Can you sue a tenant for financial loss?

slumlandlord

I have been letting my house to a tenant who has trashed it and stopped paying the rent. Their tenancy finished last year and the agent's are having to take legal action to get them to move out. I had intended to sell the house last year at the end of their tenancy.

Does anyone know if I can sue the tenant for the difference between what I would have sold for last year and what I can expect to sell for now?

Putting aside whether they could afford to pay, or how to trace them once they've gone. In principle, is this an option? Any solicitor or lawyer able to answer this I'd be interested to know.

PayDay

The market has been falling for the last 15 months.

What was the exit strategy in your business plan?

moneysavinmonkey

Simply put unless you tenant is Adam Applegarth it's going to be very difficult to prove that they are responsible for national house price falls and therefore your (paper) loss. If you were not selling would you be trying to charge them? Or to put it another way if HPI was still at +10% would you be reimbursing them the difference!

By all means do try to recover the costs associated with the damage they have done to the property and unpaid rent, but that is going to be the extent of what you can claim.

I'm not solicitor or lawyer but I did study law at university.

silvercar

I doubt you would get very far, not least because people who don't pay the rent generally don't have any money.

Planner

slumlandlord wrote: »

I have been letting my house to a tenant who has trashed it and stopped paying the rent. Their tenancy finished last year and the agent's are having to take legal action to get them to move out. I had intended to sell the house last year at the end of their tenancy.

Does anyone know if I can sue the tenant for the difference between what I would have sold for last year and what I can expect to sell for now?

Putting aside whether they could afford to pay, or how to trace them once they've gone. In principle, is this an option? Any solicitor or lawyer able to answer this I'd be interested to know.

Im assuming the property is in England/Wales

When you say 'Their tenancy finished last year' what exactly do you mean? as it dosent seem to square up with your next comment about your 'agents now having to take legal action'. How does one end a tenancy, when the tenant wont agree, without taken legal action?

Could you clarify how the tenancy finished last year? and what legal action is now being taken?

slumlandlord

I'd like to stay on topic rather than digress. The eviction process is in the hands of solicitors, lets assume they are handling it correctly. The facts are:
1. I intended to market the property at the end of the tenancy.
2. The tenant should have vacated last year but didn't.
3. As a direct result of the tenants actions I can not realize my asset at a time of my choosing.
4. I can therefore demonstrate a financial loss as a result.
On a point of law, can I seek damages to compensate me, and could such an action succeed?
Whether they could pay or not is off topic as well. I'm interested in whether it could set a precedent.

Planner

slumlandlord wrote: »

I'd like to stay on topic rather than digress. The eviction process is in the hands of solicitors, lets assume they are handling it correctly. The facts are:
1. I intended to market the property at the end of the tenancy.
2 The tenant should have vacated last year but didn't.
3. Because they refuse to budge I can not realize my asset at a time of my choosing.
4. I can demonstrate a financial loss as a result.
On a point of law, can I seek damages to compensate me, and could such an action succeed?

But I think it is very important. You still haven clarified 'end of the tenancy'? What do you mean? the end of the fixed term? The only way that a tenancy agreement can end if the tenant is being awkward is via a court order. If you are now only just begining eviction proceedings, then the tenancy hasnt ended so;

1) The tenancy hasnt ended unless it has been ended by a order of the court. As you appear now to be only just beginning proceedings to end the tenancy your other three questions are void.

silvercar

2 The tenant should have vacated last year but didn't.
3. Because they refuse to budge I can not realize my asset at a time of my choosing.

Only two ways of removing a tenant. Either they go of their own accord or you follow court procedures to secure their eviction. You can start the eviction process by serving a section 21 notice to end when the tenancy finishes, if that fails to encourage tenants to leave you then go to court. If that fails you go back to court and get baliffs appointed and eventually used to remove tenants. In theory that can be done within 4 months of the end of tenancy. It could be that the people you have paid to act for you have not been as quick as they could have been.

You can certainly take legal action against the tenants for unpaid rent and for the costs of returning the property to its state at the start of the tenancy less fair wear and tear (less any retained deposit).

indianropetrick

How can you possibly demonstrate a financial loss? If the property had been vacated at the time of your choosing it may well still be sitting on the market.

slumlandlord

Planner wrote: »

But I think it is very important. You still haven clarified 'end of the tenancy'? What do you mean? the end of the fixed term? The only way that a tenancy agreement can end if the tenant is being awkward is via a court order. If you are now only just begining eviction proceedings, then the tenancy hasnt ended so;

1) The tenancy hasnt ended unless it has been ended by a order of the court. As you appear now to be only just beginning proceedings to end the tenancy your other three questions are void.

Sorry, I can't see what you are getting at. Maybe I'm using the wrong words by saying 'the end of the tenancy'. Like I say, can't we just trust that the solicitors are doing their job. The tenant had a "normal" "legal" 12 month tenancy, which they didn't renew at the end, but stayed put anyway.

I really want to stay on topic.

So to restate:
1. I intended to market the property at the end of the tenancy.
2. The tenant should have vacated last year but didn't.
3. As a direct result of the tenants actions I can not realize my asset at a time of my choosing.
4. I can therefore demonstrate a financial loss as a result (big big difference in multiple agents valuation's from the time I intended to sell compared to what I can get now).

The "on topic" question being asked is only:
On a point of law, can I seek damages to compensate me, and could such an action succeed?
Whether they could pay or not is off topic as well. I'm interested in whether it could set a precedent.

Planner

slumlandlord wrote: »

Sorry, I can't see what you are getting at. Maybe I'm using the wrong words by saying 'the end of the tenancy'. Like I say, can't we just trust that the solicitors are doing their job. The tenant had a "normal" "legal" 12 month tenancy, which they didn't renew at the end, but stayed put anyway.

I think you need to get back to basics here. Your basing your questions on some incorrect assumptions. Once the 12 months of the tenancy came to an end, then a statutory periodic tenancy (month on month) arose. 'They Stayed Put Anyway', seems to imply they have done something that they are not allowed to. This assumption is incorrect, under the 1988 Housing Act, they are allowed to do just that until the tenancy is brought to an end either by mutual agreement or an order from the court. You still havent alluded to wether you had either of these. so;

1) Then why didnt you or your agents begin action during the tenancy (s.21 notice) so at the end of the fixed term, you could have immediatley applied to court for posession?

2) Why should he have? You still havent explained why?

3) You need to clarify 2) before this can be answered.

4) You can demonstrate an on paper loss, but you can demonstrate that if the property was on the market it would have sold for a)your asking price b) at all.