Offering on a flat that has tennants

Yankee24

Advice on sequencing please…. Many of the flats we are looking at are tenanted.  We asked one vendor to serve the section 21 before we would exchange for obvious reasons.  He did, but unfortunately the sale fell thru for other reasons, some of which was the chain wanted to move before September school start, and his section 21 didn’t end till mid Oct! . He was a real idiot about it and always arguing with us. 

Is it unreasonable to ask for a section 21 and vacant possession at exchange?   Surely not?   I assume we progress with searches and surveys in good faith before that….

i just feel burned that our original vendor was so disagreeable about the request.   

Tiglet2

If you are intending to live in the flat on completion, then your solicitor will not agree to an exchange of contracts until  the property is vacant.

A Section 21 Notice is just that.  It is a notice that the landlord will start court proceedings to evict the tenant when the notice expires.  Court proceedings can then drag it out for a further few months or so......

Hoenir

Wasn't the vendor's fault the transaction fell through. Not just yourselves with an agenda but everybody else in the chain. Making requests is pointless unless absolutely is in agreement. 

I never engage in direct contact with anyone else in the chain. Simply not worth the hassle. This is a business transaction. Better conducted at arms length. Far too many people in this world are two faced. 

FlorayG

Unless you want to sell with a tenant in situ then a landlord should issue the Section 21 as soon as the property is put on the market, because the tenant isn't obliged to leave at the end of the notice period. This is why your own solicitor will not exchange contracts until the tenants have left. A sensible landlord will offer the tenants a financial incentive to leave at the end of notice period because otherwise he's going to have great difficulty selling with vacant possession

RAS

An S21 doesn't end a tenancy, it is merely notice that if the tenant if there after the specified date, the LL is legally allowed to start court action.

So marketing when the S21 is issued is ambitious in terms of the sale, disrespectful to tenants who don't want their dirty washing displayed to all and sundry and and to potential buyers who have no way of knowing whether they might be waiting 8 months for exchange.

The LL can informally advise the tenant they want to sell before they issue the S21, and discuss the fact that should the tenant find accommodation, the LL will be flexible about the notice required of the tenant (allowing them to avoid dual rent). 

But until the tenant has offered notice or there is a court date, I wouldn't want to make an offer on a ttenanted property.

theartfullodger

Only 2 n's in tenant.

Tenants only HAVE to leave if court order and large bailiffs say so.  Probably 6 months to get to that stage.

An s21 notice, even if valid  (many many are not valid) does not end a tenancy nor compel tenant to leave.

Only exchange on YOU having checked the place is genuinely vacant.

Buying with tenants is entirely valid and legal, new owner simply becomes new landlord.  (Wny would anyone expect otherwise?) I've done it but planning and expecting to keep tenants.  Done so, with several changes of tenants for 18 years...

PRAISETHESUN

I've been in the reverse situation where I was the tenant in a property that was being sold. My LL instructed agents to start marketing the property and didn't really factor me into the situation, sort of just expecting me to play along. About 2-3 months into the process they served S21 notice. This was during Covid though so I had 6 month's notice. I was never offered any incentive to move, although I was asked a few times what my plans were and basically told them each time that "I have 6 months to think and I'll let you know". Eventually moved out 5 months after being served notice, mostly because since I had plenty of time I was a bit picky about where I was going to move to next. Could have stayed longer as other have said.

Your solicitors will advise you not to commit to the property until you have checked you have vacant possession. I'd be expecting vacant possession as a condition of exchange, not just that a S21 has been served. Otherwise if you exchange, you run the risk of being forced to buy a property with a sitting tenant who may or may not play ball.

user1977

PRAISETHESUN said:

Otherwise if you exchange, you run the risk of being forced to buy a property with a sitting tenant who may or may not play ball.

Unless something odd is going on, at the very least the contract will require the vendor to provide vacant possession - so it's the vendor who runs the risk of being in breach of contract because they can't hand over a vacant property on the completion date. But it's hassle which everyone would want to avoid anyway.

NameUnavailable

If you exchanged when tenants were still there and the mortgage co found out, they would probably withdraw the offer and you would still be legally bound to buy the property with the penalties that could be enforced if you weren't able to find other funds. So, no, your solicitors shouldn't allow it to even happen.

user1977

NameUnavailable said:

If you exchanged when tenants were still there and the mortgage co found out, they would probably withdraw the offer

I have never heard of such a thing happening, and the mortgage company aren't going to know anyway.

If anyone isn't budging on completion day (could even be an owner-occupier's family - we've had that story here before...) then completion won't happen (and it will be largely academic whether the buyer had the funds). The lenders don't police whether possession is actually vacant, that's left to everybody else to sort out.

NameUnavailable

user1977 said:

NameUnavailable said:

If you exchanged when tenants were still there and the mortgage co found out, they would probably withdraw the offer

I have never heard of such a thing happening, and the mortgage company aren't going to know anyway.

If anyone isn't budging on completion day (could even be an owner-occupier's family - we've had that story here before...) then completion won't happen (and it will be largely academic whether the buyer had the funds). The lenders don't police whether possession is actually vacant, that's left to everybody else to sort out.

It should never happen because the solicitors will be expecting the vendor to confirm that the property is being sold with vacant possession. If it isn't then they would report that to the lenders (if also acting on their behalf as is the norm). If the purchaser is buying a tenanted property they would need a BTL mortgage deal.

The OP needs to be aware of the potential issues they might face if offering on tenanted properties.