Help!! Landlord wants to sell up

[Deleted User]

What the LL is up to is besides the point, annoying but not legally relevant. That it took you five months to find a place/move in whatever is annoying for you, but has no legal validity (hopefully you'll not treat a rental property like its your own again, due to this kind of thing happening - I did the same lol). They do have a right to evict you according to the tenancy agreement. Check that the deposit is protected as advised (as if it isn't it has to be returned before a S21 will be accepted by the courts as valid).

But you don't legally HAVE to leave until the LL goes through the eviction process (S21, giving two month's notice, then they have to do a possession order, then get a bailiffs warrant. Its only on the day of the bailiffs warrant you legally HAVE no choice but to leave.., but bear in mind you will be ordered to repay the court fees of £390).

cloo

One thing I will say as a former landlord is that it is horrendously stressful having a tenant hold out when you need them to leave, it was one of the worst times of my life and on top of it feeling guilty because I knew I was asking them to leave their home. So that on top of your partner being ill would be pretty awful.

OTOH, you say it is a 12 month contract - and I can imagine that some people might consider the only way out when they need to cash from the house before then is giving a heartstring-pulling reason that it has to end early and hope your tenants will move.

Guest101

ScorpiondeRooftrouser wrote: »

Why do you think that tenants should never just move out and find another house when the landlord tells them to leave? I know what the law is. I don't care. Most things in life are done without resorting to the courts. if someone asks me to move my car so he can get out, I don't tell him I'll move it when he gets a court order. When I buy something, I have the legal right to refuse payment and wait for a court to find against me. I don't. - No you don't. When you buy something, ownership only passes to you upon payment (or trade of money for goods)

Why do you think tenancies are exempt from common decency and courtesy? Most tenants can easily find another place to live with a lot less trouble than you always want landlords to go to to evict them.

Don't push your morals on other people. The law is very clear on the matter of tenancies


- for 1 very good reason. It's to stop people being homeless!

rtho782

cloo wrote: »

One thing I will say as a former landlord is that it is horrendously stressful having a tenant hold out when you need them to leave, it was one of the worst times of my life and on top of it feeling guilty because I knew I was asking them to leave their home. So that on top of your partner being ill would be pretty awful.

OTOH, you say it is a 12 month contract - and I can imagine that some people might consider the only way out when they need to cash from the house before then is giving a heartstring-pulling reason that it has to end early and hope your tenants will move.

This is why people should not be landlords unless they are running it as a business and should not do it if their entire life hangs on it.

The absolute worst case for the LL is defaulting on the BTL mortgage and having the BTL property repossessed, although I'd argue the LL should be able to cover the mortgage even if he has a void or whatever. That is pretty awful, but apparently tenants should be living on the streets on the whim of the landlord.

If the landlord runs up loads of creditcard debt because he's irresponsible, and wants to sell, the tenant gets to be homeless. Yay.

Guest101

catalepticstate wrote: »

I'm going to post the agreement in several parts: Here's part 1 - Please don't do this again!

The Term 12 months Commencing on: 13 November 2015 to 12 November 2016 - Great.
The Rent £550.00 Payable every calendar month by standing order in advance on 13 November 2015 and every calendar month thereafter on the same date - Any arrears?
The Deposit £550.00 to be held within a Tenancy Deposit Scheme
_________________________________________________________________________ GRANT OF THE TENANCY 2.1 The Landlord shall rent the Property, including the Contents, as an unfurnished property to the Tenant for the Term of this Agreement. 2.2 This agreement creates an Assured Shorthold Tenancy in accordance with Part I Chapter II of the Housing Act 1988. RENT 3.1 The Tenant must pay the Rent on commencement of this agreement - 13 November 2015 - and every month thereafter on the same date or before the subsequent dates. 3.2 If the Tenant fails to pay the Rent in accordance with this clause the Landlord shall then be entitled to use any statutory remedies that may be available in order to recover possession of the Property. 3.3 The Tenant shall pay the Rent by standing order. DEPOSIT 4.1 The Tenant shall pay to the Landlord the Deposit on or before the date of this agreement. 4.2 The Landlord shall be entitled to withhold a proportion of the Deposit, at the end of the tenancy that may be reasonably necessary to: 4.2.1 Repair any damage to the Property or Contents excluding fair wear and tear and any repairs that are the responsibility of the Landlord. 4.2.2 Replace any Contents detailed on the Inventory that are damaged, destroyed or missing. 4.2.3 Compensating the Landlord for remedying any major breach by the Tenant of the Tenant’s obligations under this Tenancy including covering the cost of cleaning the premises, its Contents, fixtures and fittings. 4.2.4 Pay any utilities for which the Tenant is liable, which are unpaid. These include water, gas, electricity and council tax charges. - Aside from the council tax debate, this is totally unenforceable. The LL suffers no loss. 4.2.5 Pay any Rent that is outstanding.
4.2.6 The Tenant shall pay the Deposit (on signing the agreement on the commencement date) to the Landlord who shall hold the same as Stakeholders - a LL cannot hold as a stakeholder. during the Tenancy or until vacant possession shall be obtained of the whole of the Property and the Deposit or the balance thereof shall be returned to the Tenant within 30 days of either (i) the expiry of the Tenancy Term or ; (ii) in the event of any dispute resolution of that dispute by Court Order subject to deduction
of : (a)any monies due pursuant to the paragraph below; (b)any arrears of rent; (c) the cost of making good any damage or disrepair to the Property caused by the Tenant and (d) any other monies owed by the Tenant to the Landlord; - Stupid clause. The resolution or court order would have already considered a-d
After vacation of the Property, an inspection will be undertaken and checked against the Inventory list and should the Property not be left clean and in good repair and decorative order and the garden well maintained, the cost of restoring the Premises and contents to the condition they should have been in had the Tenant complied with his obligations in the Agreement and any Rent due will be deducted from the Deposit paid at the commencement of the Agreement. - bit obsessed with the deposit aren't they?! Should the Deposit be insufficient to meet the dilapidation costs the Tenant shall be responsible for payment of the balance. Providing the inspection is satisfactory and there are no dilapidations costs or unpaid Rent the Deposit will be refunded to the Tenant in full.The Deposit shall in no circumstances be treated by the Tenant as Rent nor shall it relieve the Tenant of his obligations to pay rent. - contradictory really as above they say it can be used to settle unpaid rent! No interest will be paid on the Deposit. TENANCY DEPOSIT SCHEME 5.1 The Landlord shall use a custodial Tenancy Deposit Scheme. - so the landlord wont hold it as a stakeholder?! Within 14 days of receiving the Deposit the Landlord shall pay the Deposit into an account belonging to an approved Tenancy Deposit Scheme, and shall advise the Tenant that this has been done. 5.3 The Landlord has provided to the Tenant in writing the information required under section 213(5) of the Housing Act 2004 as set out in The Housing (Tenancy Deposits) (Prescribed Information) Order 2007 which is known as the “Prescribed Information”. 5.4 If the Landlord intends to withhold all or part of the Deposit they shall inform the Tenant of this within ten working days of the Tenancy ending. 5.6 Within fourteen days of the end of the tenancy the Landlord shall inform the Tenancy Deposit Scheme Administrator of the amount of the Deposit that is to be repaid to the Tenant.

Mostly fine (certainly no break clause)


But some contradictory bits


PLEASE use paragraphs next time

Guest101

catalepticstate wrote: »

Maybe this:

TERMINATION BY NOTICE The Landlord or Tenant shall have the right to terminate this Tenancy by giving two months notice in writing to expire at any time on or after six months from the Commencement Date such notice to be delivered by hand or registered post by the Landlord to the Tenant or by the Tenant to the Landlord as appropriate. -- there we go, a break clause. STATUTORY PROVISIONS The Tenant acknowledges that possession may be recovered under the provisions of Section 21 of the Housing Act 1988 as amended by the Housing Act 1996 in accordance with the provisions of that Section. POSSESSION BY MORTGAGE The Tenant acknowledges that the agreement may be broght to an end if the Bank/Building Society/Insurance Company as mortgages require possession on default of the Landlord as the borrower under Ground 2 Schedule 2 of the Housing Act 1988

So either party can give notice of two months.


Notice does not end a tenancy.

cloo

rtho782 wrote: »

This is why people should not be landlords unless they are running it as a business and should not do it if their entire life hangs on it.

Indeed, although some are, like me, didn't buy to let, and had to let their former homes as the best solution to their life circumstances.

Basically, though, it is pretty ridiculous that a situation has emerged whereby most landlords have just the one rental property (IIRC) as they are bound to be a) resistant to long assured tenancies and b) need it back at some point if their circumstances change, and the result is tenants having to find another home. I really do think we need a more continental model whereby large organisations own rental properties as this would end the merry-go-round so many tenants have to go through with when single-property landlords (usually for good personal reasons, IMO - not buying a Ferrari or anything!) need their properties back.

Guest101

cloo wrote: »

Indeed, although some are, like me, didn't buy to let, and had to let their former homes as the best solution to their life circumstances.

Basically, though, it is pretty ridiculous that a situation has emerged whereby most landlords have just the one rental property (IIRC) as they are bound to be a) resistant to long assured tenancies and b) need it back at some point if their circumstances change, and the result is tenants having to find another home. I really do think we need a more continental model whereby large organisations own rental properties as this would end the merry-go-round so many tenants have to go through with when single-property landlords (usually for good personal reasons, IMO - not buying a Ferrari or anything!) need their properties back.

You could've sold it presumably? So you chose to be a landlord surely?

ScorpiondeRooftrouser

Guest101 wrote: »

Don't push your morals on other people. The law is very clear on the matter of tenancies


- for 1 very good reason. It's to stop people being homeless!

The vast majority of people will not be homeless. They will find another place to rent. They have to do that anyway once they get evicted, don't they.

The law is there to protect those few that might become homeless. If everyone abuses the law by staying as long as possible regardless of their situation instead of just looking round and finding another flat, the law will be changed and those that need it will not be able to take advantage of it.

ScorpiondeRooftrouser

rtho782 wrote: »

This is why people should not be landlords unless they are running it as a business and should not do it if their entire life hangs on it.

The absolute worst case for the LL is defaulting on the BTL mortgage and having the BTL property repossessed, although I'd argue the LL should be able to cover the mortgage even if he has a void or whatever. That is pretty awful, but apparently tenants should be living on the streets on the whim of the landlord.

If the landlord runs up loads of creditcard debt because he's irresponsible, and wants to sell, the tenant gets to be homeless. Yay.

Why do you assume people live on the streets or are homeless? A tiny few maybe, most just move. It's not hard. I've done it lots of times, believe it or not.