Jump to content

Carryon Regardless

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Carryon Regardless

  1. We still don't have a clear picture. There is no written agreement, if they are lodgers then that is good as they have not been granted additional rights. The room in which they have been granted access to, is there any way this could be viewed as self contained? Do you now share the bathroom and kitchen with them? If they are unable to lock their room and must leave it to share the kitchen and bathroom 'with you' then they are lodgers. Grampa is correct in that you may end up defending a situation even if they are wrong. Shelter could very well assist them with this. Prevention might be better than a stressful cure. But tbh if I was sure of my situation, in that they are lodgers in my home, I would change the locks while they are out. Any disturbance and I would call the police if they didn't. The police are often confused by such things but I would stand my ground and 'deny them any entry', as once in you can't evict. You are only permitted, by law, to prevent re entry. You are not lawfully allowed to deny them their belongings, but you have a duty of care of them. Do not allow them in to collect. Request they make a list of their stuff and arrange a time for them to collect 'from outside', or elsewhere. Photo or video their stuff inside, and try to demonstrate considerate handling of it. If the police are willing to oversee you might well give them all or what they can take. But it's best you have an assistant that would prevent them entering the property. Be sure they are not of tenant status. Big fines and a prison sentence is the risk you run. The law is an ass, but we became a dumb ass if we go the wrong side of it.
  2. Lodgers have little in the way of rights, these rights increase if given by contract. Have you given an AST or are they saying one is in place by the nature of the habitation? If these people share your kitchen and bathroom they are most likely lodgers, if they have self contained style living arrangements then they are tenants, with an effective AST. Proving you are a live in landlord is easy, you would have bills to demonstrate energy costs. The council tax will be all yours, but maybe some caution as it may be that you are just guilty of not declaring their accomodation for separate council tax. More information on the set up is required here.
  3. Typically a LL would instal a timer / stat / programmer that isn't T adjustable. But if the energy costs are set by the 'committee' there is no incentive for the LL to care anyway. My thoughts in my previous posts were that if the 'profit' from the energy charges do go toward a sinking fund then there is an element of offset to the LL, that is the LL may well have the benefit of an increasing share of that fund. Unless, as suggested, there is a management company in place enjoying this as company profits. As the individual owners are shareholders of the freehold they can change things as they desire, by a majority vote, at the AGM. It takes a bit more research to understand feasability, and typically the others are unlikely to sympathise with the 'new guy' wanting to re arrange things, but the £1,800 may not be so set in stone as you think. In any case if there is a portion of profit that is effectively to the benefit of the LL they might view this as a way to offer a competative rent. Could the energy costs be invoiced to the T seperately to the rent? The property is advertised at an attractive rent, and the energy costs might not have to look too scary.
  4. If you would have a share of the freehold, if there is profit from the energy charge where does it go? Unless there are management charges that are independant of the committee, by a mangement company, I would assume any profits would become part of the sinking fund??
  5. Thanks Grampa. I wonder what Wales will do. I found out recently that I need to be a qualified and registerd LL for Wales nowadays. It'll cost a few more quids and take a little time, but then I can use the S21 again. Untill next year when that's removed from our tool kit. Since I made them aware that I am processing for this they have given me 21 days to comply or they will come and burn my house down. It's so strange that they are proud to have developed such a a skill. I guess I'll have to justify this extra outlay by hoofing a few of my Wales T's.
  6. To actually repossess 'legally' has required us to proceed through the court system already, and ultimately employ the use of Bailiffs. While in theory we can make claim for the losses more often we just suffer them. Scrapping the S21 will mean our need to use courts, and pay up front, in the hope a court will grant our desire. In practice I believe this will mean 2 court appearances as we lose our no excuse repossession and T's are given another chance to mend their ways. Our financial losses are generally viewed as a by product of renting and a mere reduction of our high profits, these costs and so losses will rise. A specialist housing tribunal is already in place, it essentially is a full trial scenario with more specialist lawyers and very high expense, no thanks. Shelter will exploit this to the full, after all it is partly their calling for it that brings it about, that and the Gov't wishing for us to carry social housing responsibilities. I am now monitoring for dates on these changes. It becomes more intelligent than ever to hoof any T's that are or may become higher risk, using S21 while I can, in 'hope' of a more reliable client base. As T's, sometimes with Shelter coaching, can already cause S21's to take many months sooner may be better.
  7. Well up 'ere i'nt 'ills there was a 14% swing last time. That gave Labour the seat with a 2,322 majority. I can see the candidates continually harrassing us 73,248 actual voters (last time anyhows) for support is worth the effort. I would have voted TBP if the candidate wasn't spawned by an ex UKIP thug who has a Derby seat. So least worst is Tory.
  8. I've heard it described as the politics of jealousy. But as we've discussed it doesn't seem we have friends in the Tories nowadays. Still, as least worst They have my vote, even though it feels like we will be paying any Gov't for the priviledge of being allowed to be Landlords.
