chickpea Posted January 31, 2014 Report Share Posted January 31, 2014 In a nutshell - tenants took on house last January. When the tenancy ended in July, they requested a 12 month agreement, which we agreed. Over the course of the last year, they have been very picky, requesting all sorts of non-essential work to be done (which we have always done, in order to keep relations good). The last 4 months of the year, the rent had to be chased up to 2 weeks after it was due - tenants said it was due to them switching bank. December's rent arrived on time, by standing order. Earlier this month, the LA sent us an email, saying the tenants had requested to be let out of the agreement because they'd seen another property round the corner they fancied. We turned the request down, since it would cost us £250 to set up a new tenant and because the 12 month tenancy was ideal for us. This month's rent was due on the 25th...no sign. We called the LA, who said they'd chased it up but hadn't heard back from the tenants. Tenant has a business page on Facebook - when I looked, she listed her address as...a house round the corner from our property. I've been to our property today and sure enough, no sign of life, curtains closed, a different vehicle parked outside and her vehicle parked in the drive of the house she lists as her home address. Call LA, who then informs us that he had a request for a reference for the tenants from another LA. He refused. So - tenants haven't informed anyone that they have left the property, nor have they returned keys etc, but they haven't paid this month's rent and are refusing to answer or return calls from the LA. What happens now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richlist Posted January 31, 2014 Report Share Posted January 31, 2014 I think I'd pay them a visit and find out what's going on. It looks very much like they have moved and have no intention of paying you any more STILL you can always chase your guarantor or claim on your rent guarantee insurance for the outstanding monies owed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chestnut Posted January 31, 2014 Report Share Posted January 31, 2014 I would question your relationship/contract with your LA. Shouldn't LA be handling this for you? It looks like tenants have departed, although of course you'd need proof/confirmation before re-letting, in case they have installed family, split up, sub-let or something. Perhaps drop this LA as soon as you can and get another. Can you sue LA for inevitable costs you mention? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave A Posted January 31, 2014 Report Share Posted January 31, 2014 Cheeky b*&^%$£"s, you'd think they would have moved a bit further away. Dave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Melboy Posted January 31, 2014 Report Share Posted January 31, 2014 Once the position is clear to you then it's pay up time for your wayward tenant or the small claims court for recovery action. Nothing worse for the small business then a CCJ against them especially if you follow that outstanding debt up for non payment with a visit from the High Court Sheriff's. That'll make them cough I can tell you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joybells Posted January 31, 2014 Report Share Posted January 31, 2014 They owe you money so I should seriously consider paying to get the ballifs in if I were you at least you know where they live very handy! I've had some good tenants since I became a landlord/lady but I had to issue my first eviction notice last month very stressful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chickpea Posted January 31, 2014 Author Report Share Posted January 31, 2014 I think I'd pay them a visit and find out what's going on. It looks very much like they have moved and have no intention of paying you any more STILL you can always chase your guarantor or claim on your rent guarantee insurance for the outstanding monies owed. I was tempted to bang on the door of the tenants' new property and ask what was going on - but LA says I could be accused of harassment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chickpea Posted January 31, 2014 Author Report Share Posted January 31, 2014 I would question your relationship/contract with your LA. Shouldn't LA be handling this for you? It looks like tenants have departed, although of course you'd need proof/confirmation before re-letting, in case they have installed family, split up, sub-let or something. Perhaps drop this LA as soon as you can and get another. Can you sue LA for inevitable costs you mention? Technically, the LA is handling this - however, from experience, I know that they will be keen to do as little as possible to resolve the issue, eg use the deposit as rent owed and re-advertise the property. I want to be armed with the facts as laid down by law, so that we can get this resolved properly - with as little financial loss to us as possible and hopefully teaching the tenants a lesson along the way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chickpea Posted January 31, 2014 Author Report Share Posted January 31, 2014 LA has suggested that he contacts them, saying that he wishes to re-let the property but can't until they surrender the tenancy - he says he'll use this line as a way of getting into the house. He also said there is nothing to stop a tenant having 2 properties. When I visited our property, there was still curtains up which were closed (the property was let unfurnished) and a small Nissan lorry parked in the tenants' space. How do I find out whether someone is living there, if I can't knock on the door? I am so angry at their bare-faced cheek! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chickpea Posted January 31, 2014 Author Report Share Posted January 31, 2014 Cheeky b*&^%$£"s, you'd think they would have moved a bit further away. Dave I know!! She has bought the franchise for baby signing classes....which she runs in the village hall at the top of our road. At least, as someone else said, I know where to find her. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave A Posted January 31, 2014 Report Share Posted January 31, 2014 I wouldn't have thought knocking on the door would constitute harassment in the circumstances. Dave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chickpea Posted February 3, 2014 Author Report Share Posted February 3, 2014 So...tenants had refused to answer all calls and emails from the agent. Had a meeting with the LA this morning and his proposal was to ask for permission to enter the property, on the pretence of showing a potential tenant round - as bait to get the tenants to respond...which worked. Tenants now claiming they've been trying to contact LA to discuss what's happened, and have agreed that LA can enter the property tomorrow. They have been informed that the rent for this month is overdue and that they are liable both to the re-letting fee and all rents until a new tenant moves in. Will wait to see what happens next, and what state the property is in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carryon Regardless Posted February 3, 2014 Report Share Posted February 3, 2014 The property is still theirs until surrendered. Entering the property for re letting could be construed as accepting their earlier notice request. I would take the line that they owe you the rent for the fixed period and have total responsibility of the property until surrendered. Knock on the door and tell 'em so, then write the same. Harassment is more than 2 occasions of the same action, and beside any one can knock on any ones door and do you think the Police would have any interest in this anyway. It's clear what they are up to but as usual the legislation is on their side. Do you have a G'tor here, you can take them both to County Court for the unpaid rent/s in one hit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chickpea Posted February 3, 2014 Author Report Share Posted February 3, 2014 The property is still theirs until surrendered. Entering the property for re letting could be construed as accepting their earlier notice request. I would take the line that they owe you the rent for the fixed period and have total responsibility of the property until surrendered. Knock on the door and tell 'em so, then write the same. Harassment is more than 2 occasions of the same action, and beside any one can knock on any ones door and do you think the Police would have any interest in this anyway. It's clear what they are up to but as usual the legislation is on their side. Do you have a G'tor here, you can take them both to County Court for the unpaid rent/s in one hit. I questioned the LA's proposal, and said that we expected him to get a deed of surrender from the tenants, detailing what they were liable for, BEFORE getting new tenants in - for exactly the reasons you state. Hie reply was that he would never get a deed of surrender until a new tenant was lined up, so that the tenant could be seen to be liable for all rents etc up until that point, ie that they couldn't agree to surrender the tenancy but then refuse to pay the rent. I'm not going to take any notice of the harassment worry and I've told him as such - if he doesn't get any info out of the tenant as to what is going on, I know that the female tenant *happens* to run a class in my local village hall later this week, where I *happen* to walk past on my daily dog walks ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chickpea Posted February 3, 2014 Author Report Share Posted February 3, 2014 Had an email from the LA to say that he's spoken to the tenants - they say they've "virtually moved out and are going in to clean tonight." They have now paid this month's rent as well. (amazing how things spring into action all of a sudden). I need some clarification, though - when will the tenancy now be seen to end? Going with what the LA says he does, do we get them to sign the surrender deed for the day before a new tenant moves in? Does the tenancy end the day of check out by the LA? And how do we make sure the void period rent is paid? If a new tenant moved in part way through the previous tenants' rental month, eg their tenancy started 25th, new tenant's wanted to move in on the 7th, would the old tenant still be liable for the full month's rent, or only pro-rata for that month? I will admit, I'm a bit baffled by the whole process. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carryon Regardless Posted February 3, 2014 Report Share Posted February 3, 2014 My way in such situations where T's clearly are on their way and reluctant to satisfy their responsibilities is not to educate them, don't mislead them if asked though. My priority is to obtain a surrender document from them. I have a pre printed sheet that requests when the property shall be returned to my possession. It reminds of their responsibility toward security and be bound by the terms of the latest tenancy agreement, this of course means to pay rents as agreed within it so doesn't release them from the rents due in a fixed term. When I have possession I then consider the monies due. Let's face it when they are out to stuff us we are no worse of considering this later and at least they have now given us the right to deal with our property legally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mortitia Posted February 4, 2014 Report Share Posted February 4, 2014 Tracey - have you taken a deposit on this property, is it protected and the prescribed information issued? If so then your next rental month money could come from this - raise a dispute with the deposit holder. Of course this can only be done if