Landlord trying to force us into another fixed term contract

diystarter7

BikingBud said:

diystarter7 said:

[Deleted User] said:

_Penny_Dreadful said:

diystarter7 said:

_Penny_Dreadful said:

That is an interesting business plan @diystarter7, to get rid of a perfectly good tenant because they prefer a periodic tenancy to a fixed term. A

Hi @penny_dreadful

Thanks, it is for some and not for others. The important point you have missed and many others would miss is the fact that a LL
may not want someone to leave during the Christmas period or summer hols etc as they have plans and possibly managing the property themselves etc or even with a LA.  The other elementary point you have not considered is the fact we are all different but the justifcation I have give does apply and that is why some may not want a PT but a fixed  AST.

I don't expect you to agree with me but anyone else that reads this post and possibly not posting here may agree. 
Though we have not had to do that, if we had plans to go away for weeks as we do sometimes I amy not agree  to a PT
as I don't want to be constantly looking over my shoulder. 

Never forget that it works for some and does not have to work for everyone.

It’s elementary my dear Watson, a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. 

A bird that is offered a new contract and in response wants to explore a legal option for retaliatory eviction, can find another bush.

Not to mention OP makes clear they dont have long term plans for staying.

Hi

The highlighted bit to me cleary appears as though in instances like this the LL is looking for certainty.

We have bought one place with a sitting T, we were new to the game, went to a rolling agreement and he wanted to leave and i allowed him to go at a time that suits. We then did the house up and let it out via LA and into the second year if mem serves me well they wanted a rolling agreement. We negotiated a 6-month agreement and at the time they were happy and felt it was a good comprimise.. However they wanted out from the 3rd month. We said no and we the property back at the 6 months. Everything was new when we rented it out and the toilets base had turned brown possibly not using toilet cleaner or cleaning and oven was greased up and front and back gardens were overgrown. Unsure on the timeline here, was there any attempt to compromise, do you feel if they were on a periodic tenancy then that might have worked rather than you forcing the full 6 months? Did they move out and you got the property back after being vacant for 3 months? Or did they leave after you forced them to stay for the full six months?

When they lived there it was, gardens kept nice as part of the agreement as its a nice area. Via LA we gave them a chance to clean up, they ignored so we got professionals reasonably priced via 3 quotes and claimed  - we wanted the property back in fair wear and tear and the rest of the was ?? ok. The LA gave us the pics of before and after on the day they left and we made a claim, LA helped us and ex T's disagreed with the amount. We insisted as we had worked hard to get the very reasonably priced cleaners/etc. I think it went to some on;ine tribunal not 100% recall bizarre to be unsure? this but we got 100% of our claim as we felt it was very reasonable and this was paid to us from the deposit i think, this was years ago. We used the same LA since and no one else has ever left any of our properties like that. Did you consider why things didn't work with one tenant and why they have done ever since? Perhaps your approach?

We reward good T's with no rent rises for a few years and a slightly below-market value rent intially as we are
picky who gets to stay in our properties as we have worked hard for those and T appreacite the location and the fact the property is very, very clean, tidy and we ensure our LA responds asap to any problems as our T's do email us though they are fully managed.

The bottom line is, if it works for LL & R, fine and if not, the the LL has to decide if to go along with it or not.

A bit of flexibility if possible on both sides is required (Like letting them depart after 3 months?) if possible but in my personal opinion, if  people are polite and not aggressive and demanding, I will do what I can for them. So why are you forcing them to unnecessarily sign new TAs?

 Ideally you want the T's to stay their for life but we do not live in an ideal world

Thnaks

no but aggravating good tenants and forcing them to sign new TAs or serving S21 notice to them makes it much more complex and risky than it ought to be!

BikingBud said:

diystarter7 said:

[Deleted User] said:

_Penny_Dreadful said:

diystarter7 said:

_Penny_Dreadful said:

That is an interesting business plan @diystarter7, to get rid of a perfectly good tenant because they prefer a periodic tenancy to a fixed term. A

Hi @penny_dreadful

Thanks, it is for some and not for others. The important point you have missed and many others would miss is the fact that a LL
may not want someone to leave during the Christmas period or summer hols etc as they have plans and possibly managing the property themselves etc or even with a LA.  The other elementary point you have not considered is the fact we are all different but the justifcation I have give does apply and that is why some may not want a PT but a fixed  AST.

I don't expect you to agree with me but anyone else that reads this post and possibly not posting here may agree. 
Though we have not had to do that, if we had plans to go away for weeks as we do sometimes I amy not agree  to a PT
as I don't want to be constantly looking over my shoulder. 

Never forget that it works for some and does not have to work for everyone.

It’s elementary my dear Watson, a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. 