  9. Yep, agreed. I've often seen gaps in the tenancy history. While I may be told they were abroad it's more often they were 'away' some where else. Around Rhyl and such like you need to be a habitual offender or a total savage to be given such a holiday. Also the type of location they were lving at tells a story on character. On the principle of where you live is what you are, if they come from the ghetto you may find they will bring it with them. Life style, guests, well general attitude. But are we able to charge gaurantors for checks?
  10. It looks like my favoured method of taking a guarantor is still as good as any protection. Preferably a home owning guarantor. On the principle that the guarantor is the protection where a tenancy goes faulty I concern myself less than some would around searching comprehensively the history of the tenant. But I still see value in previous tenancy and employment checks. Previous tenancy checks, they being lalndlord reference, might not be considered reliable though, so I have been known to turn up at tea time w/o warning with an additional form that I'd forgotten. Seeing how they live now is valuable. But does the new legislation prevent us charging the guarantor for checks on them? How they organise settlement between themselves is up to them. In truth my check is £3 at the Land Registry, but it was usual, before, for an up front admin cost of £80 - £150 to be applied.
  11. The usual penalty for us not complying with these new measures is to prevent our ability to repossess usingthe S21, butthey are removing that sonn totally. what penalty will they come up with then? If there is non complaince with sleectice licencing (Labour council) the fine can be £20k and all revenues for the previous 12 months returned to the T. I have yet to learn 1 part of their stated advantage from this that has accured in 7 years. When we LL's become a minority I wonder if we will have police protection if abused in the street and meeting houses built for us.
  12. At least my T's would rather spend it on cheap cider.
  13. RL you clearly aren't up to date on the Landlord and Tenant act of 1984, there's a book on it some where. While I am not the cause of poor air quality I am now to be responsible for it. While I didn't sire my tenants, honestly I didn't, seemingly I must be responsible for their lack of awareness on many things. While electric cars are coming their production and the scrappage of ICE vehicles prior to they being beyond repair will increase pollution, but will also provide tax revenues. The energy to propel vehicles must come from some where, we aren't yet near finding all that from renewable sources. But I accept that neccesity is the big mother of "you will have to". Nuclear power plants have become fashionable again, it's surprising that they weren't prior to the recognition of the fast approaching energy crisis, the one that contradicts the climate change crisis. I can't get on board with these penalty initiatives until the root cause of over population is recognised, and long term strategy of population reduction is enacted. All other is merely defering the inevitable due to continual population growth. Still I shouldn't worry too much. Apparently in the life of the planet so far us destructive humans have only been here 5 minutes. Give it another few minutes and we will have made it uninhabitable to sustain the place as our home, that wasn't really built for just us anyway. A few hours later the planet will have recycled itself nicely and other species will be here to enjoy it, if the planet isn't hit by a massive asteroid, or fried by solar flares. But by then we will be part of a new oil field so no worries really. Actually to ease traffic congestion causing us to be retested every 5 -7 years, and so take the opportunity to improve driving standards would go along way. Less pile ups from those that tailgate in poor conditions, less lane weaving that causes braking and concertina effect that tranfers along way in heavy traffic, and more I'm sure.
  14. That sounds like sexual assault to me. But on that subject I do hope you have provided your T's with instructions on how to instal toilet paper in your property. Then how it should be deployed for effective use. The risk assesment for the task should conclude the requirement for a data sheet for hazardous materials that they might come into contact with. Suitable hand protection might be provided in the alternative. We should recognise our responsibility to the provision of barrier cream, along with suitable cleansing materials for personal and equipment use. Be sure to detail that gloves should be removed prior to hand cleansing. Of course a warning at each water dispensor "Excess H2o can be hazardous to health". Labels on toilet brushes should read "Not to be used for cleansing of teeth". Labels on tooth brushes are optional, but perhaps a polite reminder to T's that these are not for cleansing of toilets, or lower abdomen should there be a failure of integrity of toilet paper.
  15. But he got an apology, eventually. Serves him right for being a bottom feeding landlord I suppose. Now just to balance the discussion. We make easy money from the poor unfortunates in this life. We harrass them for such trivial things as rent. We are unforgiving to such things as a little damage, that is never their fault. A little cleaning up doesn't do us any harm during a tenancy, or at the end. The Gov't must know best, whichever that Gov't is. I'm looking forward to walking the 80 miles to Wales to service the properties that my tenants live in, that I have total responsibility for, that is reasonable to pay taxes in various forms for, for the priviledge of working for the state. That is when Magic Grampa (Corbyn) makes my evil polluting motor unfeasible to use any longer. I have considered the easier life of renting from a landlord, but wonder if there will be many left back in 1979. As I can't see the grants that were common for landlords returning somehow.
  16. For some it may be worth serious consideration. Attempting to forecast the finer details may be difficult, but understanding the general result of this looks to be less so. Prior to this coming in LL's that deal with higher risk T's may want to take preemptive action while we still have the S21, no reasons needed, tool to work with. Getting rid of those that we know to be high risk becomes intelligent before they are given increased powers to abuse us. It's also intelligent to become more wary of the risks. With the S21 at our disposal we can, in theory, repossess in a couple of months, but realistically a bad situation becomes 6 months. Soon enough that may well become 12 months. We already experience varying court appearance wait times where S8's are defended, that won't get better.
