Jump to content

Carryon Regardless

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Carryon Regardless

  1. 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?
  2. Well considered Grampa, that could well reduce the cost of any back hander.
  3. 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.
  4. In this case would the police suggest the daughter start repossession proceedings?
  5. 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 ?
  6. 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.
  7. 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.
  8. 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.
  9. It's a bluff, No one in their right mind would 'pay' for legal advice that she says she has had. Any deposit won't be in your hands, unless you opted for the insurance option. True you can't take 2 rents for the same period. I am assuming you are repossessing due to losses, that being the case keep any monies you have and offset them against those losses. The ball is then in the abusers court to take action for recovery, of course you can defend the action. Additional costs for County Court would only be in the couple of hundreds anyway so even if you did lose it may be worth chancing a defence, if it got that far.
  10. 1st the T's need to report the event and raise a crime number. Your insurance covers damage to your property, T's belongings are their problem, should be insured. It's a useful clause in the AST to stipulate that T's insure their belongings.
  11. Actually RL I was basing my doubts of the available FTB's on the continual cry from MP's and the media for more affordable housing, a very ambiguous term I admit.
  12. I haven't been following the market closely for a while but my feeling is that the north is going to see a catch up mini boom. I've been reading of the price rises down south for more than a couple of years, in selective areas I would imagine. The migration effect can take a while but does cause the outer regions to follow eventually. More important in the analysis of "is it a good time to buy" is to work out where the money to buy, for an increasing number of buyers, to stimulate property inflation, is going to come from. The last boom was due to the over easy supply of credit, is credit readily available? If not is there lots of dosh tucked away by lots of investors, I'm considering investors as the most 1st time buyers that can kick the market into activity are, in my view, struggling to find hefty deposits. Although I've heard a 15% deposit is now required as apposed to the 30% a while ago, still a lot though. For the majority wage rises have been negligible for many years so their ability to afford what are still high mortgages isn't enjoying the benefit of a one sided inflation. Are BTL mortgages easily obtainable for the wannabe LL's?
  13. Maybe a heads up on something that caught me out recently, not serious but a £60+ better in my pocket. Our local council still gives a 3 month 100% discount on an MT and unfurnished property. My AST states all council charges etc to be the responsibility of the T for the full period of responsibility agreed within the AST. Early in the year I held T's to the full period of notice, so they held the keys till that day although they had vacated the property a couple of weeks earlier. As it turned out I re let the property near on 3 months later but as the previous T's had claimed the MT property discount for a couple of weeks or so the council have charged me for the couple of weeks, as the 3 month discount ended a couple of weeks prior to the re let. Really the previous T's should be liable, if only to me now, for those couple of weeks, but my wording of contract would give them a let out as they have paid as the council have charged them. I've had similar in an abandonment situation, but then I wrote to that council to inform that the absconder had left furniture so the property wasn't MT, and they still had responsibility for the property until repossession. Maybe I've to consider some re wording.
  14. Well RL there is another view. In the past when someone has complained of how much income tax they pay I have responded with "aren't you lucky." It's only those that earn enough will pay a lot of tax. Those below the tax thresh hold and those earning so little they pay little tax are clearly not finding the cost of life easy.
  15. http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/buytolet/article-3153541/Profits-slashed-wealthy-buy-let-landlords-Budget-crackdown-mortgage-tax-relief.html I had a conversation regarding this last week with an accountant. My statement that LL's were going to be taxed on revenue rather than profit was met with "for most nothing will change". We, in a few years, will no longer be able to offset the mortgage cost against the higher rate tax paid but still able to offset against the lower band. As I don't pay the higher tax, as I don't clear enough, for me no change. Of course we do lose the 10% of revenue little bonus we could claim on 'furnished' lets. As we are able to claim the actual expenses against tax, and as I don't have furnished lets anyway, for me no difference. apart from the fact the tax man would have had to get off his butt to check if you did have furnished lets if you were claiming that is. Some may feel a pinch from the changes but as it only affects those who are doing well they will be able to weather any differences. As I know this accountant well, the off the record chats have been very useful over the years. Although years ago when I moved home and mortgaged the new domicile to the max he said I was wrong to be claiming a large portion of the new mortgage as a business loan. I said that if I didn't have the properties, i.e. disposed of them, I wouldn't have the large mortgage. The business made most of the new mortgage a requirement. After some checking he returned wiith "you're right it's the principle reason you took the loan out that counts." There would be a danger that Mr taxman would one day say that any sale profits were business profits, even if proportioned that's not attractive. But I'm heading that one off.
