PLEASE READ BEFORE POSTING
Hello Forumites! In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non-MoneySaving matters are not permitted per the Forum rules. While we understand that mentioning house prices may sometimes be relevant to a user's specific MoneySaving situation, we ask that you please avoid veering into broad, general debates about the market, the economy and politics, as these can unfortunately lead to abusive or hateful behaviour. Threads that are found to have derailed into wider discussions may be removed. Users who repeatedly disregard this may have their Forum account banned. Please also avoid posting personally identifiable information, including links to your own online property listing which may reveal your address. Thank you for your understanding.MSE News: Three-year minimum tenancies could be introduced for renters
Comments
-
Crashy_Time wrote: »They want amateurs to stop being landlords, it is pretty obvious now? Having said that I don`t think we will see 3 year tenancies, 12 months is more than adequate.
Not as much as I do, Crashy. Personally, I think 6 months is more than enough time to get the measure of a person in any situation, be it a tenancy, a job or whatever. How many threads are on this board about nuisance neighbours? It is a huge problem and more than high time it was addressed. What is the point of wasting public money on court cases and injunctions if no-one can be bothered to enforce them?
The council here seems to be just like the politicians in Whitehall in that it is all about being seen to be doing something rather than having the slightest effect on anything or anyone.0 -
Rosemary7391 wrote: »I'm a little bit confused. Whilst I agree it is not pleasant to live next to someone who is engaging in anti-social behaviour, evicting them probably just passes the problem along? Surely the goal should be to stop the anti social behaviour? I think actually removing the no fault option to eviction would improve this process. Say that anti social behaviour was a grounds for "at fault" eviction. Such an eviction would have greater ongoing consequences and as such the threat of it would be more likely to persaude tenants to improve their behaviour.
That said, I'm not sure it's appropriate for landlords to be policing anti social behaviour. Owner occupiers can also be anti social; I don't see it as desireable that we treat them differently. Not least because different landlords will have vastly different attitudes towards it and many just won't be bothered as long as the rent is paid and house isn't damaged.
Tenants can be evicted from social housing for anti social behaviour because of the impact it has on the local community and the neighbours. So why would private landlords and their neighbours have to put up with it? The only people who can control anti social behaviour are the people doing it. What do you think ASBOS were introduced for?0 -
Rosemary7391 wrote: »I'm a little bit confused. Whilst I agree it is not pleasant to live next to someone who is engaging in anti-social behaviour, evicting them probably just passes the problem along? Surely the goal should be to stop the anti social behaviour? I think actually removing the no fault option to eviction would improve this process. Say that anti social behaviour was a grounds for "at fault" eviction. Such an eviction would have greater ongoing consequences and as such the threat of it would be more likely to persaude tenants to improve their behaviour.
That said, I'm not sure it's appropriate for landlords to be policing anti social behaviour. Owner occupiers can also be anti social; I don't see it as desireable that we treat them differently. Not least because different landlords will have vastly different attitudes towards it and many just won't be bothered as long as the rent is paid and house isn't damaged.
You really have no clue, do you? If you had had to live through the sleep deprived hell we have for two years, you might just think differently. It is a wonder we can think at all, some days, after one hour's sleep and constantly waiting for the scum to start again.
This is not Utopia, it is real life. I could not give a damn if all that happens is the problem is passed on to someone else. I just hope it is to someone who will, shall we say, show her the error of her ways by less legal methods than the ones we are prepared to employ.
We have done everything we can, as I have already stated. The judge should have issued a warrant for the Chav's arrest for contempt of court over two weeks ago; instead, he sat there shaking his head and saying her behaviour, "must be stopped" when he is the only one with the power to make that happen.
He should be sentenced to having to live next door to her for 2 years with no redress. That would be justice.
The LL wants her out but is too much of a poocee to make it happen. I am sick to death of reading on here that it takes "a maximum of 42 weeks" to evict a tenant. He has had half of that again and cannot even get a notice issued because he is too tight to pay for bailiffs. The fact he could have applied to the High Court and been receiving rent for the last year + seems to escape him. He would rather bribe her to leave; he told us that in person.
We are screwed by him, the police, the council and most of all by the Chav from Hell. What would you do, Rosemary? Make nice? Don't you think we tried that?0 -
You really have no clue, do you? If you had had to live through the sleep deprived hell we have for two years, you might just think differently. It is a wonder we can think at all, some days, after one hour's sleep and constantly waiting for the scum to start again.
This is not Utopia, it is real life. I could not give a damn if all that happens is the problem is passed on to someone else. I just hope it is to someone who will, shall we say, show her the error of her ways by less legal methods than the ones we are prepared to employ.
We have done everything we can, as I have already stated. The judge should have issued a warrant for the Chav's arrest for contempt of court over two weeks ago; instead, he sat there shaking his head and saying her behaviour, "must be stopped" when he is the only one with the power to make that happen.
He should be sentenced to having to live next door to her for 2 years with no redress. That would be justice.
The LL wants her out but is too much of a poocee to make it happen. I am sick to death of reading on here that it takes "a maximum of 42 weeks" to evict a tenant. He has had half of that again and cannot even get a notice issued because he is too tight to pay for bailiffs. The fact he could have applied to the High Court and been receiving rent for the last year + seems to escape him. He would rather bribe her to leave; he told us that in person.
