Tenant inside - how to spot whether seller has problems getting tenant out

steampowered

I would always ask the estate to explain the circumstances.

If the tenant has already given notice to leave the property, then that's great and you know the landlord will be committed to a speedy sale.

If the tenant is searching for a property to move into, that's an orange flag. As you are then in a chain as the tenant cannot leave until they have completed on their new home.

If the tenant is being asked to leave, that's a red flag. As there is absolutely zero reason why the tenant should leave just because the landlord wants to sell up.

Silvertabby

diystarter7 said:

Silvertabby said:

A work colleague viewed a house on the understanding that it was being offered as 'vacant possession'

The tenant met him at the door with a big smile - and a long list of problems that he expected his 'new landlord' to sort out as soon as he bought the property.

End of viewing. 

"vacant possession" means just that.  I'm a bit lost about your contradictory post. Why would a possible buyer having met the T live there not go ahead and buy if the property is being offered with vacant possession as you stated.
 

He was told by the vendor that the tenant would be out by the time they were due to exchange, but the tenant appeared to have other ideas....

Ath_Wat

steampowered said:

I would always ask the estate to explain the circumstances.

If the tenant has already given notice to leave the property, then that's great and you know the landlord will be committed to a speedy sale.

If the tenant is searching for a property to move into, that's an orange flag. As you are then in a chain as the tenant cannot leave until they have completed on their new home.

If the tenant is being asked to leave, that's a red flag. As there is absolutely zero reason why the tenant should leave just because the landlord wants to sell up.

If the tenant has given notice it may well, depending on your position,  be worth waiting a month to see if they actually do go, but I still wouldn't be spending any money until they have.

diystarter7

Silvertabby said:

diystarter7 said:

Silvertabby said:

A work colleague viewed a house on the understanding that it was being offered as 'vacant possession'

The tenant met him at the door with a big smile - and a long list of problems that he expected his 'new landlord' to sort out as soon as he bought the property.

End of viewing. 

"vacant possession" means just that.  I'm a bit lost about your contradictory post. Why would a possible buyer having met the T live there not go ahead and buy if the property is being offered with vacant possession as you stated.
 

He was told by the vendor that the tenant would be out by the time they were due to exchange, but the tenant appeared to have other ideas....

You never said that in your post I quoted which did not make sense it was contradictory. Thanks for additional info no makes 
sennse.

diystarter7

steampowered said:

If the tenant is being asked to leave, that's a red flag. As there is absolutely zero reason why the tenant should leave just because the landlord wants to sell up.

The LL owns the property it's not the T's or are you confused?
Why sign agreements when you have no intention of keeping your side of the agreement?

Someone we know had lots of trouble with a T when they wanted to sell. Thankfully the T's worked but did not pay rent for months and trashed the property on leaving. The LL pursued them via courts for close to 19k damages/costs inc missed rent damage and his costs inc bailiff costs etc. High court bailiffs were involved and guess what, the T's came up with xx k's in cash/bank transfer and 700 pounds a month, they paid every penny of it.  I think the costs would have been a few k's if the T's played ball with the bailiffs but they tried to be clever, lol.

You may not be aware but some people rent out their home when in financial turmoil and the last thing want is a T that refuses to play by the rules and in turn make the LL bankrupt/defualt mortgae payments etc etc.

Yes, not all LL are rich, money grabing... Many are trying to make ends meet and the last thing they need is comments like yous.

Yes, LL's and T's must operate by the rules and just the LL's.

I wanted to be a LL in the hope for an early retirement/etc but my circumstances atm are not ready for that plus the rules changes possibly coming making it even more difficult to get your property back.

Ath_Wat

diystarter7 said:

Silvertabby said:

diystarter7 said:

Silvertabby said:

A work colleague viewed a house on the understanding that it was being offered as 'vacant possession'

The tenant met him at the door with a big smile - and a long list of problems that he expected his 'new landlord' to sort out as soon as he bought the property.

End of viewing. 