  17. The way I read the upcoming change is that a LL will need to apply to a Court to regain his property from an abusive T, or any T come to that. The courts generally sympathise whith these T's in my experience so will strive to provide a further chance for them to learn and change, "treat this as a warning" type outcome. So I expect we will hear more stories of a LL being required to reapply, to the Court, for repossession if the T fails again. What is the cost of an application these days, £350ish ? I can appreciate the initiative to improve reliability of accomodation and thereby the improvement to allow for people to build a life, but is it fair to make us effectively responsible and increase our costs when it comes time try and reduce our losses from the abusers? As far as the state is concerned the abusers have to live somewhere, and these people being moved on will only increase the burden to the state. Any personal plight of ours isn't a concern as in the main we will bounce back. We take a deposit that in reality can only compensate a small part of 'potential' losses. We sign up a G'tor who isn't likely to hand over large amounts easily, so we threaten their equity. Again the courts will sympathise, understandably. The fair result is for the Gov't to underwrite. We are increasingly being caused, by legislation, to take over the role of social LL's, and the many risks of being any catagory of LL have increased drastically over the years. But I'm dreaming as there is still a large supply of LL's willing to carry out the role even with the additional and ever increasing burdens. There is no reason the Gov't need to consider any protections for us.
  18. How does that encourage employers to recruit youngsters. You are expecting far too much for Labour to consider past the GE, it's designed to gain the kiddies votes no more. The idea of getting out of the UK for a better life only applies for the advantage of a better climate (rmember I'm in the High Peak). It's difficult to find a better and less corrupt country, they all have issues that even though these look to be different are pretty much the same.
  19. Let's hope it's not a hung Parlament, unless it turns out to be all of them of course.
  20. I've EPC's coming up for renewal in January, or so I thought. https://www.finance-ni.gov.uk/articles/energy-performance-certificates-frequently-asked-questions Reading the .Gov site while my EPC's are expiring I only need a current certificate when I'm marketing for rent. Terms like present to 'prospective' tenant are used. My understanding from my read up is that existing situations will not require a current EPC until I'm looking for a new tenant. A penalty of £200 isn't as scary as the usual 10 years hard labour a landlord might expect for being naughty, surprisingly. I'll get all the flats done but now consider it might as well be when a new tenancy is looking likely. I'm open to further education in case the wording of the legislation dictates different.
  21. I don't disagree with any of the comments. All our predictions are based on the use of a crystal ball, more than ever that is less than reliable. Labour getting in seems a very remote possibility, thank god. But we ar in strange times and nowt is certain. Even the Tories are attacking us continually as an industry. We only offer each other sympathy as no one else will, we are considered fair game. BTL has been about revenues, rather than capital growth, since 2008. I don't see that changing. I also don't see rents dropping, by much at least, unless legislation steps in for some reason that I don't foresee. So if the rental return on the dosh looks attractive, and it goes w/o saying that you understand the market better than most, it has to be a winner. What else would you do with the spare dosh? Buy a place in the southern hemishpere to spend half your life at, perhaps. I don't see much positive around the UK for a while, what ever happens with Brexit.
  22. I see that survey's main purpose was to offer eductaion on the new regime to be introduced. Some questions didn't allow for a negative opinion to be demonstrated and then moved to the "this is how it will work" explanation. It's coming, it has been decided how it will work. We've just to get used to it. The comment I attempted to get across, for what it's worth, is that this will increase the cultural divide. Those applicants that may presently gain from a 'benefit of doubt' will be rejected due to the increased risk / expence this introduces. They then, rather than having been given 'a chance' to improve their lot, will find the lesser attractive locations are what will be available to them. This further protection of tenants against rogue landlords just pushes us closer to being social landlords. Why would an intelligent landlord want to evict a good tenant and incur the losses that go with that? Now imagine if McDonnel gets his hands on power.
  23. I still use the Guarantor Deed that Grampa supplied many years ago, that might be while some of us used another forum. Many of my T's wouldn't satisfy the requirements of insurance so I don't look into any more, and if a T's status changes the insurancce may have no value anyway. Although insurance may be a considertion where a Guarantor is too remote and the T looks good. For the £3 I carry out a Land Registry check on the G'tor. Firstly it checks on the accuracy of info given in the application. I can see what price paid and when, and additional charges that can be deduced as a bad debt action. Although I'm not able to see outstanding balances it's possible to work out if there will be equity to threaten. Be sure that's with the LR though, others will do the same for more dosh. I Google map the location for an idea of their style. I also look into social media to get an idea of the T where I can, it's better to be forewarned of an undesirable.
  24. The rating of F or G being a failed property, is this only for the energy rating or the environmental impact rating also? Is the assessment outcome still using the same criteria for the ratings, or have there been changes that can change the score?
  • Create New...