  16. 'If' we down'ere increase rents by say 10% over what we might have to compensate us for higher A's charges the T's are definitely the losers. Any long term rent increase of significance to compensate for a short term (one off per rental cost) must bring in higher returns for the LL. In my case where I don't employ the services of A's these days, not saying I won't as there might be future value, I gain even more. I base my rents on the market comparisons, and then knock a bit off to be more comparative. 'If' market rents are going to rise for what ever reason/s I enjoy highre incomes too but with less expense. And I can still charge my admin fee.
  17. The Govt have got to mess with this industry they can't stop them selves. If the A can't charge the T the fees they either charge the LL or don't give the service. I would imagine the A will offer services in a tiered fashion, as many do already, Bronze, Silver Gold sort of thing. Higher admin fees will cause some LL to go DIY. Increased credit check fees will see an increase in higher risk T's, and the knock on of that we see here often. These days I'm essentially DIY anyway, since my find only A couldn't find T's that didn't want to pay a deposit, "they don't understand why you won't take a deposit", strange. Will the Govt aim to prevent me charging my admin fee, approx £150 but negotiable? It seems to be considered immoral for the smaller business person to make money in this country. There has been a drive to push them out of business for a while now.
  18. I guess you both had a light sprinkling of luck over the DPS debacle a couple years back when no one knew if they should retake deposits, reserve prescribed info, or in fact do nowt regarding new tenancies, existing tenancies and very old existing tenancies. At least some effort has been applied to rationalise the 21a and 21b removing some potential for confusion. As for reading the rules to be aware, if they weren't amended so often there would be more chance of the more average LL doing this. Even the judges in the CC seem to need reminding of the legislation now and again.
  19. and good luck to yer, I was how ever referring to the ever increasing legislative hoops we need to jump through. The number of them and their complexity by design must cause us to fail in one way or another.
  20. Something like learning from our mistakes eh Grampa, except most of the time it wasn't a mistake until some wannabe shows us how they can abuse us. I'm not sure it's possible to foresee where this industry will be next year so we can plan in advance, that's the lesson I take from its history anyway.
  21. I can see that argument. In my case the AST will not get my signature until formalities are complete. That is, my AST signature is the last action before presenting keys. W/o my signature the AST hasn't been agreed so not yet started. In the old days of serving the S21 at tenancy start I viewed that giving keys, shaking hands and welcoming them to the tenancy was the seal of agreement i.e. start of tenancy. All can be argued in court of course, and we know where sympathy generally lies. The problem here is that to have the deed completed (dated) before the AST is far from acceptable from a business point. For example I will drive 80 miles one way for a tenancy sign up, even if local there would be too much time spent. I can't speak for others but the risk / reward consideration in this business goes too far and fast toward risk being greater. The naive LL is such an easy target nowadays.
  22. I've been surprised some recently regarding a couple of HB tenancies. Both did a runner, the first was traced through a tracing agent and they are now recovering approx £32 pm, they keep 25% and pass the rest on. As and when he pays the original sum off I'll peruse him for the 25% I've been charged for the service. Little chance or none I'll enjoy harassing that one. The g'tor of another is paying £150 pm. In truth I believe she is protecting the wherabouts of the T by passing on the dosh. I don't care. Both of these debts were right off in my mind but goes to show some times it's worth the effort. But of course it doesn't totally compensate for the true effort, renovations, extra admin.
  23. I believe most local authorities will accept a date of repossession by the court as adequate for rehousing so most T's depart, having only cost us £280 + additional losses. Personally I haven't had the need to proceed further than a court repossession YET. Although I also believe that, with further permission from the CC, that can be requested at a repossession hearing, we can speed things up by using the high Court Sheriff. This, I believe, will relieve us of a further £1K(ish). With the value of my rents I don't envisage this having purpose for me. RL I have been saying for years now that the protection provided toward poor, poor T's is disproportionate, and largely down to social minded MP's (of any party) wanting to bleat on about something that sounds worthy..Serves us right for being the sleazy, underhand, untrustworthy second hand car property occupation salespersons.
  24. I use the deed provided by Grampa some time back. That requires the G'tors signature to be witnessed anyway, a requirement of a deed and let's face no deed no real responsibility. Sign up is at the property. We all three sign onto the AST. G'tor and witness only for the deed. The only time I went along with a variation I insisted the distant G'tor went to a solicitor who would witness (and stamp), the process failed. Passports (or similar for both required), mine as well if ever asked for. Nowadays, aside from possible visit to existing properties (T & G'tior), for £3 I carry out a LR check. If there are doubts to there being reasonable equity I ask to see 12 months mortgage statement.. I work on a good impression of them (possible faulty). As the G'tor is the real chance of recovery it's them I concern myself with.
  25. Back to the court and pay for Bailiff action.
  • Create New...