referred to "scheme", it could be in an insurance backed scheme. Certainly it is the case with the TDSL that the landlord can keep the deposit without the tenant’s agreement for whatever reason and it would be up to the tenant to raise a dispute within the required timeframe and only then does the landlord have to send the disputed amount to the TDSL. If it is with the DPS, then the landlord can go via their single claims process.
It is news to me that rent arrears cannot be covered by the deposit, as long as this reason is noted in the agreement.
NotlobNotlob0 -
Who says?
You are assuming the deposit is protected within the DPS. As Sarah referred to "scheme", it could be in an insurance backed scheme. Certainly it is the case with the TDSL that the landlord can keep the deposit without the tenant’s agreement for whatever reason and it would be up to the tenant to raise a dispute within the required timeframe and only then does the landlord have to send the disputed amount to the TDSL. If it is with the DPS, then the landlord can go via their single claims process.
It is news to me that rent arrears cannot be covered by the deposit, as long as this reason is noted in the agreement.
Notlob
The deposit is paid into the scheme provided by the LA we use if that's any use to you? Thanks0 -
It's worth remembering that it's a damages deposit.
The Deposit Protection scheme wont release it to you without the tennants approval, and the deposit can't be taken against non-payment of rent, only damage to the property.
Sorry squatnow but that is not true. The deposit is taken as security against the performance of the contract (or at least it should be unless the LL makes a mistake). It can therefore either be used against damage to the property or against outstanding rent. LL are also not limited to only claiming the amount of the deposit and can claim further amounts (legally called damages, which I think is where you confusion arises) from the T.
Finally, it is Tenant and not Tennant.0 -
Sarah, A few thoughts. Ask the LA next time, to make it clear to a new tenant, their obligation to pay rent for the entire period of tenancy. This may sound obvious, but I can tell you that LA’s do get blase and just assume that prospective tenants know this, when more often than not they don’t. This way, if they decide to leave early they know the consequences. You may also be able to ad an individually negotiated clause to the agreement, that requires a tenant, in this instance, to compensate you for part of the re-letting fee. Alternatively do 6 months fixed terms as the likely hood of tenants wanting to leave early is reduced and many do stay beyond this. Hope this helps.0
-
Sarah, A few thoughts. Ask the LA next time, to make it clear to a new tenant, their obligation to pay rent for the entire period of tenancy. This may sound obvious, but I can tell you that LA’s do get blase and just assume that prospective tenants know this, when more often than not they don’t. This way, if they decide to leave early they know the consequences. You may also be able to ad an individually negotiated clause to the agreement, that requires a tenant, in this instance, to compensate you for part of the re-letting fee. Alternatively do 6 months fixed terms as the likely hood of tenants wanting to leave early is reduced and many do stay beyond this. Hope this helps.
Thanks, this tenant was on an initial 6-month AST contract and after that he extended it for a year.0 -
Tenants can indeed just walk out and not pay - just as anyone can order goods and not pay - and you have to take them to court to get the money - if you cant find them, you cant sue them
learn from your mistakes
move on quickly
and get a professional agent to fully manage for you in the future0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.5K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.2K Spending & Discounts
- 245K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.6K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.4K Life & Family
- 258.8K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards