Jump to content

Carryon Regardless

Members
  • Content Count

    1,551
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Carryon Regardless

  1. I can't dig out the regulation right now. What is relevant is the period the rent is contracted to be paid for. Start dates and payment dates may well become irrelevant due to that. The main problem is judges are confused, as are many, by the ever changing and misquoted legislation, so if an appearance is required it makes sense to be able to quote the actual legislation being relied on. As Grampa, using a 'savings clause' should allow for a judge to decide on the date he / she believes to be applicable. I would be worth high lighting its presence in the court claim. What I have written into my contract is clarification as to what each rental period is, it is the same for each of my tenancies regardless of tenancy start date. Now though, after October 2015, we only need allow 2 months after service of S21, other dates are irrelevant. As long as we can demonstrate correct service the savings clause, and my clarification of a rental period, become irrelevant. I would serve your S21, with savings clause, and wait some time beyond the last date that may be seen by a judge as relevant, before proceeding with a court claim. It may not get that far. "After the expiry of this notice. Or the last day of a period of the tenancy next occurring following expiry of this notice. This notice expires AFTER: _________________" This is what use, it allows a judge to decide.
  2. Aye, I liked her style yesterday. I see her stance though as a starting point for negotiations. If the EU continue to be so arrogant I hope she holds her nerve.
  3. Aye, I heard the comment of a cynicist that we might become like the Cayman Islands or Singapore. That'l save on flights. Sounds good to me.
  4. Not quite true RL, Buy a Honda and likely as not it needs only fuel and service, buy a Hyundia and you might well be replacing the turbo each year. As for Germans, I have driven Mercs for years for the better engineering but they are so complicated there is more to go wrong. And their recent engines don't fill me with confidence (especially the Renault engines I've heard will be going in some MB's). I'm with Mel in that you get what you pay for, hopefully.
  5. I've found that the self sealing PRV's have a tendency to weep when a few years old as the heat has hardened the rubber sealing ring. As you'll know Mel only around £20 for a new valve but can be knuckle destroying to replace (that ignores the back twisting shapes we have to get into). I view the PRV as there for safety as for convenience it's not convenient in the long term.
  6. Another method that can be useful is to have payments made from the G'tors bank account. I've never opted for this and it can't be policed, but if operating like this then the G'tor is carrying the responsibility of chasing the T. It also continually demonstrates the G'tors involvement and situation awareness.
  7. Please remember I'm just some guy on the internet, but my further thoughts. By now you should know your maximum exposure, but that assumes that you won't become liable for your ex T's legal costs and you can be sure his vulture will attempt to make you so. In court you should be prepared with your response, possibly at summing up. Now there is a vulture on the go this will have its own momentum. The vulture will want as much meat from this as can be had, an easy result isn't in his interest. Your employing your own vulture could easily run up your own costs that outweigh the present exposure. Two vultures play a lovely game each feeding off the developing conflict. You may find paying up any award is cheaper, far less time consuming and less stressful. His vulture may not realise you are up for the possible effective 4x, in any negotiation that could help some. It seems he realises that you are liable for non protection, and non serving of prescribed info (but that makes no difference so don't be harassed if that argument comes up). Considering the deposit has been returned in a fashion that was to the T's advantage, and as this was by you being very compliant to the T's wishes and supporting his life development the Court may well give you sympathy. It isn't difficult to see an ex T who now sees an opportunity for an easy buck to buy his new sofa. Already you you have shown your agreement to extend the tenancy, on a daily basis, so no double rents there (distress of rents).You can claim for any unpaid rents though, and it wouldn't harm any to claim for cleaning and repairs required at the end of tenancy. I'm not expecting you carried out a 'check in' and 'check out' to give that any credibility though. It doesn't seem likely the exT would listen to your education but just rely on the vulture. A little satisfaction might be that any award will just pay the vulture, not the ex T. Don't get too stressed, let his vulture claw and squawk, just be prepared to cough up when need be. Let us know where this goes though, cos this is just theory so far.
