Evicting Tenant

Smodlet

FBaby wrote: »

Hoping and expecting are two different things. Hoping so that it is a successful outcome for both himself and the tenant seems a reasonable wish. In the end, the Council will have to rehouse the tenant, as their duty, not as a favour to OP.

If the tenant waited for the mushrooms to have appeared, then it was clearly too late, the damage would have been done. Who would wait until it got that bad anyway?

The council have no duty to rehouse anyone except in specific circumstances. The council and the taxpayers have no duty whatsoever to private LLs who abdicate responsibility for their properties.

How do you know how many times the tenant told the LA about the damp before the mushrooms appeared?

Tonyhague

Crikey there were a lot of replies suddenly.

I don't claim to be a professional landlord, we struggled to sell the house and the estate agent said "if you do this you can move and buy another house, everything will be fantastic", so we did.

The estate agents made inventory reports before the tenancy, annually and upon leaving.

Yes there are far worse cases than this, maybe we did get off lightly but it still feels crap and we weren't making a ton of money from the house, just a little over the mortgage. Maybe the fact that it was our home for a decade makes seem worse to us?

We were made aware that the house was vacant via a Facebook friend of a friend of the tenant, agent got through to them a day or two later and the keys returned in another couple of days. Then the agent did the inventory and the next day the windows put through by the boyfriend, I was at work so my wife paid an emergency boarding company a ridiculous amount to seal the house.
Then the "beast from the east" came in.

Heating wasn't left on low because the tenant has changed the meters to token ones despite being contractually obliged not to and didn't leave the keys or cards so there was no power until we could arrange new ones a few days later, by which time it was too late.

When she got the house boarded, with hindsight, the water should have been turned off but that wouldn't have guaranteed no freezing or bursting.

The tenant didn't inform us of the original problem the annual inventory report did.

FBaby

The council have no duty to rehouse anyone except in specific circumstances.

Nor do LL have a duty to keep people housed. They run a business end of. If the tenant ends up with nowhere to go, he is the responsibility of the council and the council will deal with it because it's their duty to the tenant NOT to the landlord.

The tenant brought this on themselves. They didn't look after the property and that resulted in damage. Who would want to keep a tenant as such?

Good luck OP, it will most likely be a battle to get the tenant out but it will happen. Will you then reconsider being a LL and sell up or will you give it another go but maybe be more selective as to who you rent your house to?

anselld

Tonyhague wrote: »

the water should have been turned off but that wouldn't have guaranteed no freezing or bursting.
.

Shut off and drained, and yes it would. Hopefully your insurance will not find this to be negligent; many policies would require measures to be taken to prevent freezing including draining during unooccupancy.

G_M

Tonyhague wrote: »

We were made aware that the house was vacant via a Facebook friend of a friend of the tenant, agent got through to them a day or two later and the keys returned in another couple of days. Then the agent did the inventory and the next day the windows put through by the boyfriend, I was at work so my wife paid an emergency boarding company a ridiculous amount to seal the house.

Ah! So the damage was done by a 3rd party (not the tenant) after the tenancy had been surrrendered.

The tenant then has no liability. It's a straight case of criminal damage by the boyfriend.

* how do you know who it was? Witness? Confession?
* I assume the police were called and a crime number obtained?
* Insurance should cover this (with the crime number)
* a (civil) small claims case could be made against the boyfriend assuming you have evidence, and his name/address, in addition to any criminal case the police bring.

Smodlet

FBaby wrote: »

NIf the tenant ends up with nowhere to go, he is the responsibility of the council and the council will deal with it because it's their duty to the tenant NOT to the landlord.

Wrong again.

https://www.compactlaw.co.uk/free-legal-information/public-housing/homeless-people.html

FBaby

Well if it's not the duty of the council to house this tenant, it certainly isn't that of OP either.

Smodlet

FBaby wrote: »

Well if it's not the duty of the council to house this tenant, it certainly isn't that of OP either.

I did not say it was. I merely wished to point out that this belief so many private LL's appear to have, namely that taking a Section 21/whatever notice to the council is a get out of jail free card, is erroneous. The responsibility lies with the ex-tenant.

FBaby

We both agree on this, but my response was to Lodger who interpreted OP's words about hoping the tenant could get the council to find somewhere else as a favour due to him.

Hoping that a situation will get sorted that will benefit you as much as the person that is causing you issues doesn't mean that you believe you are due this entitlement.

Gwendo40

Tonyhague wrote: »

Crikey there were a lot of replies suddenly.

I don't claim to be a professional landlord, we struggled to sell the house and the estate agent said.....

Why didn't you want to sell the house for it's true value?