Jump to content

Carryon Regardless

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Carryon Regardless

  1. Unless they are hoping to use it as a get out clause, there is no working with them but reminding them of their contractual obligations becomes a better strategy.
  2. Morning Melboy, I added some advice but then saw the other 2 threads by the op. There is likelihood that my advice would be repetative and I didn't care to read the other threads to find out so pressed delete instead. Really I was saying to the op that a mouse is the T's problem if it wasn't apparent at the letting, as is any other infestation nuisance like wasps, ants, human visitors.......
  3. With the potential T's there are many subtle questions that can indicate lack of suitability. On the phone I often ask where they are living now, when the answer comes back as the west end of Rhyl, although I appreciate anyone wishing to get out of there, the fact they thought it ok to move there shows their low standard of expectation. Where they work is another reasonable pointer, how long isn't always an issue with todays les than reliable employers. Plasterers, decorators and the like will always have their job left overs to be stored somewhere, and of course their returning home dusty isn't good. Then there are those that work from a van, that will clog up the parking areas. I try to eliminate where possible before arranging a viewing, but during a viewing there is much to be learnt in subtle ways. Come assessing an application, again where they have lived, and for how long. A few short duration tenancies and I'll be the next one. Gaps in accomodation dates may mean they were abroad, or in jail. Assessing a bad attitude isn't overly difficult. I point out that errors on the application, for both T and G'tor will mean a lost application fee, and suggest all issues are best divulged to save their money. It goes on and in practice most of my 'interview' is done as a second nature rather than a tick list. But I have to accept that many of my properties will only attract those with a less than ideal history an circumstance. I don't want a troublesome T, but the G'tor is my safety net.
  4. Hence my question. I beleive I've explained my rationale for not taking deposits previously. Good T's aren't a problem, they demonstrate respect and / or fear actions against them. We get our money and the property is returned in an acceptable state. The others will avoid their responibilities. I also insist on a guarantor, home owning or at least in a position where they have something to lose. But when things have soured we then make claim for unpaid rents and often excessive wear and tear, and then costs. Even with a good inventary the claim for those losses is ambiguous and biased in T's favour. For losses other than rents any excessive claim would lose us any sympathy or even be thrown out. Any accurate claim will be moderated to somewhere in the middle. For this we have paid for an inventary in and out (I know some charge the T for the in), we have made claim at our cost and the effort is significant. Unpaid rents are easily demonstrable by a simple statement of account. The only defence is disrepair but T's now have an increased responsibility to demonstrate that we were informed. The DPS scheme is only us acting as an agent for the state by providing funds for them to enjoy. Aside from the rent aspect we are highly unlikely to acheive true satisfaction from an involved claim. If defended, by T or Shelter, the effort required to attempt to win the small deposit I could realistically take would not be worth it. Dealing with the DPS just for deposit in and out is extra effort I can do without. Any slight mistake and we only increase our risks, and considering the continual changes by the London meddlers that risk is ever increasing. Keep it simple stupid is my aim. Now we are unable to keep this as simple as many of us would prefer but avoiding the ever increasing obstacles in our path, where we are able to makes sense to me. I save money and effort on check in / out. I save hassle dealing with deposits, and any later claim on a deposit. The guarantor, thank you Grampa I still use your Deed of Guarantee, and a £3 LR check, are my get out of jail card. Meeting potential T's is invaluable, but as I've never seen a bad T till I give 'em the keys it isn't fool proof. Visiting their present domicile at 6pm by surprise can be very revealing.
  5. RL my fast response is that I like your thinking, possibly as I don't wish to pay the cost of those wantng to enjoy animals but can't control their effects on others, us included My general style, and more strict for the flats, is no animals. I don't want them but occasionally might prefer that to the next unknown T'. I practice one alternative to deposit protection, I don't take deposits. Are yu aware of more?
  6. Blimey RL, you start to sound like me being frustrated at the state expecting me to be a social LL'. Your points assume that we will be able to increase deposits, although proving it is an increase could be difficult. Then after the move in a T 'then' decides to get an animal and we are in a more difficult situation. If the legislation were to say they can have one it follows that we can't penalise them for having one (or more). Any repossession attempt would fail. The wear and tear over damage argument has always been ambiguous. With animals it then would be far more difficult for us to cite excessive wear and tear, as with animals this is often more and to be expected. My AST prohibits animals of any description w/o written consent, like you I might permit such depending on which property, but it would always detail numbers and size of. I would also detail that consent is for a particular animal and not for a replacement, due to doggy death for example. T's had moved in, I visit 2 months later and there are 2 small dogs, without any consent. I can repossess but the effect of the animals on carpets has already taken place. My efforts to get rid of dog smells would be needed already. I would suffer another void, and likely a little longer due to increased cleaning. They are still there but they pay over £40 pm more than my next door and same type property. Now my application form specifically requests if there are or will be animals at the property, to attempt to focus their minds some.