A bird that is offered a new contract and in response wants to explore a legal option for retaliatory eviction, can find another bush.

Not to mention OP makes clear they dont have long term plans for staying.

Hi

The highlighted bit to me cleary appears as though in instances like this the LL is looking for certainty.

We have bought one place with a sitting T, we were new to the game, went to a rolling agreement and he wanted to leave and i allowed him to go at a time that suits. We then did the house up and let it out via LA and into the second year if mem serves me well they wanted a rolling agreement. We negotiated a 6-month agreement and at the time they were happy and felt it was a good comprimise.. However they wanted out from the 3rd month. We said no and we the property back at the 6 months. Everything was new when we rented it out and the toilets base had turned brown possibly not using toilet cleaner or cleaning and oven was greased up and front and back gardens were overgrown. Unsure on the timeline here, was there any attempt to compromise, do you feel if they were on a periodic tenancy then that might have worked rather than you forcing the full 6 months? Did they move out and you got the property back after being vacant for 3 months? Or did they leave after you forced them to stay for the full six months?

When they lived there it was, gardens kept nice as part of the agreement as its a nice area. Via LA we gave them a chance to clean up, they ignored so we got professionals reasonably priced via 3 quotes and claimed  - we wanted the property back in fair wear and tear and the rest of the was ?? ok. The LA gave us the pics of before and after on the day they left and we made a claim, LA helped us and ex T's disagreed with the amount. We insisted as we had worked hard to get the very reasonably priced cleaners/etc. I think it went to some on;ine tribunal not 100% recall bizarre to be unsure? this but we got 100% of our claim as we felt it was very reasonable and this was paid to us from the deposit i think, this was years ago. We used the same LA since and no one else has ever left any of our properties like that. Did you consider why things didn't work with one tenant and why they have done ever since? Perhaps your approach?

We reward good T's with no rent rises for a few years and a slightly below-market value rent intially as we are
picky who gets to stay in our properties as we have worked hard for those and T appreacite the location and the fact the property is very, very clean, tidy and we ensure our LA responds asap to any problems as our T's do email us though they are fully managed.

The bottom line is, if it works for LL & R, fine and if not, the the LL has to decide if to go along with it or not.

A bit of flexibility if possible on both sides is required (Like letting them depart after 3 months?) if possible but in my personal opinion, if  people are polite and not aggressive and demanding, I will do what I can for them. So why are you forcing them to unnecessarily sign new TAs?

 Ideally you want the T's to stay their for life but we do not live in an ideal world

Thnaks

no but aggravating good tenants and forcing them to sign new TAs or serving S21 notice to them makes it much more complex and risky than it ought to be!

Hi

Who "forced" the T? Did you miss the bit where I said they "were happy" to sign the 6 months?

The OP has asked a question. Posters are telling them re their right and what the options are for them and the LL

. It's no good painting a nice
picture making everything look great when it may not happen so best prepared, yes?


Thanks

BikingBud

BikingBud said:

diystarter7 said:

[Deleted User] said:

_Penny_Dreadful said:

diystarter7 said:

_Penny_Dreadful said:

That is an interesting business plan @diystarter7, to get rid of a perfectly good tenant because they prefer a periodic tenancy to a fixed term. A

Hi @penny_dreadful

Thanks, it is for some and not for others. The important point you have missed and many others would miss is the fact that a LL
may not want someone to leave during the Christmas period or summer hols etc as they have plans and possibly managing the property themselves etc or even with a LA.  The other elementary point you have not considered is the fact we are all different but the justifcation I have give does apply and that is why some may not want a PT but a fixed  AST.

I don't expect you to agree with me but anyone else that reads this post and possibly not posting here may agree. 
Though we have not had to do that, if we had plans to go away for weeks as we do sometimes I amy not agree  to a PT
as I don't want to be constantly looking over my shoulder. 

Never forget that it works for some and does not have to work for everyone.

It’s elementary my dear Watson, a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. 

A bird that is offered a new contract and in response wants to explore a legal option for retaliatory eviction, can find another bush.

Not to mention OP makes clear they dont have long term plans for staying.

Hi

The highlighted bit to me cleary appears as though in instances like this the LL is looking for certainty.

We have bought one place with a sitting T, we were new to the game, went to a rolling agreement and he wanted to leave and i allowed him to go at a time that suits. We then did the house up and let it out via LA and into the second year if mem serves me well they wanted a rolling agreement. We negotiated a 6-month agreement and at the time they were happy and felt it was a good comprimise.. However they wanted out from the 3rd month. We said no and we the property back at the 6 months. Everything was new when we rented it out and the toilets base had turned brown possibly not using toilet cleaner or cleaning and oven was greased up and front and back gardens were overgrown. Unsure on the timeline here, was there any attempt to compromise, do you feel if they were on a periodic tenancy then that might have worked rather than you forcing the full 6 months? Did they move out and you got the property back after being vacant for 3 months? Or did they leave after you forced them to stay for the full six months?

