Tenants from Hell Protected by (disgusting) law

Blackpool_Saver

Dan-Dan wrote: »

You really should stop posting on this thread , you make yourself look more and more clueless each time

Now then Dan Dan, tutt tutt, wind ya neck in mate, don't be rude and cheeky

Kynthia

The OP is pretty clueless. Yes it's awful to have a non-paying tenant, have no rent coming in for months and have to go through the time consuming process of eviction. However the landlord didn't have to wait for months before applying for possession and then giving 2 months notice, they could have issued a S8 at the start of month 4 (the day after the second rent wasn't paid) with a 2 week expiry. It's also possible to buy insurance, such as from the credit check company as opposed to rent guarantee schemes where you let to the agent. These are fairly easy ways for a landlord to minimise their risk.

Blackpool_Saver

Kynthia wrote: »

It's also possible to buy insurance, such as from the credit check company as opposed to rent guarantee schemes where you let to the agent. These are fairly easy ways for a landlord to minimise their risk.

that's what I meant

sarah_id1

Kynthia wrote: »

However the landlord didn't have to wait for months before applying for possession and then giving 2 months notice, they could have issued a S8 at the start of month 4 (the day after the second rent wasn't paid) with a 2 week expiry. It's also possible to buy insurance, such as from the credit check company as opposed to rent guarantee schemes where you let to the agent.

You've repeating something already being suggested by others in this thread. I suggest you please read through again.

Its surprising some are claiming to be "landlords" and still have no sympathy for the Landlord who lost so much and helpless throughout. It sounds like being landlord is a sin.

And some who are calling it "Business" risk are unable to differentiate between "risk" and "cheating"

Guest101

sarah_id1 wrote: »

You've repeating something already being suggested by others in this thread. I suggest you please read through again.

Its surprising some are claiming to be "landlords" and still have no sympathy for the Landlord who lost so much and helpless throughout. It sounds like being landlord is a sin. - thats because the LL has failed to protect his investment, and sympathy only stretches so far. the situation couldve been avoided easily. they are only helpless because they have failed to act.

And some who are calling it "Business" risk are unable to differentiate between "risk" and "cheating" - I doubt the tenant wants to be unemployed etc. It is a business risk, u perhaps should re-read the definition of risk.

I think the only surprising bit is that you believe you are right, as opposed to all the people on here

IronWolf

sarah_id1 wrote: »

You've repeating something already being suggested by others in this thread. I suggest you please read through again.

Its surprising some are claiming to be "landlords" and still have no sympathy for the Landlord who lost so much and helpless throughout. It sounds like being landlord is a sin.

And some who are calling it "Business" risk are unable to differentiate between "risk" and "cheating"

'cheating' is meaningless in business. These kind of risks are what you must bear, or insure against, if you want to be a landlord.

Werdnal

The landlord here is not helpless ... mis-informed, ignorant of how the eviction process works, and naive about how to run their letting business effectively perhaps ... but far from helpless!

As for risk, letting is always a risk and you can only mitigate that risk so far, but it seems the LL here has not handled the risk correctly to prevent the situation getting out of control.

sarah_id1

Guest101 wrote: »

I think the only surprising bit is that you believe you are right, as opposed to all the people on here

All???

I've already said what I think, read the subject line, yes the root cause is this law is disgusting.

DRP

sarah_id1 wrote: »

All???

I've already said what I think, read the subject line, yes the root cause is this law is disgusting.

The law provides a mechanism for a LL in this situation.

chris_m

sarah_id1 wrote: »

All???

I've already said what I think, read the subject line, yes the root cause is this law is disgusting.

Well, bleating here when you've been told multiple times that you are wrong isn't going to change a thing.

If you don't like the law as it stands you can always work to change it - there's an opportunity in about 20 months, all you need to do is get selected, then get elected, then get a private members bill accepted. Good luck.