Carryon Regardless

Advice from 3 practices is BS and weakens his stance in my view, but not the validity of claim. By instructing the cleaner you have admitted a level of responsibility, and very possibly validated the claim some. Am I correct that your Agents failed to inform you of the situation for 2 months? Do you have insurance that might cover this event? More valuable would be a legal protection cover if you have it. Do you want an ongoing relationship with this T, or have you decided that the relationship is unlikely to continue on a good working basis? There is no legal reason to deal with Daddy, but you might consider a meet and see if reasonable discussion can result in an easier resolution than what 'may' just feed the Vultures.

Well RL I usually view any consultation as a patronising warning. Maybe they occasionally fail although I can't think of any that have. Even if there is a more moderate 4 months enacted it is still very dangerous. As HB claimants learn that they can enjoy the 12 months of benefit before a LL can hoof 'em I feel that many will find the temptation irresistible. The plus side is that any Bailiff will be dragging a drunk and well soiled exhuman out for the Mortgage Co as I am unlikely to be around to clean up afterwards. I now have my licence to be a LL in Wales, time to read the conditions and understand the 173 notice. I'm feeling like my pension plan has finally been dashed on the Swelly rocks (that's the Menai Strait).

For information, the house of unintentional HMO cannot meet the Welsh licencing standards. For 5 occupants, same family or not, there needs to be a separate WC. Not possible. A shared bedroom must be at least 11m sq, 2 bedrooms not possible. The T has informed me that one child now resides with relatives for location of college reasons. another now resides with her boyfriend. I have requested he provide evidence to head off any inspection / investigation. So today I'm looking at when the S21 is taken from us. I don't see a definitive answer for England, for Wales it's already gone, it is now a 173 Notice. I've yet to understand if / what difference there may be. Further the Welsh ASSembly started consultation on 11 July 2019 with a view to amend a few things. Extending the notice period of the 173 from 2 months to 6 months is one part. Apparently the court proceedings following this take an average of 22 weeks. So a bady is there for 12 months or more after a LL decides enough is enough. I suggest that any smaller LL will have lost their own home by then as rents will likely cease when notice is served. And that also assumes the Court don't find fault or some defence. Does anyone else see the fashion of the LL being increasingly fair game for all?

I know this affects very few here, as it relates to becoming licenced as a LL in Wales. I've paid the tax sorry fee's and I'm doing their online course. I expect much of the content is nation relative rather than 'just' Wales. I've considered that I am not behind with my knowledge of legislation, although I'm finding that I'm less and less enthused to update. I don't mind admitting that there are a good few eye openers within this course that tbh increase my fear of the risks we run by being LL's. Specifically the Welsh description of HMO. Where nationally this relates to an occupation of greater than 5 people, but also of different household / family groups. The Welsh state clearly that this relates to an occupation of 5 or greater, no mention of family group. Time ter fill me nappy. I've one house where mummy and daddy breed like rabbits and have 4 lovely kiddies. An occupation of 6 'seems' to put this in the catagory of HMO. £20k fine for not being licenced. Not that I would want to but I can't even evict until licenced. The cost of works to upgrade would be scary, doing this with family in situ wouldn't be practical. I realised years ago that HMO properties weren't for me. Now Wales has decided that it is.

Tbh I have been wound up so much recently I think my spring is about to go poing. We've got QT in town tonight. Mrs COR wanted to be a part of the audience, she reckons I've a question or two I could put to the panel. I thought better of allowing the nation to see me with steam from me ears as I suggest whoever is a patronising git. I don't see anyone of interest anyway. Cleverley isn't someone I would enjoy conversation with, but at least Norcott doesn't come across as being a 'destroy the capitlists' socialist. On the Kumar show I got the impression he was patronising the host some, for a few quids. I liked watching Rachel Parris if I'm honest, Kumar was the downside of the show. I do hope the panel decide to get here by train, it's not quite coal into the boiler (still diesel though), but it is a slow haul up from Stockport, if they don't get mugged down there. If not they're lucky that the roads aren't buried under snow as is usual for January. Can't beat a bit of global warning heh.

I'll update later, I'm under attack for failing to register. I don't recall any info warning or informing me. This is for my Ltd co, so likely picked up via Co House, but the Co is near dormant so I'm intending to go online to assess the requirements.

Yep, I wasn't aware of this extra new one till they told me I was overdue for payment. The Welsh Assembly did that to me last month. I now have to take their course, pass their exam and of course pay their tax for registration. It'll take 8 weeks for them to assess my suitability. Meanwhile I'm still under threat of being prosecuted, under threat of fines and recovery of rents paid, and can't repossess my properties.

As above the AST still exists, and they are liable for rents. But fat chance clearly. It sounds like the property needs securing asap, left unlocked and your keys no longer fit. As Grampa endeavour to make contact making the new keys available. Post the notice and photo it. Record all you can in prep for the counter claim. Your inconveinece isn't chargeable just your actual out of pocket expenses, and of course the rents till the end of the AST. What you are heading off is the T turning up claiming he left the property good and some one else broke in (your insurance problem). Also his belongings were valuable and you've removed / sold them. Most like he will be affraid to show his face, but I have encouraged such fear by showing confidence where I can. I say that in the belief that if you could catch up with him there isn't going to be a happy financial benefit to you. As for Mr Plod, well good luck. But if they will do a little leg work, and even believe his cr*p, you might increase his fears. Sad days and I'm sorry for you, I've been there. Having a guarantor has served valuable purpose for me over the years, in their eyes you deserve this, but not friend or family. In truth you would be v lucky for courts to make a g'tor suffer, but most don't know that.

Often the authoritities will anticipate our out clauses. And bear in mind now that where Scotland used to differ from England and Wales, devolution now permits individual authorities to create their own local legislation. A T claims they have been unfairly excluded and we might expect to have to defend such. If that becomes the remit for the Property Tribunals to oversee we could end up with a hefty legal bill, Shelter's as well as our own. A local LL to me ended up paying £,000's in settlement for a deposit action they took on. Realistically he maybe was wrong with his (actually his A's) deposit handling, but Shelter clearly would enjoy our additional penalties that finance their lawyer. He told me the cost was about £1,600, and he doesn't have high end properties. Any action might request our overall T history. As you all are writing that won't include HB T's. Just to bleat my previous winge, we are becoming social LL's more and more. We are increasingly less able to run our own business our own way. Some might consider taking a cheapo property to house HB just to say "look there, of course I do." I can let you have one or two, complete with the HB T advantage.

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.

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.

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.

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??

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.

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.

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.

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.

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?

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.

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.

At least my T's would rather spend it on cheap cider.

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.

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.

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.

Chrostopher Jeffries might agree with you there.