When they lived there it was, gardens kept nice as part of the agreement as its a nice area. Via LA we gave them a chance to clean up, they ignored so we got professionals reasonably priced via 3 quotes and claimed  - we wanted the property back in fair wear and tear and the rest of the was ?? ok. The LA gave us the pics of before and after on the day they left and we made a claim, LA helped us and ex T's disagreed with the amount. We insisted as we had worked hard to get the very reasonably priced cleaners/etc. I think it went to some on;ine tribunal not 100% recall bizarre to be unsure? this but we got 100% of our claim as we felt it was very reasonable and this was paid to us from the deposit i think, this was years ago. We used the same LA since and no one else has ever left any of our properties like that. Did you consider why things didn't work with one tenant and why they have done ever since? Perhaps your approach?

We reward good T's with no rent rises for a few years and a slightly below-market value rent intially as we are
picky who gets to stay in our properties as we have worked hard for those and T appreacite the location and the fact the property is very, very clean, tidy and we ensure our LA responds asap to any problems as our T's do email us though they are fully managed.

The bottom line is, if it works for LL & R, fine and if not, the the LL has to decide if to go along with it or not.

A bit of flexibility if possible on both sides is required (Like letting them depart after 3 months?) if possible but in my personal opinion, if  people are polite and not aggressive and demanding, I will do what I can for them. So why are you forcing them to unnecessarily sign new TAs?

 Ideally you want the T's to stay their for life but we do not live in an ideal world

Thnaks

no but aggravating good tenants and forcing them to sign new TAs or serving S21 notice to them makes it much more complex and risky than it ought to be!

Hi

Who "forced" the T? Did you miss the bit where I said they "were happy" to sign the 6 months?

The OP has asked a question. Posters are telling them re their right and what the options are for them and the LL

. It's no good painting a nice
picture making everything look great when it may not happen so best prepared, yes?


Thanks

On this specific post - no I did not miss that they signed a new 6 month term but the point of interest for me was did you allow them to move out after 3 months without any issues? Or not, ie you forced them to honour their commitment? There was a number of questions there that may have filled in the timeline and enhanced the discussion but you chose to ignore those, I wonder why?

From you previous post "If I was your LL and I wanted another 12 months AST and you did not, I would hand your notice." So again looking to force the tenants 

Very happy that the reality is laid out so that everyone is aware how the system may be played out by people with differing intent. But you should recognise that your own stated position appears to be that you are quite content to force the tenants yet  could not link the difficulties you were then having with your own behaviour.

Rereading your post  "Though we have not had to do that, if we had plans to go away for weeks as we do sometimes I amy (sic) not agree  to a PT as I don't want to be constantly looking over my shoulder."

At or for what? Given that you are obliged to allow tenants quiet enjoyment, I am not sure what difference that really makes. 

As I said before forcing them to sign new TAs or serving S21 notice to them makes it much more complex and risky than it ought to be! 

diystarter7

BikingBud said:

BikingBud said:

diystarter7 said:

[Deleted User] said:

_Penny_Dreadful said:

diystarter7 said:

_Penny_Dreadful said:

That is an interesting business plan @diystarter7, to get rid of a perfectly good tenant because they prefer a periodic tenancy to a fixed term. A

Hi @penny_dreadful

Thanks, it is for some and not for others. The important point you have missed and many others would miss is the fact that a LL
may not want someone to leave during the Christmas period or summer hols etc as they have plans and possibly managing the property themselves etc or even with a LA.  The other elementary point you have not considered is the fact we are all different but the justifcation I have give does apply and that is why some may not want a PT but a fixed  AST.

I don't expect you to agree with me but anyone else that reads this post and possibly not posting here may agree. 
Though we have not had to do that, if we had plans to go away for weeks as we do sometimes I amy not agree  to a PT
as I don't want to be constantly looking over my shoulder. 

Never forget that it works for some and does not have to work for everyone.

It’s elementary my dear Watson, a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. 

A bird that is offered a new contract and in response wants to explore a legal option for retaliatory eviction, can find another bush.

Not to mention OP makes clear they dont have long term plans for staying.

Hi

The highlighted bit to me cleary appears as though in instances like this the LL is looking for certainty.

We have bought one place with a sitting T, we were new to the game, went to a rolling agreement and he wanted to leave and i allowed him to go at a time that suits. We then did the house up and let it out via LA and into the second year if mem serves me well they wanted a rolling agreement. We negotiated a 6-month agreement and at the time they were happy and felt it was a good comprimise.. However they wanted out from the 3rd month. We said no and we the property back at the 6 months. Everything was new when we rented it out and the toilets base had turned brown possibly not using toilet cleaner or cleaning and oven was greased up and front and back gardens were overgrown. Unsure on the timeline here, was there any attempt to compromise, do you feel if they were on a periodic tenancy then that might have worked rather than you forcing the full 6 months? Did they move out and you got the property back after being vacant for 3 months? Or did they leave after you forced them to stay for the full six months?

When they lived there it was, gardens kept nice as part of the agreement as its a nice area. Via LA we gave them a chance to clean up, they ignored so we got professionals reasonably priced via 3 quotes and claimed  - we wanted the property back in fair wear and tear and the rest of the was ?? ok. The LA gave us the pics of before and after on the day they left and we made a claim, LA helped us and ex T's disagreed with the amount. We insisted as we had worked hard to get the very reasonably priced cleaners/etc. I think it went to some on;ine tribunal not 100% recall bizarre to be unsure? this but we got 100% of our claim as we felt it was very reasonable and this was paid to us from the deposit i think, this was years ago. We used the same LA since and no one else has ever left any of our properties like that. Did you consider why things didn't work with one tenant and why they have done ever since? Perhaps your approach?

We reward good T's with no rent rises for a few years and a slightly below-market value rent intially as we are
picky who gets to stay in our properties as we have worked hard for those and T appreacite the location and the fact the property is very, very clean, tidy and we ensure our LA responds asap to any problems as our T's do email us though they are fully managed.

The bottom line is, if it works for LL & R, fine and if not, the the LL has to decide if to go along with it or not.

A bit of flexibility if possible on both sides is required (Like letting them depart after 3 months?) if possible but in my personal opinion, if  people are polite and not aggressive and demanding, I will do what I can for them. So why are you forcing them to unnecessarily sign new TAs?

 Ideally you want the T's to stay their for life but we do not live in an ideal world

Thnaks

no but aggravating good tenants and forcing them to sign new TAs or serving S21 notice to them makes it much more complex and risky than it ought to be!

Hi

Who "forced" the T? Did you miss the bit where I said they "were happy" to sign the 6 months?

The OP has asked a question. Posters are telling them re their right and what the options are for them and the LL

. It's no good painting a nice
picture making everything look great when it may not happen so best prepared, yes?


Thanks

On this specific post - no I did not miss that they signed a new 6 month term but the point of interest for me was did you allow them to move out after 3 months without any issues? Or not, ie you forced them to honour their commitment? There was a number of questions there that may have filled in the timeline and enhanced the discussion but you chose to ignore those, I wonder why?

From you previous post "If I was your LL and I wanted another 12 months AST and you did not, I would hand your notice." So again looking to force the tenants 

Very happy that the reality is laid out so that everyone is aware how the system may be played out by people with differing intent. But you should recognise that your own stated position appears to be that you are quite content to force the tenants yet  could not link the difficulties you were then having with your own behaviour.

Rereading your post  "Though we have not had to do that, if we had plans to go away for weeks as we do sometimes I amy (sic) not agree  to a PT as I don't want to be constantly looking over my shoulder."

At or for what? Given that you are obliged to allow tenants quiet enjoyment, I am not sure what difference that really makes. 

As I said before forcing them to sign new TAs or serving S21 notice to them makes it much more complex and risky than it ought to be! 

Hi

I refer you to my previous post and it is clear I stated the T was happy to sign,

Unless there is something new you have to add that may help the OP understand their situation, I have nothing more to say
as I've been clear what I did and the T said.

Hopefully, my posts will enlighten the OP to the possible scenarios/reasons why a LL does not want a rolling agreement and make it easier for OP to accept this LL's decision

Thanks

_Penny_Dreadful

diystarter7 said:

BikingBud said:

BikingBud said:

diystarter7 said:

[Deleted User] said:

_Penny_Dreadful said:

diystarter7 said:

_Penny_Dreadful said:

That is an interesting business plan @diystarter7, to get rid of a perfectly good tenant because they prefer a periodic tenancy to a fixed term. A

Hi @penny_dreadful

Thanks, it is for some and not for others. The important point you have missed and many others would miss is the fact that a LL
may not want someone to leave during the Christmas period or summer hols etc as they have plans and possibly managing the property themselves etc or even with a LA.  The other elementary point you have not considered is the fact we are all different but the justifcation I have give does apply and that is why some may not want a PT but a fixed  AST.

I don't expect you to agree with me but anyone else that reads this post and possibly not posting here may agree. 
Though we have not had to do that, if we had plans to go away for weeks as we do sometimes I amy not agree  to a PT
as I don't want to be constantly looking over my shoulder. 

Never forget that it works for some and does not have to work for everyone.

It’s elementary my dear Watson, a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. 

A bird that is offered a new contract and in response wants to explore a legal option for retaliatory eviction, can find another bush.

Not to mention OP makes clear they dont have long term plans for staying.

Hi

The highlighted bit to me cleary appears as though in instances like this the LL is looking for certainty.

We have bought one place with a sitting T, we were new to the game, went to a rolling agreement and he wanted to leave and i allowed him to go at a time that suits. We then did the house up and let it out via LA and into the second year if mem serves me well they wanted a rolling agreement. We negotiated a 6-month agreement and at the time they were happy and felt it was a good comprimise.. However they wanted out from the 3rd month. We said no and we the property back at the 6 months. Everything was new when we rented it out and the toilets base had turned brown possibly not using toilet cleaner or cleaning and oven was greased up and front and back gardens were overgrown. Unsure on the timeline here, was there any attempt to compromise, do you feel if they were on a periodic tenancy then that might have worked rather than you forcing the full 6 months? Did they move out and you got the property back after being vacant for 3 months? Or did they leave after you forced them to stay for the full six months?

When they lived there it was, gardens kept nice as part of the agreement as its a nice area. Via LA we gave them a chance to clean up, they ignored so we got professionals reasonably priced via 3 quotes and claimed  - we wanted the property back in fair wear and tear and the rest of the was ?? ok. The LA gave us the pics of before and after on the day they left and we made a claim, LA helped us and ex T's disagreed with the amount. We insisted as we had worked hard to get the very reasonably priced cleaners/etc. I think it went to some on;ine tribunal not 100% recall bizarre to be unsure? this but we got 100% of our claim as we felt it was very reasonable and this was paid to us from the deposit i think, this was years ago. We used the same LA since and no one else has ever left any of our properties like that. Did you consider why things didn't work with one tenant and why they have done ever since? Perhaps your approach?

We reward good T's with no rent rises for a few years and a slightly below-market value rent intially as we are
picky who gets to stay in our properties as we have worked hard for those and T appreacite the location and the fact the property is very, very clean, tidy and we ensure our LA responds asap to any problems as our T's do email us though they are fully managed.

The bottom line is, if it works for LL & R, fine and if not, the the LL has to decide if to go along with it or not.

A bit of flexibility if possible on both sides is required (Like letting them depart after 3 months?) if possible but in my personal opinion, if  people are polite and not aggressive and demanding, I will do what I can for them. So why are you forcing them to unnecessarily sign new TAs?

 Ideally you want the T's to stay their for life but we do not live in an ideal world

Thnaks

no but aggravating good tenants and forcing them to sign new TAs or serving S21 notice to them makes it much more complex and risky than it ought to be!

Hi

Who "forced" the T? Did you miss the bit where I said they "were happy" to sign the 6 months?

The OP has asked a question. Posters are telling them re their right and what the options are for them and the LL

. It's no good painting a nice
picture making everything look great when it may not happen so best prepared, yes?


Thanks

On this specific post - no I did not miss that they signed a new 6 month term but the point of interest for me was did you allow them to move out after 3 months without any issues? Or not, ie you forced them to honour their commitment? There was a number of questions there that may have filled in the timeline and enhanced the discussion but you chose to ignore those, I wonder why?

From you previous post "If I was your LL and I wanted another 12 months AST and you did not, I would hand your notice." So again looking to force the tenants 

Very happy that the reality is laid out so that everyone is aware how the system may be played out by people with differing intent. But you should recognise that your own stated position appears to be that you are quite content to force the tenants yet  could not link the difficulties you were then having with your own behaviour.

Rereading your post  "Though we have not had to do that, if we had plans to go away for weeks as we do sometimes I amy (sic) not agree  to a PT as I don't want to be constantly looking over my shoulder."

At or for what? Given that you are obliged to allow tenants quiet enjoyment, I am not sure what difference that really makes. 

As I said before forcing them to sign new TAs or serving S21 notice to them makes it much more complex and risky than it ought to be! 

Hi

I refer you to my previous post and it is clear I stated the T was happy to sign,

Yes the tenant certainly sounds like she was happy to sign…not. In fact you appear to have negotiated the new fixed term through a letting agent (nice wee fee for them) so did you have any one-to-one dealings with the tenant who was so happy she wanted to leave 3 months later? 

diystarter7

_Penny_Dreadful said:

diystarter7 said:

BikingBud said:

BikingBud said:

diystarter7 said:

[Deleted User] said:

_Penny_Dreadful said:

diystarter7 said:

_Penny_Dreadful said:

That is an interesting business plan @diystarter7, to get rid of a perfectly good tenant because they prefer a periodic tenancy to a fixed term. A

Hi @penny_dreadful

Thanks, it is for some and not for others. The important point you have missed and many others would miss is the fact that a LL
may not want someone to leave during the Christmas period or summer hols etc as they have plans and possibly managing the property themselves etc or even with a LA.  The other elementary point you have not considered is the fact we are all different but the justifcation I have give does apply and that is why some may not want a PT but a fixed  AST.

I don't expect you to agree with me but anyone else that reads this post and possibly not posting here may agree. 
Though we have not had to do that, if we had plans to go away for weeks as we do sometimes I amy not agree  to a PT
as I don't want to be constantly looking over my shoulder. 

Never forget that it works for some and does not have to work for everyone.

It’s elementary my dear Watson, a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. 

A bird that is offered a new contract and in response wants to explore a legal option for retaliatory eviction, can find another bush.

Not to mention OP makes clear they dont have long term plans for staying.

Hi

The highlighted bit to me cleary appears as though in instances like this the LL is looking for certainty.

We have bought one place with a sitting T, we were new to the game, went to a rolling agreement and he wanted to leave and i allowed him to go at a time that suits. We then did the house up and let it out via LA and into the second year if mem serves me well they wanted a rolling agreement. We negotiated a 6-month agreement and at the time they were happy and felt it was a good comprimise.. However they wanted out from the 3rd month. We said no and we the property back at the 6 months. Everything was new when we rented it out and the toilets base had turned brown possibly not using toilet cleaner or cleaning and oven was greased up and front and back gardens were overgrown. Unsure on the timeline here, was there any attempt to compromise, do you feel if they were on a periodic tenancy then that might have worked rather than you forcing the full 6 months? Did they move out and you got the property back after being vacant for 3 months? Or did they leave after you forced them to stay for the full six months?

When they lived there it was, gardens kept nice as part of the agreement as its a nice area. Via LA we gave them a chance to clean up, they ignored so we got professionals reasonably priced via 3 quotes and claimed  - we wanted the property back in fair wear and tear and the rest of the was ?? ok. The LA gave us the pics of before and after on the day they left and we made a claim, LA helped us and ex T's disagreed with the amount. We insisted as we had worked hard to get the very reasonably priced cleaners/etc. I think it went to some on;ine tribunal not 100% recall bizarre to be unsure? this but we got 100% of our claim as we felt it was very reasonable and this was paid to us from the deposit i think, this was years ago. We used the same LA since and no one else has ever left any of our properties like that. Did you consider why things didn't work with one tenant and why they have done ever since? Perhaps your approach?

We reward good T's with no rent rises for a few years and a slightly below-market value rent intially as we are
picky who gets to stay in our properties as we have worked hard for those and T appreacite the location and the fact the property is very, very clean, tidy and we ensure our LA responds asap to any problems as our T's do email us though they are fully managed.

The bottom line is, if it works for LL & R, fine and if not, the the LL has to decide if to go along with it or not.

A bit of flexibility if possible on both sides is required (Like letting them depart after 3 months?) if possible but in my personal opinion, if  people are polite and not aggressive and demanding, I will do what I can for them. So why are you forcing them to unnecessarily sign new TAs?

 Ideally you want the T's to stay their for life but we do not live in an ideal world

Thnaks

no but aggravating good tenants and forcing them to sign new TAs or serving S21 notice to them makes it much more complex and risky than it ought to be!

Hi

Who "forced" the T? Did you miss the bit where I said they "were happy" to sign the 6 months?

The OP has asked a question. Posters are telling them re their right and what the options are for them and the LL

. It's no good painting a nice
picture making everything look great when it may not happen so best prepared, yes?


Thanks

On this specific post - no I did not miss that they signed a new 6 month term but the point of interest for me was did you allow them to move out after 3 months without any issues? Or not, ie you forced them to honour their commitment? There was a number of questions there that may have filled in the timeline and enhanced the discussion but you chose to ignore those, I wonder why?

From you previous post "If I was your LL and I wanted another 12 months AST and you did not, I would hand your notice." So again looking to force the tenants 

Very happy that the reality is laid out so that everyone is aware how the system may be played out by people with differing intent. But you should recognise that your own stated position appears to be that you are quite content to force the tenants yet  could not link the difficulties you were then having with your own behaviour.

Rereading your post  "Though we have not had to do that, if we had plans to go away for weeks as we do sometimes I amy (sic) not agree  to a PT as I don't want to be constantly looking over my shoulder."

At or for what? Given that you are obliged to allow tenants quiet enjoyment, I am not sure what difference that really makes. 

As I said before forcing them to sign new TAs or serving S21 notice to them makes it much more complex and risky than it ought to be! 

