Jump to content

Carryon Regardless

Members
  • Content Count

    1,590
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Carryon Regardless

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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
  5. 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
  6. The first sentence of my reply answers the op's question, and actually has been answered by others in this thread. I cannot answer for HMO's, as I've no experience with these. There is no legal requirement to carry out an electrical inspection on a rental property. If an NIC electrician has provided an inspection certificate, and we are able to check that the electrician is registered with the NIC and we are able to check online as to the validity of the certificate it seems to me that there is no confusion regarding our having satisfied the duty of care requirement.
  7. There is no legislation to cause LL's to carry out electrical inspections. The IEE 17th Edition Wiring Regulations are the standards electrical contractors should work to. It isn't legislative but in the event the HSE attending one of our properties (due to being informed by the Police following a notifiable incident) any inspection following that incident will use the 17th Edition standards to prosecute us for negligence, or what ever. If we have had a property inspected by an NIC contractor then it's reasonable to view that we have done all that is reasonably practicable to comply with our duty of care. But like a car MOT it doesn't mean safety is guaranteed after that inspection. We might still find ourselves defending due to an event. The 17th Edition recommends an inspection for domestic property each ten years. Where the 17th Edition gets silly is that it also recommends an inspection prior to new occupants taking residence, for me this would often mean re inspecting after less than 12 months. Of course an inspection where notifiable works are carried out is required. Non notifiable works we can carry out ourselves, but the list of these works isn't over lengthy but might well confuse some.
  8. NICEIC is the recognised body to oversee contractors, more credible than Part P. It looks like an online check can be carried out, https://www.niceic.com/find-a-contractor/certificate-check
  9. I'm unable to find the information I've been acting on. So to be safe, until I can find confirmation of my earlier statement at least, I say it is safer for us to supply the booklet. Of little comfort, and not the information I've been working to, is this I've seen this morning. As an alternative, according to this guy at least, we can email the booklet as an attachment. http://www.propertyinvestmentproject.co.uk/blog/landlords-how-to-rent-guide-for-tenants/ If I'm able to find the information I'll post it up, otherwise I apologise for misleading anyone. Now I've to print off the bloody patronising booklet for my recent tenancies, just in case I've to serve a S21 in future.
  10. We only need provide an internet link to the booklet, The T can then choose to to download or not.
  11. A well designed and less complex system wouldn't have inherent flaws that allow for such obvious abuse. The industry has no need for such complexity, it's only the clumsy legislation that makes it so. After the election we can be sure some politician will jump on the band wagon to make it more complex yet.
  12. Scary. The story might well generate sympathy for the LL, but not from those that will say "They have a house in London don't they? They can afford it." Much worse is that this can serve as a very dangerous education for the type of T we all fear, and worse still I can see ways that a T could manipulate a more favourable result for themselves from a naive LL. Grampa you're so right, we need to know what we are doing. But the law being so clumsy and changeable it's not surprising that many are caught out. The LL is an easy and prominent target.
  13. Some of Grampa's points are only relevant if he became a T after Oct 2015. Clearly here what is very important is to follow the process defined as lawful by legislation, and record your actions. A letter to the T, sent by record of dispatch and not signed for on delivery, detailing the situation is of value. As a lawyer when he sees that you are acting as required and not stepping into the world of ambiguity that lawyers enjoy he will likely play ball. His reputation is important to him 'if he really is a lawyer'. Research, not sure how, his status as a lawyer. Try to find where his other flat is. It's his choice to inspect anything but the gas cert that he 'may' hold is of no value to you. In writing you need to ask for him to state when he will make access possible for your engineer to visit. Send him a printed sheet that he might wish to fill out giving accurate detail of works as may be required, to head off a claim of disrepair.
  14. All she has to do is not let him back in, end of. As LL to her there is nowt you can do to remove her guest besides evict her and repossess the property.
  15. Nope, A second home, a holiday home, is paid at 150% nowadays, as are our properties if they are mt long term. The length of time mt is discretionary. The local council, as do utility providers, accept a T's word of when they departed a property. If not the T informing the council will become aware from a redirected HB claim. The council may request an inspectors visit to see mt. If a LL isn't aware of the abscond this can't be facilitated. Writing to the council and offering a affidavit would be difficult to reject as evidence. However if you haven't been served notice and are paying ct on behalf of the T then suing the T might become the easiest option. The council will have a legal dept to make things awkward but generally they are under staffed and take the lazy route. If at first you don't succeed your not a bird.
  16. Does anyone here 'attempt' to have their properties supplied by one supplier? There are such a mass of companies and their varying styles of dealing that nowadays when a property returns to my possession I don't try to deal with any of them. I wait till they threaten action before quoting my actual readings and settling their bill. I would prefer to have this situation organised so that an email or phone call can sort change overs with minimal fuss. We can't physically stop T's choosing another supplier once they're in, I don't remember how long they've to be T's but remember something about them eventually having the freedom to choose anyway. Suppliers fitting key card meters is also problem I've encountered. But I'm now considering ways to persuade T's to use a common supplier. 1st it makes sense to research attractive deals, for me no standing charge is a significant bonus. This may result in a higher kwh tariff but could still be represent a saving to low usage T's. In truth most T's will change suppliers because they were told the cost would go down, the fact is the new supplier may drop the monthly charge a little but as T's don't consider the kwh cost it's only later they realise they've been had, again. Any thoughts?
