Tenants not moving out

Blackpool_Saver

ViolaLass wrote: »

Ridiculous. I've never spent anything near that amount on moving. And paying the new deposit is hardly a long term financial issue given that you'll probably get the old one back within a month.

Hi Viola, seriously please can you explain how because it cost me that and I even drove my own removal van, just 2 months down on the next place was £1400, and I had a 6 month battle to get the deposit back as the previous landlord was deliberately difficult because we wanted to leave, and we were good tenants who they said they didn't want to leave

Blackpool_Saver

Hmmm, posts have been removed and thread no longer makes sense,

ViolaLass

Blackpool_Saver wrote: »

Hi Viola, seriously please can you explain how because it cost me that and I even drove my own removal van, just 2 months down on the next place was £1400, and I had a 6 month battle to get the deposit back as the previous landlord was deliberately difficult because we wanted to leave, and we were good tenants who they said they didn't want to leave

But paying two months rent on your next place doesn't count towards your costs of moving. You would have had to pay rent either way.

When I last moved, we hired a van for £100 a day and, at a guess, £50 for petrol. We paid max £200 in fees for references etc.

Your LL refused to give your deposit back because you were good tenants? What grounds did they present to the deposit protection scheme?

DragonQ, apologies for mixing you up with another poster. Stand by my point of £2000 being a ridiculous number to claim as an average (even if that claim was not made by you).

Carl31

dktreesea wrote: »

Surely the main reason to become a BTL landlord, if you are doing it as a business - and you ought to be treating it as just that - is to make a profit? It's the government's responsiblity to provide social housing, not the private individual's.

Im not sure that everyone that enters into btl sees it as a business tbh. Often the term 'investment' is used, which I think is part of the problem

Blackpool_Saver

ViolaLass wrote: »

But paying two months rent on your next place doesn't count towards your costs of moving. You would have had to pay rent either way.

When I last moved, we hired a van for £100 a day and, at a guess, £50 for petrol. We paid max £200 in fees for references etc.

Your LL refused to give your deposit back because you were good tenants? What grounds did they present to the deposit protection scheme?

DragonQ, apologies for mixing you up with another poster. Stand by my point of £2000 being a ridiculous number to claim as an average (even if that claim was not made by you).

If you run your life like double entry ledger then strictly speaking that is true BUT you still have to find a month ahead of when you would have had to.
I didn't get to see their grounds, I submitted mine and they submitted theirs and an adjudicator found a common ground and we got half each, I won't say exactly what they were awarded in favour as it may identify me, but trust me it was very absurd

ViolaLass

Blackpool_Saver wrote: »

If you run your life like double entry ledger then strictly speaking that is true BUT you still have to find a month ahead of when you would have had to.

There is surely plenty of midground to be found between running your life "like double entry ledger" and having a few hundred pounds in savings. This isn't a problem that would be solved by owning a house or never having to move - EVERYONE needs some money in savings for emergencies. Yes, you might not have it, but that isn't the landlord's fault.

Werdnal

So, my reply (which I felt contained a lot of useful and sympathetic advice for the OP's situation and originally appeared somewhere above Jamie11's at #52 as he quoted from it), is now gone.

Thanks Mods, don't know why I bother to reply here at all - it either gets lost amongst a raft of childish, worthless bickering, or someone in Admin feels it worthy of deletion. OK, so one para did contain a little chastisement of MixedWrestling's accusations about tenants being scum, and advising that many replies actually came from LLs, but there was nothing offensive or abusive in it at all. Suggest you read past the first line before you randomly delete perfectly valid and helpful replies ....

All the good advice I thought I gave to this thread has been binned - great way to treat a long-term member who has something valuable to contribute to the forum - off to find something else to do, where my input IS appreciated.

Cheers for that ....

xylophone

'Rackman'!).

Rachman? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Rachman

dktreesea

BitterAndTwisted wrote: »

It's not that they should be evicted on the day after the fixed-term expires: it's that they can't be. I seems that the OP didn't appreciate that but I think she does now.

The OP could apply to the court on the 1st of December for an accelerated possession hearing but that won't get the tenants out on that day. They might not be able to get a court date for weeks or months after that.

I dunno the facts here but it could be a case of the agent not being candid with the OP about how to ensure it's vacant on the 1st of December, so it could be the wrong party getting all the blame for this part of it. I know from experience just how blithely an agent can respond to the question about ending a tenancy, as friends of mine discovered to their dismay some time ago.

Guest101 wrote: »

Itsnot unreasonable to want the property back, and if notice is served correctly, there's every chance that can happen.

BUT the law doesnt work like that, and thats what this thread is about.

Its a business and the LL should be aware of the correct procedures

I am a bit shocked that, having reached the end of the lease, one can't get back one's property without what seems to be a great deal of hassle.

I have just had a look at our lease, and sure enough it says that at the end of the lease period the tenancy will go onto a rolling month to month contract. It also specifies various notice periods and procedures to be followed, for both sides.

I was also surprised to learn that if the landlord wants to move back into the property they can serve you a notice to quit during the fixed term, with a notice period varying from two weeks to two months. And that the notice should be served as a section 8 notice, not a section 21 notice.

OP, you might want to have a look at this:
https://www.gov.uk/private-renting-tenancy-agreements/your-landlord-wants-to-end-your-tenancy
It was quite an eye opener. I wonder how much of this would be a surprise to tenants and landlords alike. No wonder people are so desperate to get on the housing ladder!!

dktreesea

Carl31 wrote: »

Im not sure that everyone that enters into btl sees it as a business tbh. Often the term 'investment' is used, which I think is part of the problem

Yes, I am beginning to understand just why there are so many vacant properties. Ones happily chugging along, keeping pace wtih inflation value wise, but without the complications and hassles that come with being tenanted.