Hi

I refer you to my previous post and it is clear I stated the T was happy to sign,

Yes the tenant certainly sounds like she was happy to sign…not. In fact you appear to have negotiated the new fixed term through a letting agent (nice wee fee for them) so did you have any one-to-one dealings with the tenant who was so happy she wanted to leave 3 months later? 

Hi
Thanks. As you know, the T, like the LL always has a choice.

We were more than happy with the outcome.

Why should I interrupt my holidays just because they wanted to leave mid term?

 What is the point of a contract if only one side honours it  (I await your response)

Thnaks

newsgroupmonkey_

I would call it out like this then.

You allow the tenant to stay on a rolling contract.

OR

You force the tenant to sign a longer term contract and when they refuse, give out an S21.

Tell me, which of these scenarios is more likely to play out and costs the Landlord piles of money they can never claim back?

Tenant looks after the property. At some stage, hand their notice in, clean the place up and leaves with a good reference and everyone happy (albeit the Landlord MAY have a gap, although not likely in this market)

Tenant digs their heels in. Takes no interest in the property. Stops paying rent. 3-4 months later, it finally goes to court at which point the tenant goes AWOL, never to be traced (or a CCJ that they really couldn't care less about).

_Penny_Dreadful

diystarter7 said:

_Penny_Dreadful said:

diystarter7 said:

BikingBud said:

BikingBud said:

diystarter7 said:

[Deleted User] said:

_Penny_Dreadful said:

diystarter7 said:

_Penny_Dreadful said:

That is an interesting business plan @diystarter7, to get rid of a perfectly good tenant because they prefer a periodic tenancy to a fixed term. A

Hi @penny_dreadful

Thanks, it is for some and not for others. The important point you have missed and many others would miss is the fact that a LL
may not want someone to leave during the Christmas period or summer hols etc as they have plans and possibly managing the property themselves etc or even with a LA.  The other elementary point you have not considered is the fact we are all different but the justifcation I have give does apply and that is why some may not want a PT but a fixed  AST.

I don't expect you to agree with me but anyone else that reads this post and possibly not posting here may agree. 
Though we have not had to do that, if we had plans to go away for weeks as we do sometimes I amy not agree  to a PT
as I don't want to be constantly looking over my shoulder. 

Never forget that it works for some and does not have to work for everyone.

It’s elementary my dear Watson, a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. 

A bird that is offered a new contract and in response wants to explore a legal option for retaliatory eviction, can find another bush.

Not to mention OP makes clear they dont have long term plans for staying.

Hi

The highlighted bit to me cleary appears as though in instances like this the LL is looking for certainty.

We have bought one place with a sitting T, we were new to the game, went to a rolling agreement and he wanted to leave and i allowed him to go at a time that suits. We then did the house up and let it out via LA and into the second year if mem serves me well they wanted a rolling agreement. We negotiated a 6-month agreement and at the time they were happy and felt it was a good comprimise.. However they wanted out from the 3rd month. We said no and we the property back at the 6 months. Everything was new when we rented it out and the toilets base had turned brown possibly not using toilet cleaner or cleaning and oven was greased up and front and back gardens were overgrown. Unsure on the timeline here, was there any attempt to compromise, do you feel if they were on a periodic tenancy then that might have worked rather than you forcing the full 6 months? Did they move out and you got the property back after being vacant for 3 months? Or did they leave after you forced them to stay for the full six months?

When they lived there it was, gardens kept nice as part of the agreement as its a nice area. Via LA we gave them a chance to clean up, they ignored so we got professionals reasonably priced via 3 quotes and claimed  - we wanted the property back in fair wear and tear and the rest of the was ?? ok. The LA gave us the pics of before and after on the day they left and we made a claim, LA helped us and ex T's disagreed with the amount. We insisted as we had worked hard to get the very reasonably priced cleaners/etc. I think it went to some on;ine tribunal not 100% recall bizarre to be unsure? this but we got 100% of our claim as we felt it was very reasonable and this was paid to us from the deposit i think, this was years ago. We used the same LA since and no one else has ever left any of our properties like that. Did you consider why things didn't work with one tenant and why they have done ever since? Perhaps your approach?

We reward good T's with no rent rises for a few years and a slightly below-market value rent intially as we are
picky who gets to stay in our properties as we have worked hard for those and T appreacite the location and the fact the property is very, very clean, tidy and we ensure our LA responds asap to any problems as our T's do email us though they are fully managed.

The bottom line is, if it works for LL & R, fine and if not, the the LL has to decide if to go along with it or not.

A bit of flexibility if possible on both sides is required (Like letting them depart after 3 months?) if possible but in my personal opinion, if  people are polite and not aggressive and demanding, I will do what I can for them. So why are you forcing them to unnecessarily sign new TAs?

