No Fault Evictions {Merged}

Yellowsub2000

km1500 said:

or in may be that you get posession simply by saying you want to sell, and start marketing and viewings once the tenant has left

“If the landlord uses this ground of possession (or if the tenant leaves after service of the notice on this ground), then  the landlord cannot let or advertise to let the property  for the next 3 months. If the landlord does let inside the three months then the Local Authority may impose a financial penalty of up to £5000 or prosecute for a criminal offence. The fine may be recurring if the contravention continues for a further 28 days.“



so there will have to be three months void period at least

if the LL has been found to be deceptive in saying they were selling them they didn’t there will be some big fines

Yellowsub2000

Some here are recommending illegal or immoral behaviour

“ What in @edddy's statement is 'so wrong'? There is nothing stopping a landlord having evicted a tenant to 'change their mind' about selling and instead 'decide' to re-let “

if you are caught being deceptive there will be some big fines.


I also find it disappointing how many LLs are saying if you want to get your tenants out just say you are selling it to get them out then wait three months and rent it out to someone else


dont you think the reform bill will have thought of that? Yes they have and big fines await those trying to cheat the law.


hopefully many bad LLs will be getting the £25K fines or go to prison leaving only the good law abiding LLs left

eddddy

Yellowsub2000 said:

You obviously have not read the rent reform bill.

you are so wrong and you don’t even know how wrong your statement is

Yellowsub2000 said:

This part

” I expect it will be exactly the same as today.”


I know this is wrong because there are proposed changes

Hmmm...   who could argue with logic and facts like that?

Yellowsub2000 said:

Plus if the tenants are unhappy it may take a year of costly court and balliff fees

then they don’t exactly leave the property in top condition when they finally get kicked out

So... exactly the same as today!


(FWIW, in case you missed it - I posted the relevant section of the bill above.)

ProDave

What is not being discussed is that rules are changing.  The mere fact rules are changing is a "problem"

Many Landlords entered the business many years ago when the rules were different and the rules that were in force made their business model sound.

In the intervening years, LL's have been told (not asked, told) to abide my more stringent rules, and at the same time the tax treatment of their earnings has changed for the worse.  So they now have to do more things to comply, and pay more tax / earn less all thanks to the changes.

So it is not much point trying to tell a LL here are the new rules they are good, because at the back of their mind they will be wondering what more changes are coming down the line in the future to make their life even harder / less profitable?

What other business do you know now where the law forbids you putting up your prices more than 3% even if your costs have gone up more than that.  Can you imagine what the supermarkets would say if that rule was imposed on them?

Yellowsub2000

eddddy said:

Yellowsub2000 said:

You obviously have not read the rent reform bill.

you are so wrong and you don’t even know how wrong your statement is

Yellowsub2000 said:

This part

” I expect it will be exactly the same as today.”


I know this is wrong because there are proposed changes

Hmmm...   who could argue with logic and facts like that?

Yellowsub2000 said:

Plus if the tenants are unhappy it may take a year of costly court and balliff fees

then they don’t exactly leave the property in top condition when they finally get kicked out

So... exactly the same as today!


(FWIW, in case you missed it - I posted the relevant section of the bill above.)

This is where we will have to agree to disagree like gentlemen.

I do not agree it will be the same as today. It’s getting a lot easier and beneficial for tenants and a lot less profitable and more difficulties for LLs.

In no way can anyone say as you did ” I expect it will be exactly the same as today.”

eddddy

Yellowsub2000 said:

This is where we will have to agree to disagree like gentlemen.

That sounds a bit like you're attempting a face-saving cop-out - and playing with words.

People sometimes come to this forum for advice. So I think it's important to be as accurate as possible.

If you think what I said was materially misleading, please point to specific clauses in the bill to support that. Maybe you've seen something that I missed.

Here's the bill: https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/cbill/58-03/0308/220308.pdf

Sarah1Mitty2

caprikid1 said:

From what I can see.

The big corporates want HMOC's / Flats so all these properties leaving small landlords will get turned into that configuration.

Housing association are often poorly maintained carpetless shells ....

Those that supply the rest will leave the market. If you think that works for you then all good, but don't assume you can get a housing association property and I assume you don't want a room in a house of random strangers.

But what do I know this is all a good thing. 

The problem is that although these properties do not vanish they won't return to the rental market in a format that they left in, leaving the average private renter with a problem.

Look at properties for Rent in Bristol BS15 and surrounding areas ??? You will see a volume of houses all showing the same pictures in their adverts and similar internal designs, all the three bed properties purchased and turned into HMOC's...

If the big corporates could make money in rental space they would already be buying out private landlords, they won`t do this though because the office space downturn shows how risky these big bets can be, and a corporate has no interest in running Joe Smith`s BTL properties in Blackpool or Aberdeen, far too much risk and hassle. As I said in another post you could probably make better returns on a money market fund now, the people who actually have any money other than mortgage debt to put into BTL that is. The smart money is out long ago, or fixed at low rates for ten years.

Sarah1Mitty2

Yellowsub2000 said:

km1500 said:

or in may be that you get posession simply by saying you want to sell, and start marketing and viewings once the tenant has left

“If the landlord uses this ground of possession (or if the tenant leaves after service of the notice on this ground), then  the landlord cannot let or advertise to let the property  for the next 3 months. If the landlord does let inside the three months then the Local Authority may impose a financial penalty of up to £5000 or prosecute for a criminal offence. The fine may be recurring if the contravention continues for a further 28 days.“



so there will have to be three months void period at least

if the LL has been found to be deceptive in saying they were selling them they didn’t there will be some big fines

And three months void could sink many landlords as well....?

Yellowsub2000

eddddy said:

Yellowsub2000 said:

This is where we will have to agree to disagree like gentlemen.

That sounds a bit like you're attempting a face-saving cop-out - and playing with words.

People sometimes come to this forum for advice. So I think it's important to be as accurate as possible.

If you think what I said was materially misleading, please point to specific clauses in the bill to support that. Maybe you've seen something that I missed.

Here's the bill: https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/cbill/58-03/0308/220308.pdf

The fact that there is a bill and changes coming in is why I disagree with you saying everything will be exactly the same as today.

im certain you are wrong about this, the scrapping of no fault eviction, the new ombudsman scheme which will cost the LL but free for tenants, the £25K fines for LLs if they are found to have been deceptive 

I could go on but there is no need

Yellowsub2000

Sarah1Mitty2 said:

caprikid1 said:

From what I can see.

The big corporates want HMOC's / Flats so all these properties leaving small landlords will get turned into that configuration.

Housing association are often poorly maintained carpetless shells ....

Those that supply the rest will leave the market. If you think that works for you then all good, but don't assume you can get a housing association property and I assume you don't want a room in a house of random strangers.

But what do I know this is all a good thing. 

The problem is that although these properties do not vanish they won't return to the rental market in a format that they left in, leaving the average private renter with a problem.

Look at properties for Rent in Bristol BS15 and surrounding areas ??? You will see a volume of houses all showing the same pictures in their adverts and similar internal designs, all the three bed properties purchased and turned into HMOC's...

If the big corporates could make money in rental space they would already be buying out private landlords, they won`t do this though because the office space downturn shows how risky these big bets can be, and a corporate has no interest in running Joe Smith`s BTL properties in Blackpool or Aberdeen, far too much risk and hassle. As I said in another post you could probably make better returns on a money market fund now, the people who actually have any money other than mortgage debt to put into BTL that is. The smart money is out long ago, or fixed at low rates for ten years.

Yes the smart money is out or still trying to get out of property 

work from home changed everything this is why commercial real estate is collapsing and most of these offices will be turned into residential