you accept a deed of surrender from the tenants. Could you hold out for the full 12 months rent - technically yes - was there no break clause? If you want to do that then cheapest way is moneyclaim online - google it - cost £60 I think to get your case rolling. I, personally would try this - write a 'letter before action' to the tenants with filled out copies of the county court papers with the statement of your claim attached (you can download them off the HNRC website). Point out in your letter that you are legally entitled to the rent on the property and you will bring the case which you are likely to win and they will end up with a CCJ - not ideal if you are in business as it will affect credit and all sorts of other things for many years. Give them 7 days to respond and file the case. You can claim the court fee back if your claim is successful. Or would it be easier to re-let? Has existing tenant ended council tax payments and had the meters read? They are still liable with an ongoing tenancy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chickpea Posted February 4, 2014 Author Report Share Posted February 4, 2014 Yes, the deposit is protected and PI given in the correct time frame. However, have had a very frustrating conversation with the LA this morning. When T asked why he hadn't informed LA that he had moved out, T replied that he had no legal obligation to do so and it was nobodies business whether he was between properties. However, he then says he wants LA to actively market the property. I ask LA to get a signed surrender from the T - LA says that's absolutely what I don't want, saying he will only get one once a new tenancy is agreed...and until then the original agreement runs. However, when I say that I don't understand why we can't simply let the 12 month tenancy agreement run as normal (my point being that we need an agreement about what is actually happening here - either surrender or agreement carry on, but NOT both), LA says that court would find us to be no fair or reasonable and we would lose any case we might claim. So, to clarify - a tenant signs a 12 month agreement, leaves half way through without permission, doesn't sign any surrender document BUT holding them to the agreement would be found to be not fair or reasonable in court. Seriously?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carryon Regardless Posted February 4, 2014 Report Share Posted February 4, 2014 Points, you aren't able to take rents for this property from 2 sources at the same time. If and when surrendered we have 'some' responsibility to find replacement tenants and so relieve the former tenants of their responsibilities. This property is still in the possession of the 'existing' T's, to market and find new T's without the assurance of documentation to allow for a new tenancy to start is at the least possibly misleading and unfair to the potential new T's. Q. When will the property be available for us ? A. don't know I'll ask the present T's and come back to you. It isn't for us to educate T's, although I seem to spend much of my time doing so. The existing T's are still responsible, they have given no 'formal' indication that that is to change. I would make moves to sue for the outstanding rent. The fact that they now have 2 properties is irrelevant. They have the right to serve notice, but let's face it that has no value to us until they have surrendered, as T's so often change their mind and are still in possession anyway. They have the right to surrender the property, then negotiations commence regarding the remaining 'fixed' term. At least you know where they are. The A seems a bit amiss here, are they going to charge you for their efforts ? I would prefer to take the bull by the horns and deal with this myself, if it were my property. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richlist Posted February 4, 2014 Report Share Posted February 4, 2014 There seems to be some confusion here about how best to handle this situation. 1. Its a shame that the OP hasn't got rent guarantee insurance or a home owning guarantor because that would more or less solve most of the issues. Please take this on board for next time you let. 2. Surely the best approach is to first determine IF the tenant can afford to pay rent on two properties or has the means to pay any outstanding rents for the remainder of the fixed term before considering the next stage. 3. If the tenant is unlikely to be able to find the money .....as is often likely to be the case.......then a simple deed of surrender will free the property to be let again .....hopefully very quickly. The alternative is likely to be a few months with no tenant, no rent & no possibility of getting any. You aren't able to take rents for this property from 2 sources at the same time. I agree, thats absolutely correct If and when surrendered we have 'some' responsibility to find replacement tenants and so relieve the former tenants of their responsibilities. Not as far as I am aware. There is no legal requirement for a landlord to find a replacement tenant in this circumstance BUT if the defaulting tenant can't pay the rent thats doesn't help the landlord to resolve the situation. Be realistic if there is little chance of recovering monies owed. Move on, learn from the experience, minimise your losses, don't waste money on legal action where chances of recovery are slim and put safeguards in place for next time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chickpea Posted February 4, 2014 Author Report Share Posted February 4, 2014 To answer a few questions/points raised - We have no intention of taking rent from 2 sources. The tenant (IMO) has NO intention of paying rent on both properties. However, neither has he any intention of clarifying what his intention is - hence him saying both that he is within his rights