Eviction in 7 days

Werdnal

Isn't there an old adage about "Doctors being the worst patients"?

Me thinks the same could be true here of "Landlords being the worst tenants!" ...

EmmaHerts

We gave our landlady notice but our circumstances changed and we asked her if we could pay to stay a little longer. If she had had people moving in or if she had said it would not be convenient then we would have moved out when we were meant to. It would not occur to us to put our bad luck on someone else. Luckily, she accepted and we paid to stay an extra week.

I think the OP behaved badly.

theartfullodger

.. and conversely, tenants being the worst landlords eh??

As the old Nudes of the World motto said, "All human life is here"....

Cheers!

sturman

Yellowstar wrote: »

My bolding.

The way I see it, your actions (failing to leave upon expiry of the notice you gave, which ended your tenancy and removed your right to stay) may very well have made the incoming tenants homeless, through no fault of their own...

I don't think you did the decent thing here, Sturman. But you probably already knew that.

I'm a bit surprised to see that you're back on the forum, seemingly believing that you did the right thing, trying to justify your (in my opinion, bad) behaviour. If it was me, I'd be pretty embarrassed...

Yellowstar x

You embarrass easily,The point remains,LL should be nearly a hundred % sure there will be vacant possesion.I very rarely have an immediate switch or have contracts signed before a tenant has moved out.How do you know who the prospective tenants were in my case? could of been a company let or anything. Do you as a LL tell tenants that even though they sign a contract to move in its not guaranteed[very few do].Has anyone mentioned the disgusting practise of issuing people with a section 21 as they move in or allowing people to live without a gas cert,or to insist people leave a property when its financially beneficial for a LA and not in the tenants interest.Hypocrisy on this thread is rife, people are more upset[possibly because of experience]with the issue of lost money than concern about tennants losing out.This experience makes me think that there should be a law to not allow the marketing of properties until vacant.Maybe that will stop LL asking people to leave willynilly.

sturman

EmmaHerts wrote: »

We gave our landlady notice but our circumstances changed and we asked her if we could pay to stay a little longer. If she had had people moving in or if she had said it would not be convenient then we would have moved out when we were meant to. It would not occur to us to put our bad luck on someone else. Luckily, she accepted and we paid to stay an extra week.

I think the OP behaved badly.

OH PLEASE,,,,off your knees...why dont we bring back Rachmann and be done with it.We have the worst tennant rights in Europe because of that attitude

sten_super

sturman wrote: »

You embarrass easily,The point remains,LL should be nearly a hundred % sure there will be vacant possesion.I very rarely have an immediate switch or have contracts signed before a tenant has moved out.How do you know who the prospective tenants were in my case? could of been a company let or anything. Do you as a LL tell tenants that even though they sign a contract to move in its not guaranteed[very few do].Has anyone mentioned the disgusting practise of issuing people with a section 21 as they move in or allowing people to live without a gas cert,or to insist people leave a property when its financially beneficial for a LA and not in the tenants interest.Hypocrisy on this thread is rife, people are more upset[possibly because of experience]with the issue of lost money than concern about tennants losing out.This experience makes me think that there should be a law to not allow the marketing of properties until vacant.Maybe that will stop LL asking people to leave willynilly.

You seem to be attempting to compare/contrast two completely unrelated situations in a vain attempt to 'justify' your actions.

Is it wrong for landlords not to have a current gas certificates? Yes.
Is it wrong for tenants to give notice and then refuse to leave? Yes.

One does not justify the other, two wrongs don't make a right, behave as you expect others to behave, etc. etc.

Just to clarify, I am not, and have never been a landlord. We are in the process of moving out of a rental property into a purchased property, and while we've had problematic landlords I've never used that as an excuse to cause problems.

sturman

sten_super wrote: »

You seem to be attempting to compare/contrast two completely unrelated situations in a vain attempt to 'justify' your actions.

Is it wrong for landlords not to have a current gas certificates? Yes.
Is it wrong for tenants to give notice and then refuse to leave? Yes.

One does not justify the other, two wrongs don't make a right, behave as you expect others to behave, etc. etc.

QUOTE]

My point is that most people on this site see one as an evil and the other as "a bit of dodge" but not so bad....Just looking for consistency in outrage...

johnbusby

sturman wrote: »

My point is that most people on this site see one as an evil and the other as "a bit of dodge" but not so bad....Just looking for consistency in outrage...

But why should there be equal outrage. It is criminal to both dodge taxes and murder a child. Both are wrong yet one will rightly provoke a stronger feeling in outrage. I dont see your point......

sturman

johnbusby wrote: »

But why should there be equal outrage. It is criminal to both dodge taxes and murder a child. Both are wrong yet one will rightly provoke a stronger feeling in outrage. I dont see your point......

let me help you...Through out my case there was issues with the LL ie the way section 21 are issued,refusing to talk to tennant,insisting the tennant leave when not convenient,gas cert etc etc.However with only the odd exception did someone mention these,which in my eyes are as bad as anything that i did....It ,to me proves the point that this section of the forum is predominantly run by one off LL's[probably pensioners ] With a few brokers looking for business touting subtly as nice guys. Tenants should proceed with caution.

sten_super

sturman wrote: »

let me help you...Through out my case there was issues with the LL ie the way section 21 are issued,refusing to talk to tennant,insisting the tennant leave when not convenient,gas cert etc etc.However with only the odd exception did someone mention these,which in my eyes are as bad as anything that i did....It ,to me proves the point that this section of the forum is predominantly run by one off LL's[probably pensioners ] With a few brokers looking for business touting subtly as nice guys. Tenants should proceed with caution.

On the gas certificate, I agree entirely with you - and I suspect that if you'd started a thread asking what to do as your landlord hadn't provided a valid gas certificate you would have had a lot of sympathy and assistance.

On the moving dates - that's a two way street, and simply reflects the current legislation at the end of an AST. In fact at the moment it slightly favours tenants, who are required to only give one month's notice before moving out 'when not convenient', compared to a landlord that has to give two months.

In terms of correspondence - there are ways and means (which are explained to new posters on a regular basis) of ensuring that the landlord receives communications from you. He does not have to agree to any extension of lets beyond the AST, and while you may not like this it is unfortunately the state of the legislation.

Your view of the forum is entirely inconsistent with my experiences over the last couple of months of using it, and seems to be based much more upon the fact that you didn't like the nature of the replies that you received rather than a wider experience of the forum.