  17. Thanks Grampa, I think I've got that. As I understand even without a contract in place a T needs to give 1 months notice (I'm not talking of weekly paid rents here but due monthly). although in Oct 2015 things changed for the LL the T's notice still expires on the last day of a tenancy period (or for some very confusing reason the 1st day of the next (and T's choice)). W/o contract the 1st day of of the T taking the keys would demonstrate the start point of a SPT. So as with many AST's, and mine, a T once into a SPT needs to give a minimum of 1 month notice (not 4 weeks as many try), until they have served notice, and it has expired they have full responsibility toward the property even if they have chosen to depart. Even then posting keys through the box doesn't end the tenancy, although in practice i might use my key to enter, and accept that. All of my above points can be gained from the Shelter website (and others), a print off from Shelter 'should' be reasonable evidence I would have hoped. The T, assumed to be exT, in this case could say "it was my flat, I was still in possession. The LL shouldn't have done that". Ambiguity steps in and those that might defend the poor down trodden T love that. My way to head that one off is to be sure that the monies owed me would offset any claim by the T (exT).
  18. I agree, it wasn't MT, Councils are happy to charge the same person for council tax on 2 properties when it suits them. Are the council aware that the property was furnished till mid April? Are the council aware that the T was still as a T till mid April? Be careful you don't enter the area of a possible illegal eviction claim. Also a T (exT) could feasibly claim for the value of belongings that you disposed of. Fore thought to these points might well affect your strategy..
  19. Grampa perhaps you can clarify, the term contractual periodic is new to me. My AST's state clearly when a fixed term defaults to statutory periodic, as it's stated within the contractual agreement is this the same as defaulting to contractual periodic? I have had similar issues with the Denbighshire council over council tax liabilities. A lot seems to come down to the discretion of the particular council. When a T absconds the council tax liability reverts to me, that is from the day the T has registered at a new property. As RL, if there is a charge it is then for me to recover that from the exT. As Denbighshire offer a period of zero rating for an MT property this is usually a no cost effect to me as long as the void doesn't take me to a chargeable period. Previously though I have informed the council that belongings were still present in the property, till a date decided by me effectively, the council then reversed the change of liability and charged the exT until such time that the property was actually MT. This would be when I removed the belongings (and stored securely at the local tip). This could help the op as the tax free period would then be deferred. As said though this may be discretionary.
  20. It's civil law, so not really breaking 'the law'. The Gov't and local councils have been using us to compensate their lack of social support for a long time. We still have the right to claim for our losses againt a T though. If they stay they pay, the trick is having a g'tor or such to be able to claim from.
  21. If he's wound his neck in I think you've made the right decision. Voids / T changes usually mean losses and the admin these days is a head ache. Tbh my T's don't get the service you provided him, and I don't intend to try to. There can be advantage to leaving a silly T to stew, they usually realise there power is to relocate but that isn't so easy for them and they realise when they've cooled some.
  22. No one is obliged to give a reference. If the present LA is declining to give a reference it could be for a few reasons. They may have decided that they could only provide a negative but honest reference, this could lead to conflict with their T, even litigation in the extreme. They may require a fee for the service and have not been paid. They may just have a policy of not providing them as there is no advantage to them. As an alternative 'you' could call them to see if they will give a verbal appraisal. You might ask the potential T for a rental statement, then visit their present property (my strategy is around 6pm with little notice), a check of kitchen and bathroom give a good impression of life style. How they live now is how they will live in your property.
  23. Can anyone explain the logic of it anyway? I can't see what HMRC gain from this, if were to be only reporting. Being able to collect our profits quarterly would have a cash flow advantage for them. BTW RL, you promote the advantage of items being tax deductible, but that still means many, if not the majority, are still paying for 80% of the expence.
  24. To confirm, as I attempt to do within my AST. http://www.landlordzone.co.uk/content/tenants-notice-quit Notice (by T)- Periodic Tenancy " once the tenancy becomes a statutory periodic tenancy (SPT), are one month in length. " " The Tenant’s notice must be in writing, though there is no prescribed form this must take, it must be for a minimum of one complete tenancy period," I would say that is arguable that a text is acceptable as "in writing", printing off and filing is an issue, and a T producing his mobile in court would hopefully be frowned on. Other than that there is clarity that notice expires on the last day of a tenancy period (or first day of the next for some strange reason). Notice 'should' be a minimum of 1 month. Of course we can be generous and concede a shorter period. For me this would depend on, if the tenancy has run without issue, if the communication to quit by the T was considerate, and if the T made allowance for my performing viewings so as to minimise the void. If a T feels it is reasonable to treat the tenancy as they would a hotel then I fall back on legislation to balance the disadvantage.
  25. You're thinking of the revision of Oct 2015 that allows 'us' to serve 2 months, and the end of tenancy period no longer required. Not sure if this applies to tenancies started after that date, but don't recall this concession ever applied to T's. To have multiple tenancies all with various start dates and it follows various payment dates means tracking each tenancy at various dates to see if rent has been paid. Now to standarise dates, that offers no disadvantage to either party makes sense. I only need check online once per month, in theory, to check they have 'all' paid. Reduces confusion and possible mistakes that may arise because of. As used to be with S21's, and maybe still applicable to those started prior to Oct 15, if all tenancy periods end on the last day of a month the date of expiry will always be the end of a month. How much confusion have we read of here with people, including solicitors, screwing up these dates? My method eliminates the "is it start date or is it payment date" confusion, especially after a T has decided to alter their payment dates for their convenience. I can't understand why you all don't do it this way.
×
×
  • Create New...