Continuing saga of my spiteful landlord

Soubrette

sussexchick wrote: »

what I may do, is continue to pay the rent whilst seeking advice from a solicitor ?

That's personally what I would do. See a solicitor as soon as possible while paying rent and see what they say. Take in all correspondence and a list of questions. 1) Is this a fair contract or does it contain unfair clauses and how does this affect the AST 2) What are the consequences of being taken to court and what losses would you be liable for - say the landlord has specifically mentioned you are liable for his insurance if you leave the property unattended for more than 14 days.

Do you also have another place to rent yet near where you work or will be working? I'm thinking that another option might be to contact someone like the CAB with your costs and income and how much you have left over each month. You could then contact your current landlord and explain that you do not have the finances to maintain two places of residence, that unfortunately, despite all your efforts, he will indeed have to take you to court and that you have it on authority that in the unlikely event that you lose (actually it's probable you will lose unless his contract is deemed unfair and unenforceable imo but why give him the satisfaction), as the CAB have looked through your budget and it is probable you would have to pay off any arrears to him at the rate of £5, £10 per week (or whatever the CAB have suggested).

terryw

SternMusik wrote: »

Tell him to move in himself, sort out the presentation and sell the house as his primary residence, thus no CGT liability :-)

Reading between the lines based upon the landlord's reply above, it may well be that this is what he is intending but in a future tax year for some reason peculiar to his circumstances. A period of living in a previously let property can reduce or negate CGT liability.

sussexchick

Soubrette wrote: »

That's personally what I would do. See a solicitor as soon as possible while paying rent and see what they say. Take in all correspondence and a list of questions. 1) Is this a fair contract or does it contain unfair clauses and how does this affect the AST 2) What are the consequences of being taken to court and what losses would you be liable for - say the landlord has specifically mentioned you are liable for his insurance if you leave the property unattended for more than 14 days.

Do you also have another place to rent yet near where you work or will be working? I'm thinking that another option might be to contact someone like the CAB with your costs and income and how much you have left over each month. You could then contact your current landlord and explain that you do not have the finances to maintain two places of residence, that unfortunately, despite all your efforts, he will indeed have to take you to court and that you have it on authority that in the unlikely event that you lose (actually it's probable you will lose unless his contract is deemed unfair and unenforceable imo but why give him the satisfaction), as the CAB have looked through your budget and it is probable you would have to pay off any arrears to him at the rate of £5, £10 per week (or whatever the CAB have suggested).

I totally agree with everything you have said. I've already gone down this route with him, explained my finances, even give him quotes from the benefits department etc ! - he simply says, tough, or words to that effect, you can see from his email, he is a well-educated man (posh chap that lives in London). I've even thought of driving to his house and throwing myself at his mercy ! but don't hold out any hope

sussexchick

terryw wrote: »

Reading between the lines based upon the landlord's reply above, it may well be that this is what he is intending but in a future tax year for some reason peculiar to his circumstances. A period of living in a previously let property can reduce or negate CGT liability.

Hi TW

I don't quite understand his reasons for wanting to sell in another tax year either. Yet he was very quick off the mark when a viewer arrived the other day wanting to buy ! and was very open to the idea of selling now !

SternMusik

terryw wrote: »

Reading between the lines based upon the landlord's reply above, it may well be that this is what he is intending but in a future tax year for some reason peculiar to his circumstances. A period of living in a previously let property can reduce or negate CGT liability.

Surely, if he doesn't want to sell in the 2013/14 tax year for some peculiar reason then he could just take on another tenant on a 6 months or 12 months AST? Which is what the OP offered to help arrange and even pay towards. I really can't see where the problem is from the landlord's perspective.

My feeling is that he was planning on bullying his tenant into sorting out the presentation of the house for viewings etc, then kick her out at short notice and move in himself as soon as the house has gone SSTC.

sussexchick

SternMusik wrote: »

Surely, if he doesn't want to sell in the 2013/14 tax year for some peculiar reason then he could just take on another tenant on a 6 months or 12 months AST? Which is what the OP offered to help arrange and even pay towards. I really can't see where the problem is from the landlord's perspective.

My feeling is that he was planning on bullying his tenant into sorting out the presentation of the house for viewings etc, then kick her out at short notice and move in himself as soon as the house has gone SSTC.

Its funny you should say that as I had originally wanted to repaint (the d!cor is shabby and old fashioned). I had emailed his father, who has since passed on, and he was more than happy for me to continue. However, various neighbours made comments about the son selling, so I never went any further with it.

PasturesNew

Have you moved in elsewhere, or signed a 2nd AST? Would it be worth your while just Mon-Fri commuting and staying in a Mon-Fri lodger house until your AST with Mr Meanie's done?

sussexchick

PasturesNew wrote: »

Have you moved in elsewhere, or signed a 2nd AST? Would it be worth your while just Mon-Fri commuting and staying in a Mon-Fri lodger house until your AST with Mr Meanie's done?

I've had no choice but to sign a 2nd AST. Its just a tiny bedsit but I'll make it home. It would be impossible to commute the distance involved, and as my hours are shift work, I'd be worried about taking any 'lodgers' on a Mon-Fri basis. Besides, he'd only see me in Court over that too if he ever found out ! (and he's the type to make a random visit too) !

PasturesNew

sussexchick wrote: »

I've had no choice but to sign a 2nd AST. Its just a tiny bedsit but I'll make it home. It would be impossible to commute the distance involved, and as my hours are shift work, I'd be worried about taking any 'lodgers' on a Mon-Fri basis. Besides, he'd only see me in Court over that too if he ever found out ! (and he's the type to make a random visit too) !

It's only 150 miles, I used to do 200 miles Monday morning, then back Friday night.

In my scenario, you'd have been the lodger on the Mon-Fri basis.

But if you've already signed a 2nd AST it reduces these options.

tim123456789

sussexchick wrote: »

I've had no choice but to sign a 2nd AST. Its just a tiny bedsit but I'll make it home. It would be impossible to commute the distance involved, and as my hours are shift work, I'd be worried about taking any 'lodgers' on a Mon-Fri basis. Besides, he'd only see me in Court over that too if he ever found out ! (and he's the type to make a random visit too) !

He may have a clause to try, but he can't stop you from taking in lodgers.

and in the short term he can't stop you from sub-letting.

He would have to go to court to enforce this and if the remedy that he requires is the sub-tenant out then he would have to show that he is materially disadvantaged because they are there - something he is unlikely to be able to do.