Tenants from Hell Protected by (disgusting) law

Yorkie1

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 would have enabled your mate to gete a possession order re. the T within 6 weeks of the first non-payment.

The fact your friend didn't use the law because they didn't know what they were doing, doesn't make the other methods of eviction disgusting.

You're on a hiding to nothing; stop digging yourself into a bigger hole.

Werdnal

sarah_id1 wrote: »

this law is disgusting.

Repeating it over and over again is not going to make people take your side and is just making you look silly. It is clear you (and your mate) know nothing about the LAWS you keep spouting about, and do not want to take on board the advice given.

The LAW is to protect tenants from being thrown on the street by unscrupulous LLs, but conversely, the same LAW will work in the LL's favour to get rid of tenants who genuinely deserve to be kicked out. However, the LAW is a funny thing - get it right, and everyone will be on your side and the nasty, horrible, disgusting thieving tenant (or should that be the tenant who unfortunately lost their job, tried hard to make up their rent arrears and then realised they were within their rights to stay in the property until their numpty of the LL got their facts straight and ended the tenancy correctly) would have been out long ago and have a CCJ against them for the missing rent.

Blaming the LAW for the LL's ignorance isn't going to cut it in court, or here for that matter!

Kynthia

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"

Perhaps I've said it again because you aren't getting the message and I've actually gone through it myself. I had no sympathy for my tenant as they decided to stop paying me rent because I wasn't able to give them permission for a Sky dish to be installed. However I had insurance so was not materially out of pocket, and issued the S8 the first day I could. The law doesn't disgust me as it has to protect people from homelessness and allows landlords to evict non-payers and anyone once the fixed term ends. However the fact that it took 10 weeks to get the court bailiffs did nearly drive me to the edge, but that isn't the case for most landlords and was a problem with my court and not the law.

keyser666

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"

We have all read through the post and what you see compared to others are clearly two different things.

It wouldn't surprise me if you gave your friend the "disgusting" advice in the beginning and now feel guilty about it