Housing benefits paid to landlord, i top it up. what about the '13th' payment?

tokenfield

Nada666 wrote: »

Rubbish. His contract is to pay the agreed rent. The tenant is paying in two instalments. The declared and contracted rent will be whatever 12 x calendar month payments is. The landlord is not entitled to more. The landlord has agreed that this can be paid in four-weekly instalments and in separate monthly top-ups. Any payments that take this over the contractual twelve calendar-month rent is a balance on the account that can either be returned by the landlord (unlikely) or more usually accepted as advance payment of some future instalments.

and you think that the landlord will take the latter option do you? I wouldn't - I would leave it to see what the tenant will do to try and force my hand.

lighting_up_the_chalice

tokenfield wrote: »

Landlords are in business to make profits not to provide a social service.
Like all businesses you take the chances as they come along. Some you lose, some you win.
Nothing crooked at all - they are simply looking to maximise their income.
Maybe you wouldn't, but then if I was the only one that was willing to rent a place to you - what option do you think you have?

And if, once your reputation as a "canny" landlord was known locally, the only prospective tenants who approached you were the ones no other LL would touch, what option would YOU have? Other than to watch your costs go up and your margins tumble into the red, of course.

lighting_up_the_chalice

tokenfield wrote: »

and you think that the landlord will take the latter option do you? I wouldn't - I would leave it to see what the tenant will do to try and force my hand.

Disgruntled tenants still trash properties when they leave. What would you do about that? All those repairs and void costs?

Court? Sure, why not? Fill yer boots. Spend even more of your valuable "profit" on court costs. You may even get a positive judgement. But what you won't do is get blood out of a stone. This tenant has no means of settling a judgement other than by meager installments at best. It could be years before you recoup those costs, and any sensible LL would have given up the effort of collection long before then.

Still, you know best. But I would enjoy watching the result of you having a tenant with your attitude.

tokenfield

lighting_up_the_chalice wrote: »

Disgruntled tenants still trash properties when they leave. What would you do about that? All those repairs and void costs?

Court? Sure, why not? Fill yer boots. Spend even more of your valuable "profit" on court costs. You may even get a positive judgement. But what you won't do is get blood out of a stone. This tenant has no means of settling a judgement other than by meager installments at best. It could be years before you recoup those costs, and any sensible LL would have given up the effort of collection long before then.

Still, you know best. But I would enjoy watching the result of you having a tenant with your attitude.

As maybe, but the landlord I am friendly with hasn't had any real problems. Not bad turning £10,000 into £180m since the late 90's.

As a landlord that deals with the social misfits of society, he very rarely encounters any 'trashing'. That is the advantage of having a system of 'pay a month - live there a month' thereby avoiding a restrictive tenancy agreement - much the same as the 'Zero hours' employment contracts that are now favoured by a large number of businesses.