  7. I totaly agree with the advantaqges of T's making a long term home of our properties, but many have strange ideas and as suggested the risk of Mr DIY having a go is well experienced. One issue I would have had with the op's new T's was the attitude of "it's our house and we should be able to do as we want", although they did at least ask. I find that reminding T's as to who owns the propeerty can have value, them paying rent gives them enough legislative rights already. Whats the panels opinion of this http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-43045552 I mean T's are creating a home, they are paying rent. Why should we be able to control their lifestyle?
  8. Most contract will prohibit tenants from making such alterations/ additions. Hopefully your AST isn't so vague that it could be interpreted either way. When I've been askied similar requests I respond by saying let's see how the tenancy is running in a few months. After a short time we know better if the relationship is good and likely to continue for a significant time. I've had a few that carry out their experiments and then don't hang around anyway and leave thinking that what they have attempted is to my benefit. W/o reading the contract it isn't really possible to give a definitve answer, but generally tenants wishing to alter things isn't good.
  9. I only mentioned the booklet as a sarcastic quip to demonstrate the continual meddling. The later conversation demonstrates nicely how we are continually tripped up by such pratting about by our so superior legislators, and with our combined expertise we still don't quote a definitive answer for our own protection. Nicely done chaps. Grampa your comment on there being no stipulated time, serving the booklet of the day in front of the judge, if it goes that far, seems a nice strategy.
  10. i agree on our taxes being abused, a good way to reduce that is for our politicians to stop messing with policies for self promotion. Is anyone sending out the revised How To Rent booklet yet? I'm being hit by Selective Licencing again. The previous 5 years were at a cost of £750 per property. This time £500 application fee, I don't know the result of a failed application ie a re application being required. Followed by £120 per year. It only came out yesterday so I don't know if this will be ongoing or a repeat each 5 years again. I do see the Council is empowered to fine a non applicant £30,000, not a typo, of course no S21 possible and 12 month rent refund to T. I know the policy statement but don't see any advantage re tenant security, better property management, or even less anti social behaviours. All given reasons for this. Glad I've only got the one property over in that hole.
  11. I don't think it unreasonable to assume that this latest initiative will become more stringent over time, with a D requirement and eventually a C. While I'm ok Jack for others it's not daft to plan for this. True enough the lower rated properties will be of lower quality, also more likely they will be occupied by claimants and be low revenue. Since legislation is creating this socialist tax on LL's there being some assistance doesn't seem unreasonable, to me.
  12. Don't do this, it's a disaster in the making. Bail out saying you have learnt that letting a property not up to standard is too risky, which it is. You start off with risk of a claim of disrepair being possible. If a housing inspector were to get involved you would be given a strict time limit to carry out works and then it / they would be organised at greater expense to you. If you use the services of an Agent, I'm sure Grampa would agree, that a good one wouldn't touch the property until ready anyway. It may be that you are needing the rental revenues to finance the renovations. It's very unlikely that you will see a positive result and the likely stresses would cause premature ageing. As said no friends or family for many very good reasons.
  13. I can't see a problem with selecting a living companion that fits in with the household. It must increase the chances of enjoying social stability.
  14. Post a notice of intended inspection with 24 hours notice. With all your contact details detailed you can 'hope' for a response from the T. The only way you can legally and correctly enter is by Court order and that would require a Bailiff action. I would be looking for evidence of departure, talk to neighbours to see if removals have been apparent, ring the energy supply companies to see if the accounts have been closed out, ring the local Council tax office to see if you have become responsible for this (that can take a while though as more often it is only when a HB T becomes registered at a new address that the account will revert to you). If the evidence of departure is there you should then consider abandonment procedures.
  15. I did have the lass of a Polish family accuse me of racism, because I didn't provide the AST in her language. She also claimed disrepair as every time she turned on the cold tap the water came out with such pressure it splashed her. I thought that most people would have learnt by the second time not to turn it on so much.
  16. I can't find the thread where we discussed this previously but firstly I was of the understanding that we are permitted to only provide a web link to this booklet. Secondly I read this wasn't adequate, so now worried that I had been neglectful to my poor tenants I looked for support of my first understanding and couldn't find it. I should have just read the booklet. Under "The landlord must provide you with" is "A copy of this guide..... via a link or as a printed copy." The incoming tenant can have the one I've printed off, and then for the fun of it thought I'd read the stupid thing. Now my third understanding is the same as my fist understanding and I'm not a criminal for omitting printed copies for the 3 latest tenancies, phew.
  17. Create a rental agreement with a 3rd party, Mr smith, for the garage and its use. This person, Mr Smith, has full access rights to the garage that they are in possession of. Your existing T's are aware of the storage use of the garage and as long as the use isn't hazardous have no rights to have understanding of that use. As the garage is for storage, of what is immaterial, access to store and remove is a reasonable right. How often is not for them to attempt to control. Would anybody attempt to control their access to the property they are in possession of? Mr Smith permits you to use the garage, end of.
  18. A fair number of the T's have fleas so pretty sure their fluffy pets will have. Hard to believe they would do a good job with DIY efforts.
