disgusted with landlord

pyueck

Poppie68 wrote: »

Just out of curiosity what happens to rent?
Is rent still charged? I know if housing benefit is paying that stops, so would the estate then be liable for any rent owed to the LL for the time between death and ending the tenancy legally?

Yes the estate would be liable, but that assumes an estate has any money in it. If it doesn't the landlord will be charging rent to a straw man. Hence why from the landlords perspective best to agree to surrender the tenancy, clear the place and move people in.

In this case we have no idea of the situation, maybe somebody else is acting as executor and agreed a surrender with the landlord?

Poppie68

pyueck wrote: »

Yes the estate would be liable, but that assumes an estate has any money in it. If it doesn't the landlord will be charging rent to a straw man. Hence why from the landlords perspective best to agree to surrender the tenancy, clear the place and move people in.

In this case we have no idea of the situation, maybe somebody else is acting as executor and agreed a surrender with the landlord?

Thankyou, that's what got me thinking.....if rent is owed on the property and there is money in the estate it would beneficial for the OP for the LL to clear the property as soon as possible....Not saying the LL is right or wrong in what he's done, I was just curious.

pyueck

Poppie68 wrote: »

Thankyou, that's what got me thinking.....if rent is owed on the property and there is money in the estate it would beneficial for the OP for the LL to clear the property as soon as possible....Not saying the LL is right or wrong in what he's done, I was just curious.

So long as there is a valid executor or administrator to agree surrender with otherwise you have to serve a s21 to the address and then apply to the court for possession. I am sure in reality this does not happen in most cases. If there is really nobody then there would be nobody to sue for illegal eviction but as in this case people turn up after people die so best to do it by the book. With regards to possessions the law is the same as every other tenant who leaves goods after a tenancy has ended.

However the OP is not liable for the rent. They only may have to pay out of funds in the estate if they act as executor or administrator. Hence why the OP should not really take anything from the property as from the sound of it they are not the executor or administrator and somebody else may have a claim to these items.

jjlandlord

pyueck wrote: »

otherwise you have to serve a s21 to the address and then apply to the court for possession.

The landlord may just serve a notice to quit (assuming tenancy is periodic) in a case like this, and thereafter there is no need to go to court either.

ReadingTim

I suspect we're dealing with incompetence rather than dishonesty in this case - landlord finds out tenant is no longer around so rather than ascertain what has actually happened, clears the place for new tenants by binning clothes, storing some items should the previous tenant ever reappear and flogging the electrical goods to cover any overdue rent.

It's clearly not the way a landlord should behave, and not legal either; but I don't think the motives were any more sinister than that of a greedy amateur's...

Mojisola

sophlou wrote: »

my dad was dead in that house for several days on his own before he was found

ReadingTim wrote: »

I suspect we're dealing with incompetence rather than dishonesty in this case - landlord finds out tenant is no longer around so rather than ascertain what has actually happened, clears the place for new tenants by binning clothes, storing some items should the previous tenant ever reappear and flogging the electrical goods to cover any overdue rent.

LL must have known what had happened to the tenant.

pyueck

ReadingTim wrote: »

I suspect we're dealing with incompetence rather than dishonesty in this case - landlord finds out tenant is no longer around so rather than ascertain what has actually happened, clears the place for new tenants by binning clothes, storing some items should the previous tenant ever reappear and flogging the electrical goods to cover any overdue rent.

It's clearly not the way a landlord should behave, and not legal either; but I don't think the motives were any more sinister than that of a greedy amateur's...

We don't know that the tenancy was not legally ended or what possessions the deceased had or what happened to them. There is no evidence to suggest they were sold or thrown away.

We also have no idea who else may be involved in the estate, possibly the guy had somebody else lined as his executor and has agreed to surrender the place with the landlord and is clearing possessions. As the OP has agreed, she had not spoken to her father in years, has never been in the property before and has no idea beyond circumstantial evidence of what he owned.

While completely irrelevant an old tv is probably not worth anything so the idea the landlord has used this to offset lost rent is probably wrong, but with everything in this post we have no evidence.

ReadingTim

Mojisola wrote: »

LL must have known what had happened to the tenant.

I don't believe it's possible to make that assertion, although the lack of spelling, punctuation, grammar from the OP makes it quite hard to work out anything at all - they don't appear to be too clear about what exactly happened either, hence my suggestion of the relatively mundane explanation of laziness and stupidity, rather than devious criminal intent....

Argghhh

everyone is assuming the man lived alone. he could have had a gf who had a key to the place and took stuff belonging to tem jointly? Someone else with a key may have taken items

i would speak to landlord as to his version of events, also ask him what caused/triggered him to clear it out - 3 wks - could have been away on hols, i think the probability is he did know his tenant had died