not to inform the LA he has moved out, but also agreeing to the property being re-marketed. My concern is that, until he nails his colours to the mast, so to speak, he can on the one hand claim unlawful eviction and on the other claim that we have not mitigated our losses by finding a new tenant. Our LA is very definite that we now have to be "fair and reasonable" to the tenant, by doing our best to find new tenants - otherwise, if we take the tenant to court for rent arrears any time during the remaining term, a judge would find against us. My concern is that until the tenant actually says (in writing) that this is what he wants us to do, and we agree to it, he is still liable to the agreement he signed and could possibly argue wrongful eviction when we try to get a new tenant in. The property went back onto Rightmove last night, with the date available as the day after the current tenancy ends. The LA has already had a request for a viewing to take place today - agreed by the tenant. My biggest concern is that, as has been mentioned already, the tenant hasn't signed anything to say he will surrender the agreement. Yes, the LA has sent him an email, reminding him that he will be liable for all rents etc and the re-letting fee until a new tenant is found BUT does that actually mean the tenant has agreed to to surrender the tenancy? I *think* what the LA plans to do is to agree a new tenant and THEN get a signed surrender - though why he doesn't want to get a surrender now, before marketing the property, I don't understand. Finally, yes, a guarantor and landlord insurance is a definite for all future tenancies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mortitia Posted February 4, 2014 Report Share Posted February 4, 2014 Something is not quite right here. Was there a 6 month break clause in the AST of 12 months and is that why tenant without warning has moved out? If property is on Rightmove showing availability at end tenancy date - is that 6 months hence or what. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chickpea Posted February 4, 2014 Author Report Share Posted February 4, 2014 Something is not quite right here. Was there a 6 month break clause in the AST of 12 months and is that why tenant without warning has moved out? If property is on Rightmove showing availability at end tenancy date - is that 6 months hence or what. No 6 month break clause. The agreement was a full 12 months, as requested by the tenant (who now claims he thought it was a 6 month agreement). The tenant requested to leave the agreement 6 months early because he'd seen a property round the corner that suited him better - we declined his request. LA was then asked for a reference from another agent, which he refused, stating that the tenants where in an agreement for another 6 months. LA suggested using a viewing as a way to get communication with the T - as such, he put the property on Rightmove with an availability date of 27/07, the day after the current agreement is due to end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richlist Posted February 4, 2014 Report Share Posted February 4, 2014 This is a ridiculous situation. You have very little chance of finding a tenant 6 months in advance. If you find one they could pull out a week or two before July 2014 and you are back to the start. Your existing tenants will more than likely NOT pay rent whilst your agent tries to find a tenant. You will probably need to take court action to recover rents owing Your tenant probably won't be able to afford to pay anyway. Cut your losses......get tenants to sign a deed of surrender and relet the property in the next few weeks. The situation you find yourself in is a result of the failure on your part to negotiate your tenants early departure from the fixed term of their contract. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chickpea Posted February 4, 2014 Author Report Share Posted February 4, 2014 This is a ridiculous situation. You have very little chance of finding a tenant 6 months in advance. If you find one they could pull out a week or two before July 2014 and you are back to the start. Your existing tenants will more than likely NOT pay rent whilst your agent tries to find a tenant. You will probably need to take court action to recover rents owing Your tenant probably won't be able to afford to pay anyway. Cut your losses......get tenants to sign a deed of surrender and relet the property in the next few weeks. The situation you find yourself in is a result of the failure on your part to negotiate your tenants early departure from the fixed term of their contract. I agree - ridiculous. However, as I understand it, we had every right to deny T's request for early departure from their fixed term agreement, and we had reasons for doing so - are you actually saying that we're now getting everything we deserve? In which case, why have a 12 month agreement in the first place? I believe the LA put the availability date as that in the first instance to show the T that he had reason for a viewing today - as I said, the LA requested permission to enter the property today so as to get communication with the T; saying it was for a viewing was his bait, if you like. In actual fact, someone DID request a viewing today and the LA told me this morning, when asked, that he would be telling interested parties that the property was immediately available. My issue is whether we need to get a signed surrender now (I believe we do) or whether the LA is correct and we wait until a new tenant has been found before getting the surrender. The likely reality is that we will find a new tenant very quickly, so no long void period - but I believe we can get a surrender that says the current tenant agrees to pay all rents until a tenant is found. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.