RENTING? Check your LL has permission to let that property.

MissMoneypenny · 26 January 2009 at 5:44PM

Yes socrates, it was your post on another thread that prompted me to bump this thread.

socrates wrote: »

HSBC are not as stringent as First Direct even though they are in effect one and the same.

Again LTV and anticipated rental income as well as your salary are all relevant.

I do not normally advocate this but in the case of FD as they are so pedantic I would rent it out and tell them nothing!

Hope I have not opened up a can of worms for myself...

socrates · 26 January 2009 at 5:46PM

I know why you did it but it happens, get over it and try and start a thread on bad tenants just for a change!

franklee · 27 January 2009 at 3:28AM

socrates wrote: »

Its interesting that they are very few posts on here from people who have actually been turfed out onto the street.

The problem is that a new tenant to a property does not know how far along the repossession is. If the first tenant leaves due to a whiff of repossession the landlord can re-let to a new tenant and by then the repossession date may be very close!

There was an example of this on landlordlaw last year but I don't have time to dig it out now.

Just found this, four days to pack up and leave

Sarah and James (not their real names) were shocked when they arrived back from a holiday recently to find a letter on their doorstep telling them that the property they rented was being repossessed and they had four days to pack up and leave.

...

One estate agent told Cash that he had dealt with two such situations in the past where his agency had ended up taking possession of the flats. In one case, the tenant had to call the police when she found that her locks had been changed. The police organised a locksmith for her, but it cost her £80. The other tenant was a female lawyer who was abroad when the agency took possession. In that case, the landlord made the payments about five hours after repossession and the tenant got new keys.

...

The landlord needs to get mortgage approval from the lender before he lets the property out, and tenants can check this if they want. But they should bear in mind that, if they want to be in quick, doing this will slow things down considerably.

Tenants (or potential tenants) can also run a Land Registry search on the property they live in, or are about to live in, which will bring up details of its value at the time of purchase and more importantly any charges which are registered against it such as bankruptcy notices - although the search won't show how much the owner owes on a property or if he or she is in arrears. The search costs £2 and can be done online at www.landregisteronline.gov.uk. Another option is to talk to neighbours and, if possible, previous tenants.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2005/sep/18/renting.observercashsection

That article is a bit old, here are some recent MSE threads found after the quickest of searches so there are probably many more. They show that you don't have to literally turfed out on to the street for this to be a costly and stressful position to be put in:

landlord being repossessed

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?t=1410329&highlight=landlord+repossession

Rights of Tenant when House is repossessed and sold on

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?t=1105705&highlight=landlord+repossession

Struggling BTL Investors

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?t=1383307&highlight=landlord+repossession

Claim for Possession sorted - onto the next Chapter

socrates · 27 January 2009 at 3:42AM

You can quote as many as you wish - they are outnumbered by a 1000-1 of stories about bad tenants.

This crisis has been going for 6 or so months renting to bad tenants has been going on for 60 years or maybe even 600.

However I commend you on your efforts on this post - what is shows is that there IS a need for legislation that is actually workable.

However it DOES not exist and checking the Land Registry does NOT prove any consent to let.

franklee · 27 January 2009 at 4:01AM

socrates, I do agree that there are bad tenants, of course there are and it is right they are discussed on other threads. We are all free to start threads are we not, you could start some too. For myself I've met few tenants and none bad so it's a subject I've little to contribute on, but I do read of the bad ones with interest. There was one blog from a landlord that was fascinating in a car crash sort of way I was glued to that for hours.

In the past this consent to let from the lender didn't matter as BTL repossessions were few. But with the credit crunch that's changing fast and so it is worth a tenant doing what they can to protect themselves on this. Moving house is time consuming and costly so a tenant doesn't really want to have to do it twice in a short time. Also if moving in a rush a tenant may not have much choice in where they move to and thus may fall foul again.

While there is no standard letter provided by all the lenders as you point out in post #105 I am of the opinion that a lender should jolly well write a simple confirmation to the landlord on request from the landlord. It just needs a simple line, something like as of Jan27th we confirm you, Mr. A Landlord, has our consent to let 1 Arcadia Avenue. Is that really beyond a lender's capability?

Ah this is the one I was thinking of from landlordlaw (a very good blog IMO, well worth a good look round), Tessa writes:

"I was consulted by tenants on one of these cases recently. They had rented what they believed to be their dream home, only to find two months later, the bailiffs at the door. It was a complete surprise to them because the possession order had been obtained before the property had been let to them!

Yes, amazing though it seems, the possession order was made several weeks before the tenancy was granted, and the date for possession in the order had actually expired the day before my clients tenancy started (by the way they know I writing this and have given their consent). Therefore the notice which mortgagees are required to serve on occupiers of properties did not help them, as it had been served over six months ago!"

Link to full article:

http://landlordlaw.blogspot.com/2008/05/agents-letting-property-subject-to-re.html

socrates · 27 January 2009 at 4:17AM

I agree with a lot of what you say but the banks/lenders are not squeaky clean in all this.

In desperate times people do desperate things.

One of my main issues is that the OP only ever goes on about bad LL's never anything about bad tenants.

In my posts and opinions I try to give balanced views and try to put myself in the other persons shoes.

As long as the OP continues to take a one sided approach then I intend to present the other side.

In the main I actually agree with the OP and yourself even though we are taking opposite stances

socrates · 27 January 2009 at 4:30AM

One other thing that occurred to me - you advise me to start a thread of my own.

I did start a thread aimed at educating/helping new and existing LL's it was put down very quickly

link here

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?t=1442241

This idea would help to educate mainly new LL's to start off on the right foot.

We cannot change government legislation but we can implement good ideas on here. It seems that we cannot or will not do so.

Probably a good reflection of how government works.

franklee · 27 January 2009 at 4:33AM

socrates wrote: »

I agree with a lot of what you say but the banks/lenders are not squeaky clean in all this.

In desperate times people do desperate things.

One of my main issues is that the OP only ever goes on about bad LL's never anything about bad tenants.

In my posts and opinions I try to give balanced views and try to put myself in the other persons shoes.

As long as the OP continues to take a one sided approach then I intend to present the other side.

In the main I actually agree with the OP and yourself even though we are taking opposite stances

Thing is we all tend to mainly post in areas we have experience in. My field of interest is quite small, I don't know much outside that area so would not start a thread on it or post on it. I think that true of many people here, not everyone has a broad range of knowledge or even if they know more they may not have an interest in talking about it. My other main interest is house prices but I don't post about them simply because I think that subject already well covered, I'll read quite a bit about them though.

MissMoneypenny · 31 January 2009 at 1:29AM

socrates wrote: »

In desperate times people do desperate things.

That is why renters should take care to check the landlord has received permission to let from the lender.

franklee · 3 February 2009 at 2:36AM

Another example of no consent to let:

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?p=18359247#post18359247

RENTING? Check your LL has permission to let that property.

Comments

Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply

🚀 Getting Started

Categories

Is this how you want to be seen?

Get our FREE Weekly email full of deals & guides - and it’s spam-free