 Ideally you want the T's to stay their for life but we do not live in an ideal world

Thnaks

no but aggravating good tenants and forcing them to sign new TAs or serving S21 notice to them makes it much more complex and risky than it ought to be!

Hi

Who "forced" the T? Did you miss the bit where I said they "were happy" to sign the 6 months?

The OP has asked a question. Posters are telling them re their right and what the options are for them and the LL

. It's no good painting a nice
picture making everything look great when it may not happen so best prepared, yes?


Thanks

On this specific post - no I did not miss that they signed a new 6 month term but the point of interest for me was did you allow them to move out after 3 months without any issues? Or not, ie you forced them to honour their commitment? There was a number of questions there that may have filled in the timeline and enhanced the discussion but you chose to ignore those, I wonder why?

From you previous post "If I was your LL and I wanted another 12 months AST and you did not, I would hand your notice." So again looking to force the tenants 

Very happy that the reality is laid out so that everyone is aware how the system may be played out by people with differing intent. But you should recognise that your own stated position appears to be that you are quite content to force the tenants yet  could not link the difficulties you were then having with your own behaviour.

Rereading your post  "Though we have not had to do that, if we had plans to go away for weeks as we do sometimes I amy (sic) not agree  to a PT as I don't want to be constantly looking over my shoulder."

At or for what? Given that you are obliged to allow tenants quiet enjoyment, I am not sure what difference that really makes. 

As I said before forcing them to sign new TAs or serving S21 notice to them makes it much more complex and risky than it ought to be! 

Hi

I refer you to my previous post and it is clear I stated the T was happy to sign,

Yes the tenant certainly sounds like she was happy to sign…not. In fact you appear to have negotiated the new fixed term through a letting agent (nice wee fee for them) so did you have any one-to-one dealings with the tenant who was so happy she wanted to leave 3 months later? 

Hi
Thanks. As you know, the T, like the LL always has a choice.

We were more than happy with the outcome.

Why should I interrupt my holidays just because they wanted to leave mid term?

 What is the point of a contract if only one side honours it  (I await your response)

Thnaks

What are you talking about? How is only one side honouring the contract by letting a tenancy become periodic or are you referring to the fact your tenant signed a new fixed term contract that she didn’t want? That whole scenario could have been avoided if you hadn’t been so fixated on a fixed term contract instead of just sticking with the periodic tenancy. Hell, the tenant might not even have moved out had you not soured the relationship. 

I also don’t understand what you mean about tenants wanting to leave mid term? Do you mean mid fixed term which isn’t what is being discussed or mid term as in school holidays? How does a tenant serving notice to end a periodic tenancy interrupt your two weeks in the sun? Firstly you’re using a letting agent so they’d deal with things and even if you were self-managing there’s little to interrupt your holiday. What would you do if the boiler broke down in the rental property? Would the tenant have to wait until your holiday was over before you’d do anything about it? 

There’s a lot of anti-landlord sentiment about at the moment and it’s not helped by people like you who would seek to evict a perfectly good tenant just in case they might, possibly, one day serve notice to end a periodic tenancy during your holiday. Whatever will you do if that Renters Reform Bill goes through? 

ashleyj722

Update: I spoke to the new  landlord which is APO and they said they didn’t offer rolling contracts despite them having the clause in our contract.  They went down to a 3 month fixed term but still not going to sign it.  If they do issue a section 21 then we will continue paying rent and force them to get a procession order. 

_Penny_Dreadful

ashleyj722 said:

Update: I spoke to the new  landlord which is APO and they said they didn’t offer rolling contracts despite them having the clause in our contract.  They went down to a 3 month fixed term but still not going to sign it.  If they do issue a section 21 then we will continue paying rent and force them to get a procession order. 

Thanks for the update. Are you positive APO is the landlord and not a letting agent acting on the landlord’s behalf? 

Let us know how it goes with calling their bluff. In the meantime you could use the link below to see if it’s even possible for them to issue a valid a Section 21. 

https://nearlylegal.co.uk/section-21-flowchart/

ashleyj722

_Penny_Dreadful said:

ashleyj722 said:

Update: I spoke to the new  landlord which is APO and they said they didn’t offer rolling contracts despite them having the clause in our contract.  They went down to a 3 month fixed term but still not going to sign it.  If they do issue a section 21 then we will continue paying rent and force them to get a procession order. 

Thanks for the update. Are you positive APO is the landlord and not a letting agent acting on the landlord’s behalf? 

Let us know how it goes with calling their bluff. In the meantime you could use the link below to see if it’s even possible for them to issue a valid a Section 21. 

https://nearlylegal.co.uk/section-21-flowchart/

I am not sure,  but based on your question I think then that APO and greystar were property management companies and the freeholder landlord is based in the Middle East, possibly Qatar.