Campaign for swifter tenant eviction and landlord access reaches Downing St

lostinrates

In the case where LM went in it should have been done proper like, but it might be the tenants had invalidated the terms of contract by leaving the property unfurnished/uninhabited ? I've seen that in tenancy agreements, but no idea whether its a standard term.

dgl1001

Changes are coming. Extract taken from the Local Growth White Paper:
http://bis.gov.uk/assets/biscore/corporate/docs/L/PU1068%20-%20Local%20growth

B.53 The Government has therefore committed to establishing the right conditions to draw in
that investment through its proposals for reforming the planning system; providing incentives
for local authorities and communities for unlocking land for development; de-regulation of the
private rented sector, and supporting demand through support for the mortgage market

mynameisdave

So an idiot entered into a business without the slightest clue of what she was doing and now every tenant in the country could be kicked out for minor infractions. Oh goody.

FTBFun

mynameisdave wrote: »

So an idiot entered into a business without the slightest clue of what she was doing and now every tenant in the country could be kicked out for minor infractions. Oh goody.

That's pretty much it.

All tenants are scum and all landlords are great. Didn't you get the memo?

BitterAndTwisted

mynameisdave wrote: »

So an idiot entered into a business without the slightest clue of what she was doing and now every tenant in the country could be kicked out for minor infractions. Oh goody.

Yep, and once she found out a few facts that I expect were not to her liking got air-time on national TV to libel her tenant and took a TV crew round while she entered the tenant's home. All the time pretending that she and her child were forced to sleep in the tent they collected in front of the TV crew when her family live nearby and are rather wealthy to boot.

Then she set up a rather petulant Facebook page to garner support for her ill-advised scheme.

I think Mike Weatherly is a fool for getting involved with this idiotic crusade.

dopester

BitterAndTwisted wrote: »

Yep, and once she found out a few facts that I expect were not to her liking got air-time on national TV to libel her tenant and took a TV crew round while she entered the tenant's home. All the time pretending that she and her child were forced to sleep in the tent they collected in front of the TV crew when her family live nearby and are rather wealthy to boot.

Then she set up a rather petulant Facebook page to garner support for her ill-advised scheme.

I think Mike Weatherly is a fool for getting involved with this idiotic crusade.

I wouldn't be too quick in just believing she's happily gotten her way for all her actions and behaviour without any consequence. I'm so happy and hopeful to be honest with the way things are going, but can't yet say anything of what I know.

Kohoutek

abaxas wrote: »

Basically no-one own property they own the 'estate'. Ie the right to live there providing they pay the correct tax.

Ie everyone rents from the state and that right can be revoked at anytime (technically).

That's not really true. Owning a freehold estate in land isn't conditional on paying tax as some kind of "rent" to the state. In practice the fact that the Crown owns all the land in the UK doesn't really change anything compared with if it didn't, except rare situations like finding treasure on your land or if you die without leaving or will and have no heirs.

Jowo_2

I support the implementation of an accelerated eviction process for those with significant rent arrears or anti social behaviour, despite the fact that it was an amateur landlord probably ripped off by a 'pro' tenant with a history of rent arrears and evictions who bought it upon herself with ignorance of how to screen out rogue tenants.

But I think there needs to be some reciprocity here, a rebuilding of the social contract between landlord and tenant.

This is an ideal opportunity to marry it with a requirement for all landlords to attend a 1 day course to learn about their obligations and tenants rights, plus how to screen their tenants before they hand over the key to a tenant who targets dumb landlords, and perhaps an amendment to encourage longer term ASTs to give greater security to good tenants.

Kohoutek

ceridwen wrote: »

..tenants should be told at the outset that it IS the landlords own home and not bought specifically as a "rental house" - ie thats why existing rules would continue to apply).

If you have a lease over a property it's your property, not the landlord's, even though the tenant has to pay rent and observe clauses in the lease contract. In fact one of the definitions of a lease is the right to exclude anyone from the property, including the landlord.

If as a landlord you would rather stay the legal owner of the property at all times, then you can simply give a tenant a contractual right to occupy the property, rather than own it, which can easily be terminated – a licence.

ceridwen

Kohoutek wrote: »

That's not really true. Owning a freehold estate in land isn't conditional on paying tax as some kind of "rent" to the state. In practice the fact that the Crown owns all the land in the UK doesn't really change anything compared with if it didn't, except rare situations like finding treasure on your land or if you die without leaving or will and have no heirs.

I am aware of the thing that the "Government" gets MY property if I died intestate.

I would be interested in seeing any links giving any excuses the Government might use to try and grab any "treasure" any of us freeholders found on OUR land though..I must admit the thought wouldnt cross my mind for a minute of anyone being able to find an excuse to steal anything I ever managed to unearth on my land (chance would be a fine thing.....).

Does look rather like there is an antiquated unusable clause from centuries ago still enshrined in legislation if any of this "OUR property might be deemed to be the Governments" stuff is still sitting there somewheres obscure in the statute books....