why is only the tenants that have to provide references?

MissMoneypenny

tbs624 wrote: »

"Tom Entwistle, managing director of TenantVerify.co.uk, a tenant checking service, said: ..." (Also of LLZone) Kerching!! Double the number of checks being coughed up for.

Getting one of these done on your LL ( in the unlikely event of your LL signing his/her consent for you to do so) would be of less use to a T than talking to a previous tenant, checking over the property thoroughly *before* signing up and checking for yourself that the LL has consent to let.

Surely, only landlords and tenants who have something to hide, would be unwilling to have references done on themselves? The solvent ones wouldn't mind being checked.

How will the things you suggest to check, let you know what a landlords earnings are? If a tenant or landlord isn't earning much, then how can they pay the rent (tenant) or do any expensive repairs (landlord)?

"A more comprehensive check, which costs £30.88, looks at a landlord's contract of employment, earnings and character references."

Seems like money well spent to me, but I do agree that some landlords are on shaky financial ground and/or can't show good character references, so would be unwilling to be referenced as they know they would fail the check.

MissMoneypenny

lisa-loves-cats wrote: »

Hi,
After living there for a period of 2 months, certain maintenance issues began to become apparent, but then the worst possible thing happened. A ceptic tank lacked such maintenance that the lid had corroded and collapsed..... you probably know where this is going..... one of my cats fell in and drowned in the worst imaginable way. Needless to say we were devastated and after we pulled his body out, my husband quickly placed a piece of hard board he found with a rock on top before we lost any others. Obviously we told the agents the next day who informed the landlady, who, by the way, lived in the adjoining property. 4 months later we moved out, she never fixed this and the same piece of hardboard with the rock was still in place the day we moved out.

I know some people may say, 'it's just a cat' but god forbid, it could have been a small child, thankfully my little one was barely crawling at the time.


I know for a fact that this property has already been rented out again and the issues I raised have not been addressed.

You really need to contact the Environmental Health department of the council where this property was and report this to them. It could be a child next time.

MissMoneypenny

tbs624 wrote: »

Lisa - its obviously very distressing for you to lose a pet in such a manner but did you not look round the property before you signed up to live there? A cess pit cover doesn't disintegrate in the space of just two months.

Not everyone knows that a septic tank cover has to be inspected, as Lisa has found out to her cost. The landlord should be lifting these covers on the septic tank/s and on the inspection drains, to check that everything is going through and that the lids and the surroundings are safe to stand on. Someone falling into an inspection drain could break a leg. Someone falling into a septic tank, could drown.

As you say, the cover didn't disintegrate in two months and the property should have been checked by the landlord, prior to a new tenant moving in to make sure the property was safe. It's obvious that the landlord failed to do this.

I bought a house that had a good fitting lid to the septic tank but the brickwork under the metal surrond was crumbling. The first thing I did when I moved in, was to get the brickwork made safe. Those septic tanks are very deep and have steep brick sides! Even the filter tanks for the water syphoning (sorry if you are eating), are deep and have steep sides.

I find it really frightening that the tank still doesn't seem to have a safe cover fitted to it! :mad:

tbs624

MissMoneypenny wrote: »

Surely, only landlords and tenants who have something to hide, would be unwilling to have references done on themselves? The solvent ones wouldn't mind being checked.

No, have to disagree with you on that one Miss M - it's kind of inline with the argument that "only those who have something to hide" don't want to end upon Gordy's Governmental national ID databases.

tbs624 wrote:

How will the things you suggest to check, let you know what a landlords earnings are? If a tenant or landlord isn't earning much, then how can they pay the rent (tenant) or do any expensive repairs (landlord)? What a LL is "earning" will not, for example, indicate whether he has a deposit a/c containing his contingency fund for repairs and maintenance. It won't indicate whether he has a pre-paid maintenance contract. Even if such checks could highlight a massive stash or available disposable income none of that would guarantee that the LL would spend it on effecting repairs.

If the T has consent to let in place, or a buy to let property, then the tenancy agreement should be honoured by the lender. Before anyone leaps in to say , yes but that's only up to the term expiry, that would be the case anyway since, as we know, LL is free to require the T to leave after that point

MissMoneypenny wrote: »

"A more comprehensive check, which costs £30.88, looks at a landlord's contract of employment, earnings and character references."

Seems like money well spent to me, but I do agree that some landlords are on shaky financial ground and/or can't show good character references, so would be unwilling to be referenced as they know they would fail the check.

I think many good professional LLs would be unwilling to be referenced in that form, full stop.

Decent LLs will (a) sign up to voluntary accreditation schemes, (b) have membership of a national or affiliated LL association (b) be happy to put you in touch with previous tenants.(c) be happy to confirm lender consent/buy to let status (d) provide appropriate insurance evidence.

A T can already check online whether a LL has a CCJ against them, and can also check with the private sector rental officer whether the LL has ever been a cause of concern to them

In the same way that those companies who make money from insurance policies against individual ID fraud will seek to convince us all that our very souls will be stolen by random others if we don't insure ourselves, those who make huge sums of money from running assorted verification services on us all seek to widen their sources of potential income, whilst providing little that is of real benefit.

blckbrd

Perhaps what might work is another 'Rate My' site for landlords. Don't know what the legalities are around this though.

