Help required with tennant not paying rent :(

tbs624

The pitfalls of trying to let property without adequate knowledge or preparation .....some Ts can spot newbies a mile off and you've clearly got someone who "knows the ropes".

Ignore AverageJoes suggestions - definitely does not constitute advice- you are in enough difficulty as it is, without adding tenant harassment and unlawful eviction to the list (both criminal offences)

As Planner has said, you should have provided a rent book to your tenant. It's a summary (ie criminal) offence to fail to provide one if your T is required to pay weekly - see LL&T Act 1985, as amended by Housing Act 1988. It's a breach of civil law to fail to comply with the deposit regs & not only does it mean you can't serve a S21 it means your T can pursue to court for the returnof the deposit in full plus a penaltyof 3x the deposit amount.

Get the 100 quid deposit registered pronto, give the T the "prescribed information", give him an up to date rent book ( which has to contain set information) showing clearly rent paid to date and how much is owed. There are rent arrears/ persistently late with rent grounds additional to a S21 to start getting this T out, but the T is probably aware that he can pay off arrears prior to a court hearing and send you back to the start of proceedings.

Get yourself a decent local solicitor - one with LL&T experience - and google Landlordlaw and Landlord Action to check out different options

You have got LL buildings insurance and gas safety cert etc, haven't you?

AverageJoe_4

mlz1413 wrote: »

actual aveage joe I disagree with you - the OP by his own admission has created the situation, he allowed him to move in without paying a full deposit, he has allowed him to miss payments - regardless of being able to contact tenant the OP should have been on the case from week 4 by letter as well as phone when the deposit was not made up to full value.

If the tenant has the money then OP sharpening up his practises and getting legal will make the tenant pay.

If the tenant doesn't have the money then getting him out is the main concern and the OP has said bully tactics (the ones you are advising) are not his style.

A friend of a friend recently moved into a flat run the way you like, it suits him and the rules are upfront, but the OP is after advise on how he can tackle a situation so telling him to throw someone on the street is not helping him.

I hear ya.

I was under the impression (regardless of judgement or blame) that the OP wantred a result here that benefits him.

If he wants to do business, beit being a CEO of a mahor blue chip firm or the type he has set up here, then he needs to understand the business world.

No one every got successful from business by being naive about it.

He needs to adapt his methods or he will find himself out of pocket even more than he is now, and that doensn't make for good business.

AJ

AverageJoe_4

Troubled_Joe wrote: »

If you serve a notice under section 21(1)(b) before the expiry of the fixed term you need only give 2 clear months notice and need not be concerned with the rental dates/periods.

As for timescales and costs, say you served notice today to expire on 15th May then if tenant is still present you issue a claim for possession (accelerated procedure) (court fee £150). The tenant has 14 days to respond.

If your notice is correct he has no defence and you will be able to apply for possession which will be given normally after 28 days. He can apply for an extension to 42 days on the grounds of hardship and generally any excuse will be accepted.

After the possession date, if he is still there you need to apply for the bailiffs to evict him (£95 court fee). They may take up to a month or more depending on the area you are in. This will be the final eviction date. Unlike alternative procedures the court has no jurisdiction to suspend the eviction on any grounds.

Hope this helps but in summary there's a potential 5 months wait in some cases. Solicitor's fees would be between £100 (if he left after the notice) and £800 (if he applied for an extension and also didn't leave until the bailiffs were instructed).

Jesus, what kind of advice is that? Im beginning to think that you might actually be the tenant..

AverageJoe_4

You ppl are laughable - you are all techanically correct Im sure - but you remind me of top top University Graduates who have an immense and powerful knowledge of complex sublects, rules and laws - but zero common sense totally un-street wise.

OP is screwed eitherway unless he bucks his ideas up.

Planner

AverageJoe wrote: »

You ppl are laughable - you are all techanically correct Im sure - but you remind me of top top University Graduates who have an immense and powerful knowledge of complex sublects, rules and laws - but zero common sense totally un-street wise.

OP is screwed eitherway unless he bucks his ideas up.

We just arent 'with-it' are we 'dude'!!! :rotfl:

GreenNinja

I would love to know why the law is so biased that people like the OPs tenant are able to do this!
When its blatantly obvious that the tenant has not paid his rent why does the law give him rights to stay there and still not pay and as suggested get compensation against his deposit. The whole thing is ludicrous!
The law should be on the side of the poor bloke being taken for a ride.
Why is it in this country that people are rewarded for being lazy or dishonest? and the decent hard working person gets taxed and penalised to pay these scumbags to live a life where they get benefits and their rent paid every week for doing nothing.

david29dpo

My thoughts exactly, thats why the next time i will do things my way and sod the law.

AverageJoe_4

Planner wrote: »

We just arent 'with-it' are we 'dude'!!! :rotfl:

Oh dear, that is an incredibaly dated answer and only upholds my thought.

I was referring to lving in reality as opposed to living life according to the bible of Acts.

mlz1413

AverageJoe wrote: »

You ppl are laughable - you are all techanically correct Im sure - but you remind me of top top University Graduates who have an immense and powerful knowledge of complex sublects, rules and laws - but zero common sense totally un-street wise.

OP is screwed eitherway unless he bucks his ideas up.

AJ I'm worried about you - do you need to lay down in a dark room with a cold fannel whilst the moon is in it's full stage?

I'm beginning to think you are the LL who rents to the friend of a friend, ie pay up or move out, no reasons/excuses for not paying, no deposit taken no regulations adhered to and no questions asked. Whilst I would never move into this type of rental I know it exsists and it that some are happy with that type of agreement.

BUT that does not mean you should advise everyone to be Nicholas van Hoogstraten - who incidental ended up in prision.

Planner

GreenNinja wrote: »

I would love to know why the law is so biased that people like the OPs tenant are able to do this!
When its blatantly obvious that the tenant has not paid his rent why does the law give him rights to stay there and still not pay and as suggested get compensation against his deposit. The whole thing is ludicrous!
The law should be on the side of the poor bloke being taken for a ride.
Why is it in this country that people are rewarded for being lazy or dishonest? and the decent hard working person gets taxed and penalised to pay these scumbags to live a life where they get benefits and their rent paid every week for doing nothing.

Laws are generally always in favour of the consumer rather than the business in this country. Its the isolated few tenents that abuse them to their advantage unfortunatley, as there are the isolated few 'slumlords' (Average Joe) on the business end that believe they are also above the law.