Regulated tenant not all she might be

ancientbuilding

The vast majority of regulated tenants are civilised and honest folk, but occasionally you get one that isn't. I have one, and I am writing about her because such tenants create chaos for verybody else and a great amount of mistrust, so there needs to be a way of dealing with them.

For more than the last 30 years I have had a tenant who does everything she possibly can to make the house unmanageable, and for some long time I did not even realise that was what she was doing. Here is my description from another thread:


(to jamie11, who appears to have no understanding of what the tenant might be doing)

'For more than the last 30 years I have had a tenant who behaves pretty much in the same way, and from this I might be able to help you a little with understanding the situation.

I bought a very rough antique house with the intention of restoring it, and as fast as I restored it my work was dismantled. Tools and materials disappeared, newly mended bits were broken again, light switches were turned upside down, my car was vandalised if I parked it in the driveway, my trailer was steadily demolished over several years, my shed was wrecked, my bicycle stolen, my scaffolding stolen, pipework removed temporarily was stolen......

I could go on, but some people are just vindictive and will do all the damage they can with no apparent reason.

But wait. Here are some possible other explanations:

1. If the place is thoroughly shabby the rent officer keeps the rent down.

2. If the property is difficult to manage the landlord may be desperate to sell it and the tenant or a friend may fancy a quick buck from a purchase. Thus when things are going particularly badly certain property dealers contact me 'speculatively'. A bit transparent, don't you think?

3. The tenant may on principle not like landlords or this particular landlord.

4. After several years the tenant asked for more than £100k to leave and was refused. This wound her up a bit more.

5. My experience has been that most but not all judges are a bit prejudiced against landlords - and on one occasion many years ago I investigated why a particular property company contacted me during a case only to come to the conclusion that the judge had shares in the property company.

About 6 years after I had bought the house the tenant decided to complain to the environmental health department because work was not getting done (not actually true) and they served a notice and did some appallingly poor work on the building, and then billed me for £36K, but by this time I had become so poor that I was eligible for Legal Aid (you could get it in those days) and went to court over it. I discovered in court who was responsible for this fiddle (the intention I think was to share the swag with the tenant) and the council withdrew their claim and gave me a few thousand - but not anywhere near enough to make good the damage they had done. Probably that bent council officer was not sacked either.

Read between the lines in case there is something else there.

Anyone else with similar experiences?

mart.vader

I've realised that the council in this area are as corrupt as they could be, and the judges at the local court are as disinterested as possible. This is not in tenancy law or house repair as you are experiencing, though.

What annoys me is, that when you try to explain to anyone what you have proof of, they say, "But surely, the council wouldn't do that would they ? They have a written Constitution and a code of practice, that prohibits corrupt actions, so they can't do that"

Other posters on this forum will be along shortly to tell you and I that we must have imagined it.

sequence

What are you smoking ?

bebewoo

Could you set a trap for her and say catch her on cctv doing something that is illegal?

anotheruser

Mark as SPAM and move on!
Post doesn't make sense.

Norman_Castle

I bought a very rough antique house with the intention of restoring it, and as fast as I restored it my work was dismantled. Tools and materials disappeared, newly mended bits were broken again, light switches were turned upside down, my car was vandalised if I parked it in the driveway, my trailer was steadily demolished over several years, my shed was wrecked, my bicycle stolen, my scaffolding stolen, pipework removed temporarily was stolen......

Were you restoring your "antique" house around your tenant?. What about the tenants right to peaceful enjoyment of their home.

45002

Here what OP posted on 22-07-2013

ancientbuilding wrote: »

For more than the last 30 years I have had a tenant who behaves pretty much in the same way, and from this I might be able to help you a little with understanding the situation.

I bought a very rough antique house with the intention of restoring it, and as fast as I restored it my work was dismantled. Tools and materials disappeared, newly mended bits were broken again, light switches were turned upside down, my car was vandalised if I parked it in the driveway, my trailer was steadily demolished over several years, my shed was wrecked, my bicycle stolen, my scaffolding stolen, pipework removed temporarily was stolen......

I could go on, but some people are just vindictive and will do all the damage they can with no apparent reason.

But wait. Here are some possible other explanations:

1. If the place is thoroughly shabby the rent officer keeps the rent down.

2. If the property is difficult to manage the landlord may be desperate to sell it and the tenant or a friend may fancy a quick buck from a purchase. Thus when things are going particularly badly certain property dealers contact me 'speculatively'. A bit transparent, don't you think?

3. The tenant may on principle not like landlords or this particular landlord.

4. After several years the tenant asked for more than £100k to leave and was refused. This wound her up a bit more.

5. My experience has been that most but not all judges are a bit prejudiced against landlords - and on one occasion many years ago I investigated why a particular property company contacted me during a case only to come to the conclusion that the judge had shares in the property company.

About 6 years after I had bought the house the tenant decided to complain to the environmental health department because work was not getting done (not actually true) and they served a notice and did some appallingly poor work on the building, and then billed me for £36K, but by this time I had become so poor that I was eligible for Legal Aid (you could get it in those days) and went to court over it. I discovered in court who was responsible for this fiddle (the intention I think was to share the swag with the tenant) and the council withdrew their claim and gave me a few thousand - but not anywhere near enough to make good the damage they had done. Probably that bent council officer was not sacked either.

Read between the lines in case there is something else there.

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.php?p=62576351&postcount=12

mart.vader

sequence wrote: »

What are you smoking ?

I don't smoke

societys_child

Norman_Castle wrote: »

Were you restoring your "antique" house around your tenant?. What about the tenants right to peaceful enjoyment of their home.

Ah but, what about the tenant complaining to the EH . . and if this thread is genuine, what about the chaos she's causing?

About 6 years after I had bought the house the tenant decided to complain to the environmental health department because work was not getting done

She can't have it both ways . . .

propertyman

The common problem is that after 30 years some chap turns up wanting to turn her home into a modern or " restored antique house"

Not only is that a hugely disruptiuve and unsettling issue it frankly cr*ps on her whole concept of it being her home.

These works have to delicately handled and can lead to sabotage or violent behaviour.

While rent does increase it is not simple jump as the Rent officer will not take into account the landlord meeting their repairing obligations nor improvements that significantly departs from the house at the time of the tenancy.

Taking a Victorian house if it was let as a workers cottage standard with a basic specification then the rent would not take account of restoration to a comparible higher standard with the addition of say period features.

Somerset

propertyman wrote: »

Taking a Victorian house if it was let as a workers cottage standard with a basic specification then the rent would not take account of restoration to a comparible higher standard with the addition of say period features.

I take your point that someone may just want to be left in peace in a basic, unchanging house.

But an offer to vacate for 100K implies they are not wedded to the property and are umm canny and possibly playing a long-term game.