Carryon Regardless

S21's are to become history anyway. We are effectively to request permission to recover our properties from abusive T's. While I don't condone such is this type of outcome really a surprise? https://metro.co.uk/2021/05/17/landlord-fined-for-dumping-tenants-belongings-in-the-street-14597450/ The big surprise is that the penalty makes this worthwhile. Court costs and the wait for, eliminated. Lost rents reduced. Damage during an eviction process eliminated. Either route would have stresses. I have read of the big stick persuasion becoming used more. Like I said I don't condone such. I have been meaning to research where we stand these days on repossessions where we desire to sell a property.

Many are aware there were changes that came in during 2019 for new tenancies, relating to charges and penalties no longer allowed. Those changes became applicable to all existing changes by 1st June 2020. There are a few more than the true but sarcastic referred to change in the title. One that has caught me out is the penalty for late payment of rents. Each month if arrears are greater than £50 at 5 days after the due payment date I would apply a £30 penalty. As it was a term within the AST I thought it was ok. NOT, I have been wrong. The titled charge may be 'only' made if it is detailed within our AST. Also if detailed within our AST we may apply a charge at a rate of 3% above the BofE base rate for payments that are 14 days late, so 3.1% at the moment. This is pro rata. So if a T is 2 weeks late paying say £1,000 rent. At 3.1% /52(weeks) we may charge 60p per week. I am now at risk of a £5,000 fine for my charges (civil suite). As I have done this monthly on 3 tenancies, I guess, I am at risk of being a repeat offender and liable for £30,000 (now criminal). However just maybe I am innocent till proven so not yet an offender??? Years ago it was advisable to return unprotected deposits and hopefully head off any deposit claim of 3x (plus deposit return anyway). While I'm intending to return the £990 I've applied for late payments I've seen nothing to suggest that lets me off the hook. I don't think the Gov't likes us anymore.

Shelter have come up with a useful tool, https://england.shelter.org.uk/housing_advice/private_renting/how_to_end_a_fixed_term_tenancy_early Talking periodic here. Working through it, the result is for a tenancy to end on the last day of a tenancy period, or the 1st day of a tenancy period. Seems strange to me that the 1st day would be applicable but hey ho. It states that a tenancy period starts on say the 14th if the move in date was the 14th. This is where it is at odds with my set up but I still believe my set up to be applicable. My AST states tenancies will become periodic at the end of the initial fixed term. My periods of tenancy are all stated to commence on the 1st of each month, regardless of move in date. So the initial fixed term may be some days longer than 6 months but will always end on the last day of the applicable month. In this case their move in date was on a 24th, so they have already missed their opportunity to serve notice in time for that anyway, should the likes of Shelter wish to argue the point. They may become organised and shift all their 'stuff' efficiently, we'll see. That being the case they have already paid for June so no issue.

They've been long term T's with excessive wear and tear. My usual is to say "thanks for letting me know, keep me updated as to when". Here though I'm expecting heavy repairs, and ott cleaning / removal of 'stuff'. Rather than chase for damage and rubbish removal costs that could be more problematic to achieve, the strict claim of rents due till the end of a notice period could give me a less complicated way to recover some losses. If they leave the property in reasonable, but a some what worn state then no problem.

Things change often in this game, so nowadays I'm not as sure as i used to be. It used to be that a T was required to give notice of 1 month (for a periodic tenancy that is paid monthly). and for the last day to be the last day of a tenancy period, Is this still true? I often refer to the Shelter site, but on this they state one month and don't specify the end date, another site does specify last day to be end of a tenancy period.

The price can depend on so many things, so near impossible for us to say. But most tradesmen would consider a £55 charge as a minimum for call out. I view that £55 isn't worth worrying about for this and might well save further damage.

