Buying flat - how long before tenant has to vacate?

Fluffi

dimbo61 wrote: »

Removing squatters is now very easy but not so with tenants.
Can the owner use court appointed officers to use accelerated eviction process to evict quicker.
Your mortgage offer may only last 90 days !!!!!!! Check the paperwork from the lender now ?

My mortgage offer is for 6 months and was only granted a month ago so not concerned on that side of things yet.

If its deposit/referral fees that could be the problem is the landlord allowed to offer a tenant a facilitation payment to vacate? Or is that just against all the rules?

duchy

They can offer

Is the owner in any real hurry though ?
Obviously you want things to move on but are they motivated enough to hurry things up .....or do they need a motivating reason -like you threatening to pull out ?

Don't be surprised to be asked to contribute half of the facilitation payment though ...or for the tenant to refuse point blank as they'd prefer the stability of social housing to another private let she can be turfed out of if the owner fancies selling at any point.

katejo

duchy wrote: »

They can offer

Is the owner in any real hurry though ?
Obviously you want things to move on but are they motivated enough to hurry things up .....or do they need a motivating reason -like you threatening to pull out ?

Don't be surprised to be asked to contribute half of the facilitation payment though ...or for the tenant to refuse point blank as they'd prefer the stability of social housing to another private let she can be turfed out of if the owner fancies selling at any point.

In your position I would at least threaten to pull out completely. In fact I wouldn't make an offer at all with a tenant in residence. I think that this eviction problem must be a major factor in the decision by many lettings agencies not to let to DSS tenants.

Pixie5740

katejo wrote: »

In your position I would at least threaten to pull out completely. In fact I wouldn't make an offer at all with a tenant in residence. I think that this eviction problem must be a major factor in the decision by many lettings agencies not to let to DSS tenants.

The tenant being DSS has nothing to do with it.
Private tenants whose LL decide to sell whilst they're still living there can do the same thing especially when they have children at school. Depending on location it can be tricky to find somewhere else in the right catchment area.

The problem is greedy LL trying to have their cake and eat it.

There are other reasons why some LL find DSS tenants less desirable.

franklee

duchy wrote: »

Obviously you want things to move on but are they motivated enough to hurry things up .....or do they need a motivating reason -like you threatening to pull out ?

What good do threats do if the situation is out of the hands of the person being threatened? An eviction will move at the speed it moves based on the council and the court.

Pulling out is another matter but why bother. I'd suggest the OP starts looking at other properties, see if this one comes though before he finds another.

duchy wrote: »

Don't be surprised to be asked to contribute half of the facilitation payment though ...or for the tenant to refuse point blank as they'd prefer the stability of social housing to another private let she can be turfed out of if the owner fancies selling at any point.

I don't think a modest payment (say a few hundred) is going to be enough so I would expect the tenant to refuse point blank.

duchy

franklee wrote: »

What good do threats do if the situation is out of the hands of the person being threatened? An eviction will move at the speed it moves based on the council and the court.

Pulling out is another matter but why bother. I'd suggest the OP starts looking at other properties, see if this one comes though before he finds another.


I don't think a modest payment (say a few hundred) is going to be enough so I would expect the tenant to refuse point blank.

Depends why the tenant is holding out. If she genuinely can't afford the deposit on a new place- she may feel she has no choice. If given the means to choose where she lives ( especially as she has children who are probably in school locally) with a facilitation payment that enables her to find somewhere decent nearby and not risk the council putting her into B&B or a grotty place on a sink estate miles away -she may very well agree. There's no way to know until the LL tries.

It's not always about hard cash - especially when children are involved stability can be more important.

So if threatening to pull out motivates the LL to offer the tenant the means to move without waiting for a court date and eviction order it could be a good move for the buyer.

If the LL has any sense he'll offer her 2 months rent and a couple of hundred towards moving costs- say a grand max . Enough to make it an attractive proposition but not a stupid amount of money. She'd then have the deposit and a month's rent up front to put down and may very well bite his hand off for such a solution. Without knowing her motives we don't know but it's certainly a possibility to consider.

BigAunty

deannatrois wrote: »

If the tenant has an awkward council who won't rehouse before a bailiff's notice is served or the bailiff's turn up on the door even, it'll be more than a couple of months. I'd work on 4 months.

Supposedly, in England, the Localism Act of Nov 2011 was supposed to end Local Authorities extremely dubious practice of gate-keeping, whereby contrary to the Local Authority Ombudsman's guidance, they routinely told private tenants to ignore the notice served by their landlord and remain in the property until a court order, then sometimes a bailiff's appointment was made.

I believe that Local Authorities are supposed to act earlier, when notice is served. The requirement in England that obliges them to offer social housing to the homeless in priority need was removed, freeing them to offer private tenancies instead to fulfill their duties to the homeless.

Of course, it doesn't mean they do this since they ignored previous directives and housing law on this topic, plus it doesn't get round the fact that HB tenants find it a struggle to secure tenancies, if they even try.

AlexMac

BigAunty wrote: »

Supposedly, in England, the Localism Act of Nov 2011 was supposed to end Local Authorities extremely dubious practice of gate-keeping, whereby contrary to the Local Authority Ombudsman's guidance, they routinely told private tenants to ignore the notice served by their landlord and remain in the property until a court order, then sometimes a bailiff's appointment was made.....

Thanks for this info BA; long overdue if this silly practice has now been stopped; why should local Councils use the Courts and baliffs as part of their allocations process- toatal waste of legal resources.

In reply to the OP, and re timescale, I was about to post my own experience, that it took me 2-3 months to evict someone who was in fact desperate to leave.

My tenant, who was also a friend of our kids, was offered a Council house possibility; subject to actually being homeless or threatened; with it. So at her request I colluded with a charade of my issuing a S21, then my taking her to Court for possession, then the Court instructing baliffs; all because that particular SE London Council demanded this silly ritual or they wouldn't rehouse her and her kids.

And when we sold once, I was daft enough to admit to having a short-term temporary lodger (who in fact left immediately she sensed our problem) and the conveyancing solicitors went ballistic; why didn't yours caution against the probelm?

katejo

AlexMac wrote: »

Thanks for this info BA; long overdue if this silly practice has now been stopped; why should local Councils use the Courts and baliffs as part of their allocations process- toatal waste of legal resources.

In reply to the OP, and re timescale, I was about to post my own experience, that it took me 2-3 months to evict someone who was in fact desperate to leave.

My tenant, who was also a friend of our kids, was offered a Council house possibility; subject to actually being homeless or threatened; with it. So at her request I colluded with a charade of my issuing a S21, then my taking her to Court for possession, then the Court instructing baliffs; all because that particular SE London Council demanded this silly ritual or they wouldn't rehouse her and her kids.

And when we sold once, I was daft enough to admit to having a short-term temporary lodger (who in fact left immediately she sensed our problem) and the conveyancing solicitors went ballistic; why didn't yours caution against the probelm?

Surely you wouldn't have had the same problem with evicting a lodger as they don't have tenant rights? I have avoided DSS lodgers but for other reasons.

Fluffi

You were all so helpful I thought you might appreciate an update:

Tenant was finally evicted yesterday. It took 4 months because the council insisted on not re-homing the family until the bailiffs date. Tenant moved out yesterday morning and luckily I was about to WFH so immediately inspected the flat (and saw the lock being changed) , called my solicitor to confirm and we exchanged yesterday!

Hurrah. Completion is the start of Sept

In total 6 months from the landlord saying they wanted the tenant out and issuing the S21 to getting their property back!