Just been issued a section 21 Housing act notice to vacate.

mattyprice4004

Funny story, I got a letter last week which said 'thanks for advertising your house for sale with us' etc etc - I panicked (as I rent) and went into meltdown.

Turns out the estate agent hadn't put a name on the letter (address only) and it was a poorly written 4a, not 42 (where I live!)

Anyway, I hope the move goes well. It's never a good position to be in.

Cakeguts

G_M wrote: »

You're right of course, but, to play devil's advocate, I have some sympathy with tenants on this. Maggie Thatcher of course is to blame.

For comparison, in France it is extremely hard for a LL to evict.

Our system of (frequently) 6 month fixed terms with a 2 month notice period is not condusive to stable family life, or a sense of security in one's home.

But as you say, it IS the system we have, and so it is the system everyone must accept - LLs and Ts alike.

One of the shortest tenancies we have ever had was for a French property. The tenants gave notice to move after 1 year.

Cakeguts

No one can guarantee that they will be able to live in the same property for ever even if they own it.

whatajoke2016

marksoton wrote: »

Wow, just wow.

In what sane world do you consider someone " !!!!!!" by taking THEIR property back within a legal framework ?

"!!!!!!" in the sense that someone who has paid for "temporary ownership during contract" has to now change their lifestyle or circumstance when they were busy trying to live life. It is an inconvenience to one party especially if the party was happy to stay in a property.

How is that now a sane world to have one side be displeased by circumstance? That is life.

marksoton

whatajoke2016 wrote: »

"!!!!!!" in the sense that someone who has paid for "temporary ownership during contract" has to now change their lifestyle or circumstance when they were busy trying to live life. It is an inconvenience to one party especially if the party was happy to stay in a property.

How is that now a sane world to have one side be displeased by circumstance? That is life.

And that " temporary ownership" is coming to an end.

If they wanted a place for longer rent a place with a longer lease.

cloo

I always say that people may go 'Oh, evil landlords demanding people leave', but I'd mainly blame the silly situation that's evolved in this country whereby so much rental property is in private hands of unregulated often poorly-informed people (of whom I was one for 8 years!). I think it's something like 81% of private landlords own only one property, and generally when they give notice 'for no reason', they generally aren't doing it so they can buy themselves a Ferrari.


They're often not wealthy individuals (other than in property assets) and generally will be selling up because their family has got bigger, they're retiring, divorcing, they want to give their kids a deposit, they want to start a business etc. It's not much comfort to tenants, but I do hate this archetype of the venal landlord throwing tenants onto the street so the landlord can bathe in banknotes. But I do also think that leaving letting up to private landlords has not been a good system for society.


/rant

Apodemus

Lioness_Twinkletoes wrote: »

Yes, you'll have to move. You can refuse, but as previously advised, this will cost you money.

The state of your OP, grammatically speaking, is worrisome considering you're intending to join the legal profession.

I would be much more concerned about a prospective lawyer (who has already graduated with a legal degree) seeking legal advice from an Internet forum!

No-one has suggested that the OP actually talks to the LL to see if there is any way that they can reach a suitable compromise. If both are reasonable people, there may be ways that the OP can help the owner sell the property. In the past I have house-sat for someone that wanted to sell. I kept the place occupied, heated/furnished and showed prospective buyers round, in return for free accommodation and a promise to leave by the agreed entry-date. Win/win!

PersianCatLady

Unfortunately one of the down sides of renting is that the LL has the right (as long as they follow the correct legal procedures) to regain possession of their property.


Why on Earth are you acting as if the LL is being unreasonable?

Pixie5740

marksoton wrote: »

And that " temporary ownership" is coming to an end.

If they wanted a place for longer rent a place with a longer lease.

Where are these rental properties with longer leases? The social housing has been decimated and typically the private rental sector doesn't offer tenancy agreements longer than 6 or 12 months. Then when there's a letting agent involved tenants are faced with the choice of coughing up for renewal fees or getting a Section 21 in the post. It's an aggressive tactic and worrying that there are landlords out there who use letting agents who employ this tactic. More worryingly still that there are landlords out there who are also willing to pay a renewal fee and genuinely believe that tenants without a fixed term contract needs to be evicted.

marksoton

Pixie5740 wrote: »

Where are these rental properties with longer leases? The social housing has been decimated and typically the private rental sector doesn't offer tenancy agreements longer than 6 or 12 months. Then when there's a letting agent involved tenants are faced with the choice of coughing up for renewal fees or getting a Section 21 in the post. It's an aggressive tactic and worrying that there are landlords out there who use letting agents who employ this tactic. More worryingly still that there are landlords out there who are also willing to pay a renewal fee and genuinely believe that tenants without a fixed term contract needs to be evicted.

Granted, and all valid points but they are out there. It's a question of hunting them down. But agreed, the system is busted in England.