The rejection of HB applicants on that ground doesn't apply to me, because I need T's and it wouldn't be realistic in some / most of my areas to expect better. I guess I need be cautious on my wording when advertising though as I 'did' state no unemployed. I also state sickness and elderly claimants welcome and while that often amounts to benefit claimants it is a restriction to some. Shelter's barrister, well any really, are there to find the best cause to hang the defendant, us in these scenarios. Insurance companies are allowed to assess risk and charge the premium accordingly. I would wager that if we were to increase our rent for benefit claimants the prosecuting Barrister would find it easy to have us hung. To defend would cost upwards of £10K (an added cost to the LL mentioned in the original post) As with my earlier grumble, We must now go to court to request approval of having 'our' property returned to us. When told "not this time", we shall suffer the backlash and have to return at our expense to try again. We, or our Agents, are not allowed to charge the prospective or in place T's for any admin or even inconvenience they cause. Increasingly it is being taken out of our hands who we should actually take as a T. It is desired that we should be forced to accept children and animals, as a human right. These things creep up on us, but here it isn't that subtle. Any forecast on what onerous changes we should expect next month / year? How close are we to being social LL's? And our threatened penalties are greater than the local councils. Do the RLA still exist?

My simplistic thoughts, cynical of course. When I was rejected for the self employed covid grant HMRC stated I wasn't classed as self employed, and yet I have completed a self assessment and paid tax due to that for many years. So I'm not self employed, I don't pay PAYE so who do I work for. Well it's the Gov't of course. Our decisions and choices of how we run the business that we are allowed to be responsible for have been diminished to such a degree that we must accept that it isn't our business any longer. We are merely the one's responsible to provide accommodation to the satisfaction of onerous legislation, to be overseen by Shelter. I haven't read the link but am I right in assuming the LL paid the expenses of Shelter?

Losses are automatically carried till offset.

Condensate is acidic and so corrosive, but even so I would be surprised if the leak would cause serious damage. More often these sorts of stains are dealt with by a coat of undercoat followed by emulsion, not usually near the excess cost never mind whatever the claim is for. I would want to interrogate this. But if the mismanagement company are Comptons they don't discuss and enjoy ramping up the charges via their 'not' in house solicitor who works for them.

Should I require a defence. Whatever the situation the soil wasn't his to remove, as said it has value. Theft end of. I appreciate that there are different views on actions but mine is he is a weasly thief. He demonstrates that no trust would be reasonable. Btw, tenants should only be doing work with our consent and approval. Even then it can be a dangerous result if there is a court case regarding the tenancy. Where I can trust the tenant to do good work I offer to refund the receipt of materials, by credit on their rent

It's theft, so a police matter. Good luck there.

No problem with discretion, just enjoy quietly. Or with sound proofing.

Is that the new model that might be attracted to a sports car?

In truth tax hikes are expected and will more often be accepted due to covid costs I imagine.

RL if they tax the voter on boilers they lose votes. It's us that are fair game. 12 year old cars, well a whole new subject that involves manufacturers designing to make us more dependant on them and causing a return to the keep it 3 years or so and sell it on principle. There will be an increasing realisation that, certainly with diesels, pre 2010 cars (and possibly more so vans) are more reliable. After thought, if they could tax gas boiler spares that might well be a sly way of persuasion.

There can be a lot of this and that thinking around this but. They have been inconvenienced, and I'm not considering guests here, and as much as you did as you were able it was the various tradesmen that screwed up. If you are able to achieve compensation from them it would be reasonable to pass it on. But I wouldn't want to put the effort in for the benefit of these tenants. They have turned your property into a care home, they are selective as to who can have access. They run the property w/o any consideration of you but expect all the responsibilities of you being a landlord. I think I might politely suggest that when they change their attitude and show you consideration they will get the same by return. Even though you have demonstrated your continued contentious attitude over this. I would consider alternative accommodation is only applicable where a tenants property is uninhabitable. If they considered it was then that is when they should have cited it as such. Too late.

