Landlord wants to evict me and move back in!

david1951

Miss_Samantha wrote: »

The landlord is wrong, probably more by ignorance than malice. OK

As has been said, OP could just have replied that in a concise and professional way. Instead he has escalated the situation without restraints in a rather childish way. Agreed. Don't think anyone advised him to though...

Two wrongs do not make one right. Once again this thread has shown that many of you are simply hostile to landlords in general and are just rationalising it. ...in fact, the advice was quite clear (see post #75 from G_M and #80 from Guest101). OP ignored it.

Kalamazoo was on point in post #113. Not really. I think most people were surprised at post #113 which didn't follow the advice given...

OP should have given the LL the benefit of the doubt, rather than gone on a crusade which will no doubt mean lots of hassle in the weeks/months to come..

Newbie78

For what its worth OP hope it all works out for you


You sound like a decent person dealing with a nightmare landlord and I for one wont be dishing out any "told you so" or "You should have"


Best wishes

Cakeguts

The landlord tried emotional blackmail. I think we can forgive the tenant for being annoyed. There is nothing to escalate if the OP just doesn't reply to anymore emails there is nothing the landlord can do especially from where he is living now.

m0bov

I'm sure some of the posters who were critical of the Op would be equality rattled if their mortgage provider decided they wanted to claim there property back from under there feet.

DaftyDuck

There's nothing the landlord can do now... However, it is possible that a slower and considered response might have ameliorated the situation, such that the landlord would extend tenancy if the OP wished, or would agree a mutually-beneficial deal to end the tenancy at some point, or wouldn't chase every possible minor deduction from the deposit.

Replying to any ill-worded email in a hurry is often inadvisable. Having said that, I'm far from sure I'd have personally been able to bite my email tongue long enough not to press "send". I've certainly done my share of rash acts in the past, and it's learning from my historic mistakes that makes me always suggest the quiet and placid approach first.

Not a criticism of the OP; as I have admitted, I'm far from sure I could resist pressing the "send" button under similar circumstances!

Gleeful

DaftyDuck wrote: »

There's nothing the landlord can do now... However, it is possible that a slower and considered response might have ameliorated the situation, such that the landlord would extend tenancy if the OP wished, or would agree a mutually-beneficial deal to end the tenancy at some point

If you read all of the LL emails that the OP had shared, you'll see that this was never on the cards

m0bov

The landlord had basically said when I'm back from UAE your homeless.

booksurr

Gleeful wrote: »

If you read all of the LL emails that the OP had shared, you'll see that this was never on the cards

and if you read page 1 of the thread you will see that the OP was advised (including by a solicitor) that the LL had no legal basis for their "demand" to repossess. So had the OP written what was suggested in #16 that would have been the end of the matter. Instead Op was swayed by the more aggressive responses after that.

The LL is patently someone who has no idea of the basis of LL and tenant law. Presumably all they were focused on was getting an income to cover the costs of retaining a property in the UK for when/if they ever returned from their time abroad. On that basis you can understand why their initial contact was, "we want it back" because their ignorance meant they really believed it was that simple. That is of course no defence for the LL failing to learn what they were doing before they did it, but look at how many posts we get on here from "accidental" LL - ie those who deliberately chose to let their house for financial reasons but who have no idea what that means beyond collecting rent.

the Op, having been informed that the law was on their side, simply needed to inform the LL that was the situation and then let events take their natural course, ie either the LL "has" to have the property and so will give a financial incentive to move out, or the LL will follow due process and repossess via the courts after the end of the fixed period.

Instead now both LL and OP are at daggers drawn and after blood from each other. Yet the outcome remains the same, LL will repossess the house eventually, but now it will be a very bitter battle.

silvercar

So lesson is to remember that by posting on a public forum, you will get a mixed bag of responses. Some useful, some damaging and some keyboard warriors who just like winding up with their own agenda. The trick is to separate the wheat from the chaff.

Remember the forum is not moderated.

GDB2222

I can't see what is gained by being ghastly to people, so even though the landlord was in the wrong I would have let him down more gently. That way I would be more likely to get a decent reference and not have an argument about the deposit.

Unfortunately, there's a sizeable contingent of people here who think landlords should be punished simply for being landlords.