  19. My AST requires T's to obtain written consent for pets, of course at application there is the question of pets and that allows me to reject the application. So a couple w/o pets moved in over 3 years ago and what do you know there are 2 little doggies. I can hoof 'em but the ill effect of fleas will already be present. Any animal smells are soon there anyway. I can make claim after hoofing against them and/ or their well of g'tor, but I have little confidence in the CC system already and as the strategy I'm using against Compton's demonstrates, recovery of the out of pocket expense is rarely recovered and this ignores the effort required. I increased their rent by more than £30pm more than I would otherwise. The longer they stay the better off I am and it's their choice, for now. The pile of paving blocks at the front are a new concern though.
  20. Agreed Grampa, for slightly different reasons but similar I have reduced the attention I give to T's and have learnt to stay within the legislative requirements. Where as I used to enjoy giving good service before the gov't increasingly told me how to.
  21. With luck I'll get to improve my quality of T's in Wales. Often i've to lower my expectations as demand isn't healthy, that might improve as other LL's increase their admin charges.
  22. So if agents don't charge tenants I assume they charge landlords, Maybe I'm missing something here. The gov't's don't lime LL's and prefer legislation to cause us to be more controlled and professional, with such as selective licencing, schemes to train and produce qualified LL's. While there are those fly by night agents in general a professional agency is easier to police than the hundreds of LL's on their books. This measure is more likely reduce the use of agents as a LL won't like the extra initial charge coming his way. I see this as being contradictory to the desires of any gov't to professionalise the industry, just more tinkering that'll cause more confusion within the industry. Not that I expect it to have a great affect on me.
  23. Aside from insurance backed schemes we don't hold the deposit anyway. Then trying to claim the deposit from an awkward T who defends the claim isn't really worth the effort, as in most LL / T litigation's the T will have the an advantage come time for 'whoever' to decide who gets what, or in the LL's case not. I am surprised that the Gov't are cutting their revenues from the holding of deposits some, and I've always seen the deposit schemes as an unnecessary Gov't scam anyway. Why a T shouldn't use the court system like any other faltered business transaction escapes me. The home owning G'tor has been my favoured method for a while. I only take a deposit when all my checks and intuition is good but the G'tor isn't a home owner. Another little gem I've developed is when an existing T isn't playing nicely I increase their rents significantly, at least while T's they are paying towards the expected hassles of later. I am surprised you guys haven't cottoned on to the fact that we don't run our own rental businesses these days, We are pretty well social LL's acting on behalf of the Gov't who can't afford to increase their housing stock as is desperately needed, That can have other advantages for us with the principles of supply and demand, but the ongoing and incoming Gov't's will continue to increase the controls over us. I'm waiting for some git up there in the Westminster ivory tower to suggest we should provide 10% of our rentals to the really needy, like ex cons and single mummies. I'm sure we've seen this great idea for the poor abused T's http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/extend-right-to-buy-to-the-tenants-of-private-landlords-labours-jeremy-corbyn-says-10342824.html
  24. But there are no requirements as such. As there is no legislation, similar to the annual gas inspection, that causes us to meet any standard we only have to demonstrate a duty of care in the event of a serious mishap. And only then if the HSE decide to make an example and prosecute for negligence. The HSE barrister is going to use the 17th Edition 'Regulations' to show the standard the property should have been wired to to be safe. There are three organisations that oversee electrical contractor competence, but the NICEIC is the better known and more widely required by local council building control as the organisation they accept when requiring certification, but not wanting to 'confuse' further it's sensible to talk of the NIC(EIC) only. It follows that if we use a contractor who is registered with the NIC and he provides an inspection certificate then we have satisfied our duty of care. To my mind in any event of mishap the contractor might then find himself defending rather than us. Now as to selling, a new subject methinks. We have no controls to provide certificates for double glazing installations (FENSA), a 'normal' home owner has no need to prove gas safety, the same is true of electrical safety. Come a time of sale it may well be that a surveyor requires evidence of these things, then it's between solicitors/ lending sources/ and clients to negotiate. As you know often an indemnity insurance is often used to cover the risk. Or indeed to gain an electrical inspection 'pass' the property may be rewired. As you might imagine each time the Institute of Electrical Engineers (IEE) publish a new edition of the regulations, or amendments to the existing, there is no requirement for all British properties to be brought up to those standards, that just wouldn't be realistically policed. All new works do need to be carried out to those standards and it may be that an electrician may recommend a rewire of aged, out of date electrics, and even prefer not to add to a wiring system he feels would increase risk. Any contractor not registered with the NIC should inform the home owner of the need for an inspection, I can only imagine that he is still liable for the quality of his work but the home owner is then made aware of his liability to satisfy 'building control'. This bit may confuse a little more, a contractor may be competent to carry out works but not qualified to carry out inspection and testing. As previous, he should make the home owner aware. A Part P qualified electrician has a diluted qualification to carry out works in a dwelling. His ability to carry out industrial works for example won't be demonstrable from a Part P qualification, the IEE 17th Edition regs still covers this type of work though, and much more. https://www.niceic.com/find-a-contractor/electrics-explained/what-is-part-p
  • Create New...