  8. Nowadays I use gut feeling as my 1st decider. I might drop in to the present address 'at teatime' with an extra application form to check their life style. Requesting to use the loo can reveal much. I check the G'tor for ability to settle, in the event, at a cost of £3. The Land Registry will show when their property was bought and for how much. You will see outstanding charges (Mortgage) but not how much. It isn't difficult to assess, with online property prices, if likely to be negative equity or if they have equity for you to claim against. You might run a check for bad credit history on both. I tell them I shall (bluff) and suggest a bad report will mean they lose their admin fee if they don't declare any adverse history beforehand. I usually get a list of mobile phone company issues, Sky, occasional bank, or I scared them and I don't see the admin fee or them again.
  9. It's the court that decides how much of an award the T should get, not his vulture solicitor. I also have the view that as the claim should go through the County Court there is no need for your ex T to employ a solicitor so any costs for that shouldn't be a penalty to you. I would consider creating your defence in preparation for court, however minimal that might be. You have the 2 confusing letters and might use them to show the poor confusing effect of the solicitor anyway. Be ready to make settlement after the hearing and there should be no adverse marker against you. You might reduce your final outlay by negotiation (pre Court), that at max is 3 x deposit value + return of deposit (so 4x effectively), but be cautious that this would actually remove the right of the ex T to claim anyway. It is now a game that solicitors like to play for revenues, don't be harassed.
  10. Guarantor, in good financial situation. Home owner preferred.
  11. Mel perhaps you could confirm that the fill loop (with it's non return valve) isn't supposed to be left fitted. Some years ago I plumbed a copper filling loop, thinking it removed some faff, on inspection my 'engineer' told me it was naughty.
  12. I don't like T's doing anything, I assume it all is beyond their competence. A nice lady T re pressured the system and forgot to turn off the fill tap. The increase in pressure passes the relief valve ok, but these things rarely settle back as designed and continue to weep afterwards. But in this case it also found a weakness at a HEP 90 deg 22mm joint and blew it. I sorted it all w/o drama and didn't cause the T to feel at all bad, but better I didn't have to. If we provide instruction to do these things then a T will likely say "you told me to", difficult for us to claim for ill effects of their actions then as we can if / when they do / authorise works of their own accord. There was discussion on here some time ago on how we should provide instructions for all that is in a property, I don't agree. I prefer a T to make contact when they have issues, I can then decide on the urgency and appropriate response.
  13. I have been of the belief that a Section 13 is the prescribed notice of rent increase, again happy to be corrected. It was some years ago when I looked into this and things change daily in this industry due to legislative meddling. I don't issue a 'notice' as such but as my letter has the same information as prescribed I always worked on the principle that it was good enough. Also, as RL, I've informed them, they are aware, if they don't accept it and cite legislation as their out then it points to a T that I no longer want. Same as RL, once they have paid the increase there is mutual agreement in place so no more required.
  14. I stopped taking deposits a while ago, for a few reasons. I'm no familiar with the DPS procedures, and in truth I was resentful at having to be at any time. It does strike me that you have been a bit knee jerk though, more often not the best way. If dates allow I will often consider pros and cons before acting.
  15. I wouldn't return the deposit, if as you inspect you find issues that might cause you to claim from the deposit you might prefer to negotiate an easier surrender using the deposit return as a bargaining advantage. As I understand, and I'm happy to be corrected, you can't remedy the fault of being late to register a deposit. The potential for the 3x claim (plus return of deposit anyway) will stand if returned or not. At their departure from your property unpaid rents and the cost of repossession proceedings are the easiest to demonstrate as losses for a claim against the deposit. Come any time it goes in front of a judge, who has discretion on the value of compensation for late protection, having repossessed and citing the reasons (although irrelevant to the use of a S21) 'might' get you some sympathy anyway. Keep the deposit, it may be the only monies you will see from here forward.
  16. Serve notice as soon as. Communicate openly with the Environmental Officer, offer to attend the visit. The truth will out.
  17. When I raise the rents, which will be from February, I invite T's to demonstrate be comparison if they believe I am over charging. None ever have as if they do the research I do they will see I am a little below the competition.
  18. I thought we were down to using 1 S21 these days, Aren't the previous 2 now redundant in favour of a S21 that is 2 months from any date served, as apposed to the previous being required to end at the end of a rent period?