MissMoneypenny

tbs624 wrote: »

it's kind of inline with the argument that "only those who have something to hide" don't want to end upon Gordy's Governmental national ID databases.

tbs624 wrote: »

I think many good professional LLs would be unwilling to be referenced in that form, full stop.

Would you accept a tenant that refused to be referenced? If they did refuse, would you think they had something to hide? Both tenants and landlords rely on the others finances being in good order.

tbs624 wrote: »

A T can already check online whether a LL has a CCJ against them, and can also check with the private sector rental officer whether the LL has ever been a cause of concern to them

A tenant can aslo check the following without the landlords consent:-

• England & Wales Section 1: CCJs, administration orders and child support agency liability orders
• England & Wales Section 2: High court judgments
• England & Wales Section 3: Fines defaults from Magistrates Courts
• England & Wales Section 4: Tribunal Awards
• Scotland: Small claims and summary causes Sheriff Court judgments
• Isle of Man: Default money judgments
• Jersey: Money judgments from the Petty Debts and Royal Court
• Northern Ireland: Undefended default & small claims judgments
• Republic of Ireland: Money judgments from circuit & district courts

http://www.trustonline.org.uk/understand-judgments-fines/tribunal-awards-and-the-register/

However, the above doesn't reflect the landlords finances if they have debts building up and have yet to go to court. Nor does it show if the landlord has employment and a good enough wage to finance his debts.

tbs624

Look back and you'll see that my comment
"I think many good professional LLs would be unwilling to be referenced in that form, full stop."
was in response to your statement that
"

MissMoneypenny wrote:

The solvent ones wouldn't mind being checked.

which is IMO a flawed line of "reasoning".

MissMoneypenny wrote: »

Would you accept a tenant that refused to be referenced? If they did refuse, would you think they had something to hide? Both tenants and landlords rely on the others finances being in good order.

Indeed they do but I would say that one party bears the greater risk tbh, and the fact is that its the LL.

However, you are perhaps misinterpreting my post - I have not suggested that a LL should refuse all forms of " referencing", any more than I would suggest that a T should refuse.

The *point* is that there are other more relevant methods of a T getting reassurance that they are not going to be dealing with a rogue LL, that there are some checks that are more worthwhile than others, Checks such as the ones you suggest on , for example, a LLs "employment and wages" will often bear no relevance whatsoever to his/her rentals business, as explained in my previous post.

Ts would be daft to think that this sort of check affords them anything other than very false sense of security, even in the unlikely event that a LL would consent to it.

olly300

lisa-loves-cats wrote: »

s. Obviously we told the agents the next day who informed the landlady, who, by the way, lived in the adjoining property.

Are you sure the LA told the LL?

Lots of time LL are damn lazy and don't tell the truth. They state they have told the LL but haven't and only bother to mention things to the LL a couple of months after the issue has occurred.

Quite a few people I've worked with have had boiler/ heating/ water leakage problems and have told the LA.

A week or so later (mainly when I or someone else has talked to them) they approach the LL directly and find the LL hasn't been told at all. The furious LL then sorts the issue out immediately.

lisa-loves-cats

olly300 wrote: »

Are you sure the LA told the LL?

Lots of time LL are damn lazy and don't tell the truth. They state they have told the LL but haven't and only bother to mention things to the LL a couple of months after the issue has occurred.

Quite a few people I've worked with have had boiler/ heating/ water leakage problems and have told the LA.

A week or so later (mainly when I or someone else has talked to them) they approach the LL directly and find the LL hasn't been told at all. The furious LL then sorts the issue out immediately.

absolutely positive.... the very same day i saw the landlady looking around the tank and lid, she then knocked on our door to ask us about it as she had just been on the phone to the agents. she said she would get a new lid and get it fixed. She got the lid and every now and then she would say, 'I still haven't got round to fixing that lid but I will do it'.

The frame that held the lid had just been stuck to the side with concrete and there was nothing underneath to catch the lid if it fell in, however on another access point a few feet away, the frame had been placed on top of pretuding bricks, (hope that makes sense) so that even if the frame failed, the lid would then fall against the bricks and not straight down.

after this happened I couldn't stop thinking, 'how could this happen, surely there must be some kind of legislation on the safety of these things'. I started to trawl the net and found the most awful stories of toddlers/children and even adults falling into these tanks and drowning........ so sad. But I couldn't find anything about legislation.

lisa-loves-cats

MissMoneypenny wrote: »

I find it really frightening that the tank still doesn't seem to have a safe cover fitted to it! :mad:

My feelings entirely, what if a couple with small children have moved into the property?

I think I will now contact the council on monday morning, because even if the lid is fixed, I still don't believe it is safe.

What if it collapses again due the to the poor workmanship of how the frame was fitted in the first place and with no safety parameters to catch it if it does?