We are screwed by him, the police, the council and most of all by the Chav from Hell. What would you do, Rosemary? Make nice? Don't you think we tried that?
Is it just bad behaviour or is it a mental health issue? I really feel for you it sounds horrible. The landlord is an idiot.
In the next borough to where I live (not near me thank goodness but someone has to put up with it) there are feral children who don't go to school and just run round the area all day. Their parents don't care where they are. Young children out of control. Just imagine what sort of neighbours they are going to make.0 -
The "mental health" card has been played, ad nauseum. Even the council acknowledge that, when injunctions are issued, then re-issued and tightened up (what a laugh, when breaches are ignored by the useless tool that passes for a judge) the Chav modifies her behaviour, a lot, for a time. Then she resumes. We record sound, neighbours opposite record video because of course, the police can't be expected to lift a finger, let alone show up unless all the work has already been done for them, can they?
They show up. They ask her to keep it down. She is oh, so reasonable. They hang around for a whole ten minutes, then leave. You'll never guess what happens next. Yep, as if nothing had happened, and it might as well not have.
So the Chav is far from so incapacitated that she cannot understand she is committing anti social behaviour. She apparently has a record as long as your arm yet, for some reason, is still walking around loose. The problem is, she never has to face any consequences so why should she stop? Where else is she going to live rent-free? OH and I see no end to the hell, now. Even I, who have six Phd's in cynicism, foolishly hoped we might finally be rid of her 2 weeks ago. Silly me.
And to think we bent over backwards to be helpful when she and her abusive BF moved in. She could not wait to tell us how violent he was, the poor, little victim. The council did actually get around (eventually) to issuing a Closure Order against him well over a year ago and told us they would do likewise for her, then chickened out.
And these morons want 3 year tenancies? The Age of the Chav is upon us and most of them probably don't even bother to vote.0 -
Rosemary7391 wrote: »I'm a little bit confused. Whilst I agree it is not pleasant to live next to someone who is engaging in anti-social behaviour, evicting them probably just passes the problem along? Surely the goal should be to stop the anti social behaviour? I think actually removing the no fault option to eviction would improve this process. Say that anti social behaviour was a grounds for "at fault" eviction. Such an eviction would have greater ongoing consequences and as such the threat of it would be more likely to persaude tenants to improve their behaviour.
That said, I'm not sure it's appropriate for landlords to be policing anti social behaviour. Owner occupiers can also be anti social; I don't see it as desireable that we treat them differently. Not least because different landlords will have vastly different attitudes towards it and many just won't be bothered as long as the rent is paid and house isn't damaged.
What if you are the landlord of the antisocial behaviour tenant from hell and also your other tenants are in neighbouring flats, such as in an HMO or converted house block of flats? This is the situation I was in and I found out how inadequate s.8 provisions are and was counting the days down to when I could use the s.21 after 12 months.0 -
What if you are the landlord of the antisocial behaviour tenant from hell and also your other tenants are in neighbouring flats, such as in an HMO or converted house block of flats? This is the situation I was in and I found out how inadequate s.8 provisions are and was counting the days down to when I could use the s.21 after 12 months.
Thank you, Querty, and to Cakeguts (with whom I do not always agree) from the bottom of my heart.0 -
Thank you, Querty, and to Cakeguts (with whom I do not always agree) from the bottom of my heart.
I don't care if people don't agree with me because I love a discussion.
One of our tenants once kept a potential neighbour from hell under control by having a boyfriend who looked like a bigger thug than anyone the neighbour from hell could produce. The boyfriend didn't actually have to do anything other than be seen by the neighbour.0 -
I don't care if people don't agree with me because I love a discussion.
One of our tenants once kept a potential neighbour from hell under control by having a boyfriend who looked like a bigger thug than anyone the neighbour from hell could produce. The boyfriend didn't actually have to do anything other than be seen by the neighbour.
What a pity OH is at the other end of the spectrum. It should not be about that. Why are so many people so ignorant of the most basic values these days? They never spare a thought for anyone who is not them. It is most certainly not the way I was brought up.0 -
I don't care if people don't agree with me because I love a discussion.
One of our tenants once kept a potential neighbour from hell under control by having a boyfriend who looked like a bigger thug than anyone the neighbour from hell could produce. The boyfriend didn't actually have to do anything other than be seen by the neighbour.
Things can sort themselves out but most likely the other tenants will just leave rather than become involved, especially if there are children involved, which is what happened in this case. I felt that things could potentially take a downward spiral at this point so decided to leave vacated flat empty until I could get the problematic tenant out, and take a hit on the income for a few months.
As for passing the problem onto someone else, what is the alternative? At least if they keep getting s.21s eventually no one will rent to them and social housing will have to step in anyway.
Actually even with the best will in the world I don't believe this type of problem is fixable and just has to be left to the landlord, imperfect though that is.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 343.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 250.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 449.7K Spending & Discounts
- 235.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 608K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 173.1K Life & Family
- 247.9K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
- 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards