Tenants are offering to leave early...

[chickpea]

...but they still haven't paid rent due on the 26th, and despite having a letter hand-delivered by the agent, informing them that they are in breach of contract, they have informed all parties that they will not be paying.

The reason they give (or rather, the tenant's father gives) is "the condition of the house".

The father left a message yesterday, saying that he is happy to see us in court. He has told the agent that we should have provided alternate accomodation over Christmas, as the property was "uninhabitable", despite the fact that the tenants had already arranged to spend Christmas elsewhere.

The facts, putting aside exactly who has been responsible for the plumbing issues, are that we have been contacted by the tenants on 4 occasions and on each occasion, we have dealt with the problem within 4 working days. No issue remains undealt with - all problems have been fixed within that timeframe.

The agent had offered to set up a meeting with the tenants, tenant's father, ourselves and him to resolve the tenants' unhappiness, on the proviso that the rent was paid first - the tenant's father refused.

The agent has now hand-delivered another letter, offering them to leave the tenancy agreement at the end of this rental month "without prejudice" , as long as the rent is paid up to date - he says that the discussion as to who is liable for the plumber's bills can be dealt with through the DPS arbitration service.

If they don't respond to the offer, a S.8 will be issued on the 27th of this month.

Does this all sound right and proper?

[Carryon Regardless]

Remind us (well me at least) is Daddy the G'tor?

If so, is he worth per'sueing' for the dosh ?

I think your 'letter' offering their early escape is a mistake, a court may well see this as a date where you've accepted their responsibilities will cease. Where a court is looking for easy answers the "without prejudice" will be worthless. in my view anyway, unless it's high Court (unlikely).

Letting them go is intelligent but the negotiation should be more delicate and strategic.

[chickpea]

There is no guarantor (yup, big mistake on our part but we were unaware they needed one).

How would the return of the dposit be handled at the end of a normal AST?

We have got to the point where it may cost us less in the long run to let the tenants go early and suck up the damn plumbing bills, frankly - I've now seen both tenants' photos on Facebook and had I ever have seen them in the first place, they would never have crossed the threshold

[Grampa]

If all maintenance issues have been resolved and they were all dealt with promtly I wouldnt enter into any discussions with the father as he appears to be pulling the strings.

Options are:

1 Serve a section 8 under grounds 8,10 & 11 as soon as 2 months rent due ( 1 month and 1 days in arrears)

2 Serve a section 21 as well.

3 Maybe get a debt collector to chase on a no collect no fee basis. This can put pressure on tenants to pay up.

4 Get Solictor to write them a "letter before action"

[Carryon Regardless]

I can't be sure my memory is correct here but seem to recall your writing that a change in their circumstances led you to believe they wanted out of the contract as they could no longer afford the commitment.

If they truly can't afford this tenancy and there is no G'tor then it's likely that any effort and expense to get money will be wasted, no blood from the stone.

In your shoes first I would take best guess at how much you are likely to receive by negotiation, maybe Daddy will help to see the situation closed ?

My aim would be to gain a max realistic return by allowing them to escape their remaining term of tenancy, calculating the amount payable till the end of term for their demonstration.

Negotiate, receive, let 'em go.

We know they're trying it on but they have the upper hand as you can be put to great trouble as they attempt to show how unsuitable the property was / is / will be.

For negotiation I would expect you to be better than Agent and Daddy to be an advantage for the process as the kiddies are useless.

[chickpea]

Daddy has responded by leaving a message on the agent's phone, saying they will be taking up the offer to leave early, but will be seeking compensation because the house is uninhabitable blah, blah and we will be hearing from his solicitor.

I'm guessing they'd have to prove that it was uninhabitable....which will be difficult, since we have a copy of the signed inventory, plumber's reports, photos and no form of written complaint from them or evidence that they asked us to repair and we refused to act. I'm not sure what qualifies "uninhabitable" by law, but am confident that our property is a long way from it.

[chickpea]

Letter of acceptance from the tenants was dropped into the agency sometime over the weekend, but it contained the provison that they want 14 rent reduction for days they claim the house was "uninhabitable".

Putting aside the fact that the house was never uninhabitable by legal definition, they've made up the details of when they say they were without water (the plumber's report shows as much).

So - the agent has responded,saying that full rent is payable by tomorrow, otherwise the offer is off and the AST will continue to run as before.

[Mortitia]

In my opinion the chance of them getting compo is zero but what you need to concentrate on is getting property back without damage. As for Daddy getting a brief - well probably not if he is going to have to pay for it.

I would let them go asap and if property left as they moved in no action would be taken. Often the longer you let these things fester the worse the outcome is. Yes legally you can issue notices and pursue them through the courts but is it worth it - ask yourself that?

Get shot and re-let getting guarantor and full deposit if necessary I say.

Mortitia

[Chestnut]

I agree with Mortitia and others - let them go - and don't loose sleep over costs of past tenants - move on! (Best advice I've ever had from this site.)

Incidentally, if property hasn't already got one, consider having a water meter fitted by utility company. It might discourage prospective tenants from doing daft things like bathing with the taps overflowing, because the water wasted (wherever it runs to) will be at their expense!

[Carryon Regardless]

I see a game of bluffs, both sides trying to maximise financial advantage.

For legal correctness you have the upper hand (somewhat confused by the early escape offer), but they have the keys.

My thoughts would be to agree the day of return and they pay 'all' till that date, they're screwing you for enough as it is.

Gits.

[Mortitia]

And to add on from Chestnut......make sure you do not act as a reference in any way for them! This way they will have difficulty renting via an agent again.

Recently I have noticed that referencing agencies just call me asking 'did they pay the rent' - well in this case in general they did but refuse to give any info if asked. Sometimes this is months after the event so be warned Tracey.

Gits is a mild term COR but acceptable.

Mortitia

[chickpea]

As always, your replies are invaluable. Thank you!

Chestnut - excellent advice, but the property is already on a water meter and when this was pointed out to the tenant who likes his bath overflowing and hot, he simply shrugged. More fool him!

I'll be honest, I'm resigned to paying all th plumber's bills which is why I think the very least they should pay is the rent owed.

It will be interesting to see what happenes re: us being asked for references in the future. My suspicion is that, being the honest and upstanding people that they so clearly are, they'll use parents' addresses as their previous address in future.

I did have to laugh, though. The letter of acceptance from them was littered with mistakes - it asked that the agent work out the daily rate for rent and then calculate the rent from the date they moved in until 25th January, minus 14 days....bearing in mind they've paid for Nov-Dec already. Also, it said "as the house was inhabitable" (I'm guessing she thinks that's the oppposite of habitable!)

Clearlynot very bright, either of them.

[chickpea]

Just an update.

We had a meeting with the agent on Tuesday and he has now sent another letter, stating the serious consequences of continuing to refuse to pay rent. ie potential for CCJ against them etc.

He has asked them to list all problems they feel they have had with the property, the nature, what they consider the cause and how exactly it affected them and for how long.

The next rent is due on the 26th, so we'll see what happens between now and then.

A couple of questions - are there any circumstances under which a tenant could claim rent reduction? At worst, our tenants would have been without water to the shower (it has it's own tank), but not without any other water or heating, despite what they are trying to claim.

If they left the property of their own free will, before the cause of the leak had been established, can they claim rent reduction for that? Both times, they fled the property (the second because they were going away for Christmas anyway), but subsequent inspection by the plumber found no reason to turn off the water.

Does a tenant have to give notice at the end of an AST? Probably a stupid question, but our agent tried to infer that they didn't, and that the tenancy would simply end.

[julles]

Hello Tracy

I would have thought that if they were only without water from the shower but had water elsewhere in property,maybe ensuite, another bathroom I would doubt very much they can claim for any compensation.

A tenant does not need to give notice at the end of the AST they can just move on as their tenancy is coming to an end,The AST can just come to an end.

It's best,if possible to check what the tenants intentions are before the end of the AST, are they staying on a periodic,or renewing ,unless of course you are in regular contact and are aware of what they are wanting to do .

[chickpea]

Thanks Julles.

The question about giving notice will be irrelevant with these tenants - we will be issuing them with a s21 if the s8 fails! I was just wondering how you ever avoid a prolonged void period if you don't know whether you need to look for new tenants at the end of the AST.

The property has only one bathroom but the bath has a power shower that runs from it's own water supply plus a deck shower that is diverted from the bath taps. From what I've read elsewhere, the tenants don't even need running hot water in an emergency - just cold water supply and a kettle is enough in the immediate term.

Our unintelligent tenants are trying to claim that turning off the water meant they had no heating either...

[Carryon Regardless]

From what you've said they have a bath as an alternative, so loss of shower is of no consequence.

Attempting to claim they were going away anyway but using the adverse situation as an excuse would seem like wasted effort to me, it would just come over as an emotional argument, you have to remain professional even when they aren't.

Your A is right to get them to record their claims and reasons, this when silly is good for the future in arbitration, or whatever. Here though it might be about time to stop dealing with Daddy unless they document that he is acting as their agent, otherwise he is no one.

I return to the statement that if they have nowt you get nowt though, just more wasted effort and expense trying. A great reason for g'tor as assuming this would have been Daddy he would now have his own selfish concerns. As it is he can play Mr superior in comfort.

My view is they have had their warnings, they are there till the end of tenancy if they wish (or longer), take the offensive and start a MCOL for all outstanding monies.

List separately all parts of claim allowing the Judge to grant success on the items he sees as correct and kick out such items as the plumbers cost if he doesn't see it as appropriate.

Forget the S8 just go for S21 and act as soon as you are able. The Kiddies likely don't have anything to give so can play games with a S8 that will cost you much more.

Put your hobnail boots on but stay professional, your being stung.

Edit: At the end of a tenancy the T's may depart w/o waning or notice. As long as they are out before the start of what would be the Periodic tenancy the AST is finished.

The risk is that the LL signs up a new T in anticipation and the existing T's stay, now the LL has 2 lots of T but only 1 property.

Never sign a new AST until the property is actually in possession again.

[Richlist]

The question about giving notice will be irrelevant with these tenants - we will be issuing them with a s21 if the s8 fails!

Not necessarily.

They still have a tenancy agreement, they are still the tenants, they do not owe 2 months rent and so an S8 may not give you possession of your property. In addition any S21 will not take affect until the end of the tenancy agreement. Getting your property back is not yet a done deal.

I was just wondering how you ever avoid a prolonged void period if you don't know whether you need to look for new tenants at the end of the AST.

Its done by communicating amicably with the tenants a couple of months before the end of the tenancy agreement to ascertain what the tenants plans are. I usually offer them 3 options.....i) Leave ii) New tenancy agreement or iii) Keep existing tenancy agreement and let it become periodic.

Our unintelligent tenants are trying to claim that turning off the water meant they had no heating either...

Makes no difference......tenants are not entitled to ANY compensation. Problems happen all the time....not just to tenants. Provided problems are dealt with in a timely manner they have no grounds for complaint.

[chickpea]

Sorry Rich, I was talking in shorthand.

The s8 will not be issued until 2 months is owing - after the 26th of this month. With any luck, it will qualify for mandatory reposession.

The s21 will be issued at the same time - so what I meant by the tenants giving notice being irrelevant this time is that we have no intention of letting their AST roll over to a periodic.

Of course, as you say, we still have to get the house back...

They are claiming to have taken both legal advice and advice from 2 other letting agents, all of whom have advised them not to pay rent until we agree to a rent reduction of 14 days for the time they claim they were without water and heating and the house was unsafe.

Who knew that a loose shower hose and a disconnected overflow would render a house unsafe and uninhabitable??

Cor - daddy has been removed from any discussion by both the agency and ourselves, since he has nothing official to do with the tenancy. The reason we're persuing the s8 as soon as, is so that we can limit the financial hit we may take if they stay in the property any longer than is absolutely necessary - am I right in thinking that while the tenancy runs, we'll still be responsible for carrying out repairs, regardless of whether they're paying rent or not? The s21 will be issued at the same time and we'r very much hoping that the threat of legal action will be enough to knock some sense into them (but I doubt it.)

[Carryon Regardless]

Going forward with the S8 'may' involve the Judge deferring pending reports on the condition they claim.

Reading here it seems that a growing trend is to claim an adverse living condition that then may need assessment ??

By the time you get an award for the outstanding rent it may well have been spent.

If they have taken advice it should be that they keep the rent aside ready for later payment, if so you should consider getting what you can while you can.

If they are able and do pay it could be worth sacrificing the 14 days (or negotiate somewhere between). Be careful not to document an offer that could bounce back at you later.

Negotiate, agree, receive, accept repossession, finished. Maybe in different order but I'm sure you get the gist.

Moving on and accepting the education that you've paid for is more often better............................with T's.

[Richlist]

These situations seem to have a habit of dragging on for many months.

Thankfully' I've never been in your situation, BUT if I were, I certainly wouldn't be handling the matter myself or relying on my agent. I'd employ Landlord Action to serve and follow up the section 8 / section 21.

Good luck.

[Carryon Regardless]

Often though RL there is a judgement call as employing 'another' could be more good money after bad.

T's have been given great advantage to abuse by legislation, your lists I view as a way to attempt to rebalance the risk. Often in the lower market properties your suggestions, although relative, aren't achievable.

For my own attempts to reduce risks I require deposit, g'tor, and hopefully a good assessment from interview and background checks.

Here we have no g'tor and the assessment was trusted to the A.

Also like you and others I consider kiddies to be too great a risk, however the the A was happy to accept that risk on some one else behalf.

[Richlist]

Often though RL there is a judgement call as employing 'another' could be more good money after bad.

T's have been given great advantage to abuse by legislation, your lists I view as a way to attempt to rebalance the risk. Often in the lower market properties your suggestions, although relative, aren't achievable.

I wouldn't disagree with any of that BUT, and there is a big but, the primary objective is now to regain possession of the property.

We know that it is SO easy to make a mistake with completing the forms, serving them correctly, following up and dealing with the courts etc etc that I wouldn't want to advise ANYONE who hasn't done it before to risk getting it wrong. Often a few hundred pounds spent now will save mistakes, delays and severe disappointment and potentially more lost rent.

Using an experienced, well tested expert makes perfect business sense.

[Carryon Regardless]

Very true.

[chickpea]

That's my worry - that we will be losing more money just to try to get back rent owed.

I do take the point that what is really important is getting reposession - in all honesty, I don't think the tenants will dig their heels in once they are issued with papers. The rent thing is a try on, mostly (I believe) because they have little or no understanding of what being a tenant entitles them to (or rather, doesn't). They appear to think that they can negotiate terms with us...I suspect they will get a wake-up call when they realise they can't negotiate with the law.

Our agent has experience of issuing papers, appearing in court against tenants etc, so I'm hopeful that he knows what he's doing - but of course, I'll be doing my own research to make sure.

We will, of course, being terminating our contract with him once the matter is resolved - and starting again, better prepared and more knowledgeable.

[Richlist]

Tracey,

Here is the link to the Landlord Action web site. You might like to browse thru it and keep it in your back pocket/ handbag should your agents performance not meet expectations.

http://www.landlordaction.co.uk/site.php