Tenant said would leave at the end of the fixed term: UPDATE WINDOW SMASHED

lizzielondon

yep they have! i think he's been quite proud of himself for having nice relationships with all of his tenants & he's always had normal, reasonable tenants (he's been doing it for a while with a few properties) compared to the strict & business like attitude of others- think he;s realised thats the way to go...

olly300

lizzielondon wrote: »

yep they have! i think he's been quite proud of himself for having nice relationships with all of his tenants & he's always had normal, reasonable tenants (he's been doing it for a while with a few properties) compared to the strict & business like attitude of others- think he;s realised thats the way to go...

You can be strict and business like and have a nice relationship with your tenants.

All you do is make it clear that people aren't to take the p*ss out of you and take you for a soft touch.

It also helps if you:
1. Know the law
2. Know various ways of dealing with problem tenants

Blacksheep1979

lizzielondon wrote: »

ohhhhh lol

not got my deceptive hat on today...

how dodgy is this though... like on a dodgy scale?

It's dodgy and not very nice, but if they're not playing fair then I'd be happy with it - if they complain they're not going to find it easy to prove (and a judge is more likely to believe a good landlord than some skank who's trashing someone else's property and living off handouts). I just wouldn't shout about it if that's the route you/your uncle goes down.

lizzielondon

Blacksheep1979 wrote: »

It's dodgy and not very nice, but if they're not playing fair then I'd be happy with it - if they complain they're not going to find it easy to prove (and a judge is more likely to believe a good landlord than some skank who's trashing someone else's property and living off handouts). I just wouldn't shout about it if that's the route you/your uncle goes down.

lol you guessed thats weird lol

Fire_Fox

BitterAndTwisted wrote: »

It's my understanding that the landlord has to give 2 months notice only once the original fixed-term AST has expired and the tenancy has then become a periodic one. This tenant is still in their fixed-term so they need to be given only one month

It is always two months notice from the landlord assuming the rent is paid to the landlord monthly. I may get this a bit muddled but .... IIRC the landlord can serve an S21 at any time during the fixed term, and this can expire at any time after the end of the fixed term.So if notice had been served today - 2 April - the tenant would have needed to vacate on the 1 June. If the landlord serves the S21 after the end of the fixed term, the two months must coincide with a rental period, so 15 May to 14 July say.

"Notice by Landlord
To end a shorthold tenancy the landlord must give at least two months' notice under Section 21 of the 1988 Housing Act. For notices - see Agreements & Forms
The notice cannot take effect for at least six months or until the original agreed term has expired.
Where the tenancy has become a periodic one the notice given must expire on the last day of a rent period. For example, if a monthly periodic tenancy rent day is the 20th of the month, the two month notice period must end on the 19th of the month in question."
http://www.landlordzone.co.uk/notice_to_quit.htm

Fire_Fox

BitterAndTwisted wrote: »

Have a look on the landlordzone forum, I'm sure you'll find all the information there.

What your relative could do is to contact the tenant, remind them that their fixed-term ends on the 15th of May and ask for an appointment-time on the 15th to carry out a check-out inspection and to accept a hand-over of the keys. This makes clear to the tenant that they won't be having their AST extended and that the landlord is expecting them to leave.

You know as well as anyone that the contract does not end with the fixed term, only by one or other party serving proper notice to quit. IMO what you are suggesting could be deemed harassment/ illegal eviction by a professional tenant and this sort of activity is covered by the Protection from Eviction Act

"The tenant has the right to quiet enjoyment of the property for the duration of the tenancy along with the legal right to live in property as if it was their own home. This means that they have the right to a peaceful existence without undue disturbance. Harassment is a criminal offence under the Protection from Eviction Act 1977 and may result in the landlord being fined, or even imprisoned in extreme cases. Harassment can take the form of:

• Entering the property without permission.
• Changing the locks without giving the tenant warning or new keys.
• Cutting off utilities such as gas water and electricity.
• Tampering with mail or possessions.
• Verbal or physical abuse or threats.
• Enter the tenant's home whilst the they are out."

http://www.themovechannel.com/guides...tenant_rights/

BitterAndTwisted

You actually think it could be considered harassment for the landlord to contact the tenant and ask for an appointment? At least if the LL asks for an appointment time they might stand a slim chance of getting an indication from the tenant whether they they do wish the tenancy to terminate at the end of the fixed-term or not. This was all I suggested. There's no point in the landlord sitting around twiddling their thumbs waiting for the tenant to indicate one way or the other. If this woman is as chavtastic as she sounds I expect she signs her name with a cross

Fire_Fox

BitterAndTwisted wrote: »

You actually think it could be considered harassment for the landlord to contact the tenant and ask for an appointment? At least if the LL asks for an appointment time they might stand a slim chance of getting an indication from the tenant whether they they do wish the tenancy to terminate at the end of the fixed-term or not. This was all I suggested. There's no point in the landlord sitting around twiddling their thumbs waiting for the tenant to indicate one way or the other. If this woman is as chavtastic as she sounds I expect she signs her name with a cross

I think your suggestion (below) could indeed be deemed harassment/ illegal eviction by a professional tenant which this clearly is. There is a system in place for evicting tenants which starts with an S21. I have all sympathy for the OP's uncle or I would not be posting, but part of his current predicament is naivety - adding criminal activity to minor breaches of the legislation is not the way forward.

"remind them that their fixed-term ends on the 15th of May and ask for an appointment-time on the 15th to carry out a check-out inspection and to accept a hand-over of the keys. This makes clear to the tenant that they won't be having their AST extended and that the landlord is expecting them to leave."

bitsandpieces

lizzielondon wrote: »

ohhhhh lol

not got my deceptive hat on today...

how dodgy is this though... like on a dodgy scale?

If you lie in court, it's perjury. You may not get caught out (although discussing specific - identifying - details of case on a public forum isn't a good start if this is the plan!) Very dodgy and risky, though, and not a good idea.

shaven-monkey

serve S21 now.
get shot of the tennant.

Don't lend money to tennants.
Don't allow tennants to move in without providing a security deposit.