"vacant possession" means just that.  I'm a bit lost about your contradictory post. Why would a possible buyer having met the T live there not go ahead and buy if the property is being offered with vacant possession as you stated.
 

He was told by the vendor that the tenant would be out by the time they were due to exchange, but the tenant appeared to have other ideas....

You never said that in your post I quoted which did not make sense it was contradictory. Thanks for additional info no makes 
sennse.

It absolutely did say that in their post.  What did you think "The tenant met him at the door with a big smile - and a long list of problems that he expected his 'new landlord' to sort out as soon as he bought the property." meant?  

Slithery

diystarter7 said:
The law should change where a T has been given legal notice leaves on that date or high court sherrifs evict them, no ifs no buts.

But that is what currently happens...
Once the tenants have been legal notice to leave by the courts then bailiffs can be instructed immediately if they fail to vacate the property.
Or are you under the mistaken assumption that a LL can end a tenancy?

justwhat

Never trust a tenant, They have far too many laws on there side that lets them take liberties. 

There is going to be a serious shortage of rented accommodation sooner or later due to the laws protecting tenants.  

diystarter7

Ath_Wat said:

diystarter7 said:

Silvertabby said:

diystarter7 said:

Silvertabby said:

A work colleague viewed a house on the understanding that it was being offered as 'vacant possession'

The tenant met him at the door with a big smile - and a long list of problems that he expected his 'new landlord' to sort out as soon as he bought the property.

End of viewing. 

"vacant possession" means just that.  I'm a bit lost about your contradictory post. Why would a possible buyer having met the T live there not go ahead and buy if the property is being offered with vacant possession as you stated.
 

He was told by the vendor that the tenant would be out by the time they were due to exchange, but the tenant appeared to have other ideas....

You never said that in your post I quoted which did not make sense it was contradictory. Thanks for additional info no makes 
sennse.

It absolutely did say that in their post.  What did you think "The tenant met him at the door with a big smile - and a long list of problems that he expected his 'new landlord' to sort out as soon as he bought the property." meant?  

I'll make one attempt to clearly demonstrate the poster did not say that and below is their post in full.
"vaccant possession" is just that an empty house.

Today at 2:04PM edited Today at 2:04PM

SilvertabbyForumite7.6K Posts

A work colleague viewed a house on the understanding that it was being offered as 'vacant possession'

The tenant met him at the door with a big smile - and a long list of problems that he expected his 'new landlord' to sort out as soon as he bought the property.

End of viewing.

Ath_Wat

diystarter7 said:

Ath_Wat said:

diystarter7 said:

Silvertabby said:

diystarter7 said:

Silvertabby said:

A work colleague viewed a house on the understanding that it was being offered as 'vacant possession'

The tenant met him at the door with a big smile - and a long list of problems that he expected his 'new landlord' to sort out as soon as he bought the property.

End of viewing. 

"vacant possession" means just that.  I'm a bit lost about your contradictory post. Why would a possible buyer having met the T live there not go ahead and buy if the property is being offered with vacant possession as you stated.
 

He was told by the vendor that the tenant would be out by the time they were due to exchange, but the tenant appeared to have other ideas....

You never said that in your post I quoted which did not make sense it was contradictory. Thanks for additional info no makes 
sennse.

It absolutely did say that in their post.  What did you think "The tenant met him at the door with a big smile - and a long list of problems that he expected his 'new landlord' to sort out as soon as he bought the property." meant?  

I'll make one attempt to clearly demonstrate the poster did not say that and below is their post in full.
"vaccant possession" is just that an empty house.

Today at 2:04PM edited Today at 2:04PM

SilvertabbyForumite

7.6K Posts

A work colleague viewed a house on the understanding that it was being offered as 'vacant possession'

The tenant met him at the door with a big smile - and a long list of problems that he expected his 'new landlord' to sort out as soon as he bought the property.

End of viewing.

We know what vacant possession is.  The vendor had offered it. The tenant clearly had no intention of leaving.  Therefore the vendor cannot promise vacant possession in a reasonable timescale, and the buyer didn't bother going further.

That's about as simple as I can make it.