Leaving a rented house empty

Comms69

HampshireH said:

If their tenancy says they should be living there or not be away for an extended period of time and they ignore that but there is a break in they have left a house unoccupied and vulnerable in breach of their contract

The landlord could argue damage is likely to have been minimised if someone was living there and it is furnished etc. The property is naturally less of a risk when lived in.

Are you suggesting that burglars are targeting empty properties? That would seem counterproductive as there woul dbe nothing to steal

davidmcn

HampshireH said:

The landlord could argue damage is likely to have been minimised if someone was living there and it is furnished etc. The property is naturally less of a risk when lived in.

They could argue it, but the tenant could also argue that the burglary would have happened if they had just popped out to the shops. I can't see any implication that the tenant indemnifies the landlord against everything which might happen while it's unoccupied.

MovingForwards

HampshireH said:

If their tenancy says they should be living there or not be away for an extended period of time and they ignore that but there is a break in they have left a house unoccupied and vulnerable in breach of their contract

The landlord could argue damage is likely to have been minimised if someone was living there and it is furnished etc. The property is naturally less of a risk when lived in.

Odd that, all the times my mom's house was broken into as a kid, was overnight, when we're were all asleep, and our neighbours, and to me a few years later.

p00hsticks

Comms69 said:

HampshireH said:

If their tenancy says they should be living there or not be away for an extended period of time and they ignore that but there is a break in they have left a house unoccupied and vulnerable in breach of their contract

The landlord could argue damage is likely to have been minimised if someone was living there and it is furnished etc. The property is naturally less of a risk when lived in.

Are you suggesting that burglars are targeting empty properties? That would seem counterproductive as there woul dbe nothing to steal

Copper piping from the central heating systems was a bit of a target at one point round here, I'm not sure if it still is.

dimbo61

You are still liable for the council tax until the end of your contract.
As others have mentioned if you leave a property empty for 2 months and its broken into the thieves could remove the central heating boiler, copper piping, electric fittings, period features, even floorboards as they have lots of time to strip a property.
As the tenant you would be liable

Chavy89

dimbo61 said:

You are still liable for the council tax until the end of your contract.
As others have mentioned if you leave a property empty for 2 months and its broken into the thieves could remove the central heating boiler, copper piping, electric fittings, period features, even floorboards as they have lots of time to strip a property.
As the tenant you would be liable

Im sorry this just is not the case, as an electrician who works in domestic properties with loads of other trades i can tell you no ones stealing boilers, copper or electrical fittings. This is silly thinking to suggest theses things would happen honestly the best thing to do is...
1 check what you contract says 
2 speak to the LL 
3 i dunno bolt down the floor board to stop thieves  

shinytop

HampshireH said:

shinytop said:

If a tenant is renting under a 6 month fixed term AST, is there anything to stop them moving out after, say, 4 months and leaving the house empty until the end of the contract? All rent and appropriate bills would be paid. There is nothing in the tenancy agreement that refers to this.  The ideal situation would be for another tenant to be found but that's unlikely at the moment. The only issue I can think of is the LL's buildings insurance might not allow it but that's their problem.  Any thoughts? 

It's actually the tenant problem if the tenancy agreement states they cannot leave it vacant for more than x amount of time.

I know my previous rental had a clause i couldnt leave the property empty for more than than 3 or 4 (i think it was 4) weeks without breaching the contract.
Therefore any problems as a result of doing so the landlord could have pursued me for breach of tenancy.

The tenant still remains liable so if there was a breakin or anything ........

I've highlighted the bit I think you missed in my OP.  Your rental agreement may have had such a clause but this one hasn't.  

shinytop

dimbo61 said:

You are still liable for the council tax until the end of your contract.
As others have mentioned if you leave a property empty for 2 months and its broken into the thieves could remove the central heating boiler, copper piping, electric fittings, period features, even floorboards as they have lots of time to strip a property.
As the tenant you would be liable

I know about CT and mentioned it in my OP. 
In my last house I got the boiler replaced and saved lots of copper piping and the HW cylinder and took it to the scrappie. I think I got about £30 for the lot.  There are easier ways to make £30.

On what basis would the tenant be liable if they are not breaching the tenancy agreement? 

Marvel1

MovingForwards said:

HampshireH said:

If their tenancy says they should be living there or not be away for an extended period of time and they ignore that but there is a break in they have left a house unoccupied and vulnerable in breach of their contract

The landlord could argue damage is likely to have been minimised if someone was living there and it is furnished etc. The property is naturally less of a risk when lived in.

Odd that, all the times my mom's house was broken into as a kid, was overnight, when we're were all asleep, and our neighbours, and to me a few years later.

Someone I work with was broken in to during the day a few months back.

martindow

Even if there were a clause saying that it should not be unoccupied for longer than a certain period, the tenant could satisfy this by popping in or staying overnight  every now and then when this interval was up.  The onus is on the LL to specify conditions in the contract but they can't be too onerous or the tenant would never be able to go on holiday!