I have wondered where up North. I let properties in less affluent areas, at your rent price it's either very cheap or in an area worse than mine. In the lesser areas I often find the quality of tenants is going to be lower, with associated additional risk. I must accept that but the lower value of the properties can mean the return is proportionally higher, until. Also guarantors can more often be found, but again of a lower quality. So in the event they aren't really going to compensate the situation. But I still want one and if nowt else they can find the bugger when they've hoofed it. The fear of litigation 'can' be greater for some. I did research on insurance some years ago. I didn't work for me then. In some cases it would be pointless but would involve more admin. I effectively self insure. On more than one occasion I have accepted the hit as part of my increased risk. I do endevour to minimise it each time though. There does come a point where writing off is more intelligent than the effort of chasing for what is likely to be a limited return. In this case I would be taking the physiological route to hopefully avoid him leaving damage when gone. Consider what you have over him. Do you know where he works, where friends and parents live. Him knowing this will follow him is a good deterant. Meanwhile unless your sure the next tenants will be lovely I would consider negotiating a reduced rent, so often it's better the devil you know.

I managed to overcome the issue of fluids getting under a laminate, I have it our bathroom ceiling. Tis true, honestly. Mrs Me thinks I only did it because I like Lionel Richie.

I imagine you will consider that I'm looking for problems. but Should there be issue with the floor you have no agreement with the installer, you would need to take it up with the tenant, who by then may be the ex tenant possibly living in America. When you create the new agreement you have effectively accepted the install anyway. A laminate floor that gets fluids underneath isn't something i would wish to have as a concern, milk, coffee, cat pee.

As RL decide what you want in the long term. In my mind waiting till the end of the tenancy for resolution leaves you at too much risk, in no small part with her being an international traveller. If you want it to be returned to as was then the money to do so should be paid now for you to carry out when you wish, and consider the void time of the works. I'm sure the legalities would be otherwise but I consider such to be vandalism. Treating you property with such a lack of respect shows the attitude to expect at end of tenancy.

Different scenarios, different strategies. Deposits are of limited value regarding recompense. 5 weeks being the max. We are so controlled and find it awkward to even seek financial satisfaction, never mind actually getting it, I can see an argument for keeping the T for a long as. I have negotiated an early release settlement. How we phrase any charges might bite back, but I would hope a settlement is acceptable as a payment. If the T has changed his mind he should pay for the luxury. London rents are falling, maybe elsewhere in city locations also, due to the reduced number of T's needing to live near work. We are in business so the T feeling peeved his rents might now be higher is just tough. I'm not aware rents have fallen by 30%, and even as a starting point of negotiation, with menaces, it's taking the pee. To my mind the biggest concern here is the difficulty in getting court dates and the power that gives T's who are aware. 4 months allows for some recovery so that threat can be realistic again. I have one property I would hate to become mt. If the T's made such noises I would nail their feet to the flippin' floor. Be sure to get a suitable G'tor next time, they are such loverly people that can do our dirty work for us.

I think this has gone far beyond our abilities to suggest any 'legal' means of resolution. Of interest, the council inspector rejected claims of disrepair, good. That suggests the property was habitable and in an acceptable state at best, but at least points to you not being responsible for any apparent damage. Why did you authorise repairs for a simple request from the officer? I had similar, to a lesser degree, in Wales some years back. The council inspector stated the tenants living condition were lifestyle and not my responsibility, but requested I repair a toilet that didn't flush easily. "I would rather not go into that sh*t hole till I have the repossession," (action in place", "do you mind if I leave it till then?" "Yes, that sounds reasonable." My general rule is that if they create the sh*t then they should live with it. As long as I/ we are permitted to that is.

1st point is that a new consumer is code 3, at worst. That equates to a recommendation for improvement, not a requirement for a 'Satisfactory' on the cert. Challenge your electrician as to why. Next point is if you are able to demonstrate you have tried to do all reasonably possible to carry out the electrical inspection, and that must include improvements, you are no longer liable for the £30k fine. Record you communications with your tenant and set up the evidence of your attempts to do as you desire. If you tenant feels the electrics are unsafe there is clearly a contradiction if he doesn't allow for you to improve them. I would suggest to the little sh*t takes up alternative accommodation on the street. The greater question here is what you can do to take pro active action for any unpaid rent. These days we are pretty well stuffed, and our best hope is that the tenant isn't aware of their covid protections on this. Do you have a guarantor?

My 2nd hand little girlie was paying £1,650 pcm, Hammersmith though. Nice spacious 2 bed flat. But with Mussolini as a concierge.