How Can The Bank Find Out I Don't Have Consent to Let?

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

citricsquid wrote: »

The landlord at my previous-previous place hadn't notified his mortgage lender that he was letting out the property. He fell behind on his mortgage and the letters started piling up, every few days there was a new letter saying pay now! pay up! we'll reposes!

Anyway eventually he paid up and the letters stopped but for a short period while I was renting that place I was concerned that because he didn't have permission from his lender (hence letters coming to the property) I would have to move out at a moments notice, which wasn't a nice position to be in.

If I were you I'd be more concerned with breaking the law and committing a crime by opening someone else's mail.

Section 84 of the Postal Services Act 2000 makes it a criminal offence to open someone else's post, even if that person does not live at the house any more.

A little known fact that more tenants should be aware of.

Henman_Bill

Annisele,

The reason I won't "just sell" is because I want to make more money by selling the house later when there is more equity and house prices have risen. It is purely a financial decision.

I did some background research on the interest rate. I found out that that the low Bank of England rate of 0.5%:

1. Has been at that rate level for 4 years.
2. In the last 4 years, only 2 of the voters every voted for a rise, and most months voted unanimously not to rise.
3. Since August 2011, every month they have voted unanimously for no rise.
4. Analyst productions are for no rise until about 2014-2017.
5. They even talking about reducing the base rate, or at least an interbank lending rate, to a minus number, which, while it may be unlikely, does give a hint about how unlikely they are to raise it.

Now, if things change and they raise the interest rate substantially to say 4-5%, I will simply sell the house. If the economy makes a surprise recovery this year and the interest rate starts rising in the next months I may well change my mind and sell the house this year. But that seems unlikely.

I am planning to use a decent letting agent. If I find that the letting agent insists on consent to let I will try another agent. If I find that all the best letting agents are asking for the same I will reconsider my position and maybe sell the house after all.

For the issue of someone not paying the rent, I plan to get an insurance policy that would pay me the rent. For the issue of someone trashing the house, that is a risk I will have to take although not sure if any insurance I could get could cover it.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

hugoshavez wrote: »

Your tenant loses their job, stops paying rent. The bank have sent a letter to the property, which they've opened, and they know you don't have consent.

How would you handle them? Evict?

Nah.

Remind them they've committed a criminal offence under Section 84 of the Postal Services Act 2000 by opening a letter addressed to someone else, but out of the kindness of your heart you won't be calling the Police down to arrest them.

And then evict.

Henman_Bill

Annisele wrote: »

If the tenants agree to go, all well. If they don't, then evicting them would be illegal (as in criminal offence) - so that would be a big deal.

Normally you can evict tenants through the courts when they don't pay right, so what's illegal here? Is something more illegal if I have no consent to let than if I don't, and hence harder to evict? If that is the case I would be interested to find more info about that.

G_M

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Nah.

Remind them they've committed a criminal offence under Section 84 of the Postal Services Act 2000 by opening a letter addressed to someone else, but out of the kindness of your heart you won't be calling the Police down to arrest them.

And then evict.

A common misconception.

The Act applies either to post it transit, or where there is intent to act to addresees detriment.

83 Interfering with the mail: postal operators.
(1)A person who is engaged in the business of a postal operator commits an offence if, contrary to his duty and without reasonable excuse, he—

(a)intentionally delays or opens a postal packet in the course of its transmission by post, or

(b)intentionally opens a mail-bag.

84 Interfering with the mail: general.
(1)A person commits an offence if, without reasonable excuse, he—

(a)intentionally delays or opens a postal packet in the course of its transmission by post, or

(b)intentionally opens a mail-bag.

(2)Subsections (2) to (5) of section 83 apply to subsection (1) above as they apply to subsection (1) of that section.

(3)A person commits an offence if, intending to act to a person’s detriment and without reasonable excuse, he opens a postal packet which he knows or reasonably suspects has been incorrectly delivered to him.

" Sorry guv. Saw it was my landlord's letter and thought it might be important so opened it to see if it would help if I did anything as the LL is abroad....."

hugoshavez

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Nah.

Remind them they've committed a criminal offence under Section 84 of the Postal Services Act 2000 by opening a letter addressed to someone else, but out of the kindness of your heart you won't be calling the Police down to arrest them.

And then evict.

Though a quick google would reassure them that the police are highly unlikely to be interested as there's such an easy defence:

3)A person commits an offence if, intending to act to a person’s detriment and without reasonable excuse, he opens a postal packet which he knows or reasonably suspects has been incorrectly delivered to him.

noh

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

If I were you I'd be more concerned with breaking the law and committing a crime by opening someone else's mail.

Section 84 of the Postal Services Act 2000 makes it a criminal offence to open someone else's post, even if that person does not live at the house any more.

A little known fact that more tenants should be aware of.

Simply not true.
An offence is only commited if the mail is opened with intent to cause detriment and without reasonable excuse.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/26/section/84
the relevant wording of section 84 is

(3)A person commits an offence if, intending to act to a persons detriment and without reasonable excuse, he opens a postal packet which he knows or reasonably suspects has been incorrectly delivered to him.

brit1234

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Nah.

Remind them they've committed a criminal offence under Section 84 of the Postal Services Act 2000 by opening a letter addressed to someone else, but out of the kindness of your heart you won't be calling the Police down to arrest them.

And then evict.

The offence of blackmail is set out in s.21 Theft Act 1968. Under the Act, blackmail consists of making an unwarranted demand with menaces with a view to making a gain or causing a loss. By s.21(3) Theft Act 1968, the maximum sentence for blackmail is 14 years.

So now we have got blackmail and fraud offenses which are trialed at crown courts as their sentencing is over 6 months for each in prison.

Section 84would be heard at the lower magistrates court and unlikely police will arrest for it.

How about the landlord be decent and declare all his corruption and try to be honest for his tenants?

Henman_Bill

Fire_Fox wrote: »

You can ask them to move out at a months notice but you are not serving notice because a one month section 21 has no legal standing. Assuming rent is paid monthly notice is two months and must be rubber stamped by the court if the tenants choose not to go. The tenants are not breaking the law if they stay, S21 is just a notice you will be seeking possession after that date. How would you attend court given you are will not be in the UK? Are you going to pay a solicitor or the letting agent to get them out?

You can certainly offer compensation but you need to be VERY careful you don't fall foul of the Protection from Eviction Act. What you see as a bribe or enticement can be miscontrued as harassment, it would be easy to do if you are in a hurry so need an answer ASAP. Again this is someone's home and the tenants can perceive you to have more rights or powers than you actually do as a landlord.

What are the odds that it will come to a many months not paying rent/going to court situation? Got to be pretty low right. 1% chance? 5%? Something like that?

There is piles of legislation to protect tenants (and landlords), you can't just make it up as you go along, again that is unprofessional. G_M did an excellent post with a selection of the legislation you need to adhere to, hopefully someone will link to it.

Hi, I think if there is a need to evict I would have to evaluate whether this could be done remotely, by the letting agent or solicitor's for me at a low cost (say £1000). If not I would probably have to come back to the UK for a period of time. I will be working from home and although I plan to live abroad I can work wherever I want, so I can come back. However the main issues there are the high costs of flights from where I'll be (£1000 return! - unless I'm fortunate enough to have business travel to Europe at company expense scheduled at the same time) and being away from my children. I think on the latter point if I had to come back for 2-3 weeks to get everything done - no problem. If I had to be here to sort out a mess for 2-3 months away from my kids not great at all, but I'll have to take that risk if I decide to go down this route.

Also, do you think not having a consent to let has any legal impact on my ability to evict?

noh

G_M wrote: »

A common misconception.

The Act applies to post it transit. Once it has been delivered to the correct address the Act does not apply.

Section 84 does apply to mail after delivery but as already stated there needs to be intent to cause detriment and no reasonable excuse.