Landlady Defaults twice on her morgage. Advice needed.

silvercar

If the lender repossesses you wil get at least 2 months notice.

If you look for somewhere else you can give one month's notice.

Notice to end at the end of a rent period.

If the lender repossesses they will require all the rent to be paid to them. If you withhold rent from the lender they could take you to court. Withholding rent from the landlady risks her taking you to court, to evict and to get the rent, but this is less likely as the landlady is not going to want the hassle and we assume is short of cash; though it is a risk.

thesaint

If your rent is more or equal to the mortgage, I would suggest to your landlord that you pay the lender directly.

I would then work out an exit strategy.

moneyistooshorttomention

thesaint wrote: »

If your rent is more or equal to the mortgage, I would suggest to your landlord that you pay the lender directly.

I would then work out an exit strategy.

That thought crossed my mind...but I was wondering whether it would actually be a feasible proposition?????

I think that suggestion boils down to whether you can manage to find a way to "ring fence" yourself with a layer of protection against that impecunious landlady of yours. If you can....then all to the good...it was just down to I don't know whether there is any way to protect yourself from her financial irresponsibility in the event.

steeeb

As others have said, do the following:

- Check all the deposit schemes to ensure your deposit is actually secured. Do this now.
- Start living like you're going to be evicted - don't go mad and buy that car you wanted. Try save up some money so this goes smoothly.
- Start looking for somewhere else to move. You may not be in a position right away - but it could be 2 months from now if the mortgage company gives you notice. If you can afford it you can do it with 1 months notice.
- You may not get notice to leave for 3-4 months, the landlord may solve the problems and you live there for another 10 years. In any case, you KNOW of this possibility and now is the time to plan for it. Put away the money required to move if required.

Once you know your deposit is protected, and you have enough money to move then you shouldn't have too much to worry about. It's worth keeping an eye out for what property is doing - if there isn't much available you may have to move when the opportunity arises so you aren't then stuck.

Whilst you sound a bit like you have the landladys interests at heart and feel getting up and going will put her in a worse position - at the end of the day she did this to herself. And more, she didn't inform you and has been lying to you about it and will keep on acting like everything is fine and nothing to worry about. You need to keep in mind that you could end up homeless if you continue thinking about anyone but yourself.

It should be against the law to let somewhere without consent - but that is another story.

booksurr

silvercar wrote: »

If the lender repossesses you wil get at least 2 months notice.

are you sure?
the LL has misled the lender into believing that "relatives" occupy the property and the OP has had no direct contact with the lender to correct this misconception

as such the info provided by GM implies it would be an "unauthorised" tenancy. i know the law changed recently but GM's info does not say that 2 months notice is required if the bank is not aware that tenants are in occupation and the court will not grant a stay if the OP does not make themselves known at the court hearing

OP - it looks very likely your LL has :
a) spent your deposit
b) spent your rental money on anything but the mortgage

it is therefore at least 50/50 that you are going to lose the property, either because the lender will repossess or because the LL will evict you out of spite when (as you must for your own good) you inform the lender. Your priority therefore should be to get some money together to allow you to move when the time comes

moneyistooshorttomention

Very true:T You don't know the extent of the lies this landlady has told/is telling and are very vulnerable right now. Not what you wish to know...but that's how it looks and you need to protect yourself from her financial irresponsibility/dishonesty.

There are some people who can literally look you straight in the eye and then tell barefaced lies and will carry right on telling them, even when you tell them you know very well they are lying to you...I know that one from personal experience. Be aware and protect yourself.

No..I don't know how they can...but some people ARE capable of that.

silvercar

booksurr wrote: »

are you sure?
the LL has misled the lender into believing that "relatives" occupy the property and the OP has had no direct contact with the lender to correct this misconception

as such the info provided by GM implies it would be an "unauthorised" tenancy. i know the law changed recently but GM's info does not say that 2 months notice is required if the bank is not aware that tenants are in occupation and the court will not grant a stay if the OP does not make themselves known at the court hearing

....

Have a read of Mortgage Repossessions (Protection of Tenants etc) Act 2010

The court will grant 2 months stay to the tenants if the mortgage doesn't allow for the property to be tenanted. Obviously, you have to make the court aware of your existence.

moneyistooshorttomention

Some element of protection at least for OP.

I would echo that she needs to make the Court aware of her existence. I'll admit the first thing I would be thinking in her position is "Just how do I know that I need to do that and then proceed to let them know".

More voice of experience time here (if in a different context) that someone impartial who was supposed to "know of my existence" apparently didn't and I was just extremely fortunate to have the chance to realise what was what and let them know of it personally (so that I was taken appropriately into account).

So how would OP know a court was considering it? (bar the fortunate circumstance of opening another letter addressed to her home).

Op's landlady is going to be far too busy protecting her own back personally to ensure OP is taken account of.

silvercar

So how would OP know a court was considering it? (bar the fortunate circumstance of opening another letter addressed to her home).

It only applies when there is no consent to let or buy to let approved for the mortgage. In these cases all correspondence to the mortgage holder will go to the property that is rented. So the tenant will see post arriving addressed to the landlord with their address - that is clue number 1, particularly as lenders frank their own post. Generally, a lender concerned about arrears would send someone to the property to make sure the owner is aware of the importance of the arrears and to suss out the situation in general. That should alert the tenant (either the appearance of the mortgage lender's representative or their note through the door. So that's clue 2. Clue 3 is that lender's are aware that some people let out their house without consent and would write to "the occupier" at the address.

RAS

moneyistooshorttomention wrote: »

So how would OP know a court was considering it? (bar the fortunate circumstance of opening another letter addressed to her home).

This is why the mortgage provider send mail to the occupier

Kynthia wrote: »

You were completely right to open post addressed to 'the occupier' as it is why the lender sends out a letter addressed like this instead of addressed to the borrower. As your LL has defaulted again it is clear that your home is at risk.

OP - if you get another letter to the occupier it is vital that you contact the court yourself to protect your right to notice.