  19. Well considered Grampa, that could well reduce the cost of any back hander.
  20. So not as simple as him wishing to be evicted so he can get housing from the council then. Even then any offer by the council would likely be a hostel type set up and not as appealing as his own pad (yours). He isn't just abusive he has some knowledge of his rights, ether from tinternet, guy down at the pub, or wherever and that can be dangerous. Often wrong but he has nowt to lose, all cost and effort is now down to you. Recovery of expenses and lost rents will be written off. A back hander of a few hundred quids is by far the cheaper and swiftest option, following his departure and signed declaration to say as much, witnessed. I feel that although he isn't on the AST and was taken in as a guest a judge would sympathise with him claiming to be tenant. Assumed, he has been there for a considerable period, and with your knowledge, after all it is your daughter. Assumed, he has contributed to payments of rent, you have said he has paid rents since your daughters departure. Maybe he has even received HB for your property? He isn't a squatter, I feel he has become far more than a guest as he has been given right of sole occupation by the person in possession, your daughter. Now, as said, I would serve S21 and 8 on your daughter, at the property and in her hand to demonstrate she is aware. She signs receipt. She offers no defence in court so possession is granted, if he defends, unlikely, you still get possession. Then onto bailiffs to hoof him if needed. Alternative, some one with stature offers him the back hander, I wouldn't attempt more persuasive methods as he sounds like he is aware of the illegal eviction scenario. BTW, I've had tenants call in the housing enforcement officer to create a reason for not paying rent, they haven't enjoyed success as yet. If I am aware of such action I make contact and offer to go along on their visit, that gains a favourable response and shows more than a don't care attitude. The officer would like to see all properties as palaces and may try to encourage us to carry out unnecessary works. He will raise a report for you. I would ring prior to that and politely request that he detail the relevant legislation that applies to the works requested / suggested. When he reads the legislation you may find the works aren't requested any longer. Already he has the measure of the abusers try on.
  21. In this case would the police suggest the daughter start repossession proceedings?
  22. I considered the squatting angle Grampa, but 2 thoughts crossed my mind. This man has been granted access by the daughter, there is no unlawful entry. It's reasonable to assume he will have keys also. The police, generally, consider these issues to be the owners problem. I would be interested to 'learn' if the police have been pro active in real squatter situations. I go along with S21 / 8 on the daughter only, after all as a fall back it can end up in the bin when it suits. It / they will need to be served at the property so 'he' will see it, even if not addressed to him. It seems there is advantage in providing good evidence of 'he' becoming homeless, in the hope he has intention of organising his own future. Armed with legislative knowledge, and some bluff, I would attempt a face to face meet. Actually as he isn't a tenant, aside from the complication of him having paid some rent, isn't he already homeless ?
  23. The council won't ask you of the situation, they will ask the T but that's no concern of yours. If your daughter presents you with the deed of surrender that closes the tenancy, as Grampa says if HE is paying rent he might claim to be in a tenancy with you. My view here is that at present a tenancy exists between you and your daughter and this man. Either tenant can surrender a tenancy. The date of the deed would show that he hasn't entered into a new tenancy after your daughter quit, so she is quiting the joint tenancy, From then he has no legal right to occupy, but the repossession could be complicated if he's awkward. And of course he can claim anything and then the court decides. If he wants to leave and depend on housing assistance surely his showing a copy of the deed and demonstrating the date of his homelessness should suffice. Be careful with a section 21 or section 8 as that might show you are attempting to terminate an existing tenancy. That might be a contradiction.
  24. As I see it these are totally independent issues. If the rental in Spain is a tax allowable expense, and I wouldn't like to say how, then it is claimed as such against the Spanish business profits. If your rental business in the UK makes a profit then tax becomes payable. If overall you make a loss in Spain again I wouldn't like to say if that can be used as an offset for your UK liabilities, but we are in the EU, still. In theory though wherever you live will have an expense, how much of an expense is your choice.
  25. Your LA is silly, the ex T has no claim so you getting on with your business is no concern of hers. I would advertise and have the next T lined up, with more time to choose you have more chance of getting better.
×
×
  • Create New...