fit4life Posted September 25, 2012 Report Share Posted September 25, 2012 After serving a section 21 notice on the tenants who have not paid rent for 3 months now , i got another letter from the local authority, private sector housing manager, demanding that i fix the property which is being recked by the present occupants. I wish to know if this is a matter for which i can be taken to court if i refuse to fix the house.? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carryon Regardless Posted September 25, 2012 Report Share Posted September 25, 2012 S21 or not, rent paid or not, you still have responsibility to keep the property in a safe habitable state for the T's. We as LL's don't have responsibility to rectify T caused damage though. The tricky bit can be demonstrating this and it may be that the LA don't care anyway. The LA won't concern themselves with the money side of things, apart from charging on to you for works they may authorise, but have a conversation with the inspector and see if there is any (unlikely) sympathy. I'm sure there will be interest here as to how you evidence T abuse, the LA response to your plea, and a general update on progress. Good luck methinks you're going to need it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caravanj Posted September 25, 2012 Report Share Posted September 25, 2012 After serving a section 21 notice on the tenants who have not paid rent for 3 months now , i got another letter from the local authority, private sector housing manager, demanding that i fix the property which is being recked by the present occupants. I wish to know if this is a matter for which i can be taken to court if i refuse to fix the house.? You'll struggle to prove the retrospective damage so I suggest you get it fixed & then get the house checked by & photographed by an independent professional inventory specialist so that any future damage will be apparent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest tenants_from_hell Posted September 26, 2012 Report Share Posted September 26, 2012 You'll struggle to prove the retrospective damage so I suggest you get it fixed & then get the house checked by & photographed by an independent professional inventory specialist so that any future damage will be apparent. So more costs, yay! LA's are bent as hell they favour tenants especially housing benefit tenants. They are a lot worse when it comes to council tax and want the landlord to be liable and try to get extra out of us, what a joke! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carryon Regardless Posted September 26, 2012 Report Share Posted September 26, 2012 tfh you didn't mention selective licencing. Hyndburn BC have for a 2nd time taken the licencing of properties route. 18 months ago they attempted this with no consultation and only informing occupiers rather than owners. As this initiative is for rental properties it's easy to guess that many LL's claimed to not have been informed. The council weren't interested. I've not been aware of any consultation this time but the notice has been given. Apply by January or face a criminal prosecution, max fine £20k. The cost is only £775 per property per 5 years, but before an inspector details perceived improvements. I can sort of appreciate the aim of this but the same council fails to pay up on a housing benefit claim for an applicable 'to be licensed' property for over 6 weeks. They want better for HB T's, I assume, but have no responsibility toward helping the cash flow of such a business. Now try to find a T that isn't HB in that area. Just thought I'd have a share of belly aching too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grampa Posted September 26, 2012 Report Share Posted September 26, 2012 They So more costs, yay! LA's are bent as hell they favour tenants especially housing benefit tenants. They are a lot worse when it comes to council tax and want the landlord to be liable and try to get extra out of us, what a joke! I can only speak from experience but my local authority certainly are not "bent as hell" and are very helpful. I had a HB tenant a few months ago who we knew had vacated the property (without notice) but as there was a bit of furniture left and the keys not returned we were not too keen on entering the property without surrender. One of the housing officers went to the tenants new address (which we didn't know) and got the keys and a letter of surrender. They didnt have to do that and I owe them a big favour. They didnt know if the property was to re-let to a HB tenant (but i guess they were hoping). So it goes to show you can work with the councils but it helps to know or have access to their rules and regs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest tenants_from_hell Posted September 26, 2012 Report Share Posted September 26, 2012 They I can only speak from experience but my local authority certainly are not "bent as hell" and are very helpful. I had a HB tenant a few months ago who we knew had vacated the property (without notice) but as there was a bit of furniture left and the keys not returned we were not too keen on entering the property without surrender. One of the housing officers went to the tenants new address (which we didn't know) and got the keys and a letter of surrender. They didnt have to do that and I owe them a big favour. They didnt know if the property was to re-let to a HB tenant (but i guess they were hoping). So it goes to show you can work with the councils but it helps to know or have access to their rules and regs. Depends on the council. I put in housing benefit tenants in july, who only went and tried claiming dss on 2 properties decorated mine for me and said they want me to give their deposit back or they will trash the house, the had the house for 5 weeks didnt pay a penny, and council dont want to pay me saying there is no proof of "residency" dont know if they want video footage. I gave the deposit back because I thought it aint worth risking £500 for £1000s of damage. Prior to this the property was empty unfurnished yet the coucil claim it wasnt, so who knows more about my business them or me? Now since I gave the deposit back, the period they had the house for the council have wrote to them saying council tax has been cancelled due to no residency. So they will be issuing that bill to me since i gave them a furnished property. Why should I be liable for this?! I shouldnt! I got tenancy agreements but if their dodgy little scam didnt work out it aint my fault. The council didnt even pick it up, it took 5-6 weeks and I got fed up of getting no rent and decided to investigate myself. You might be made of money son but I certainly aint. Dont see why some of us should be pushed and penalised whilst others get housing benefit, council tax benefit, income support, jsa and bloody work on the side too!! OP - play a dirty game like your tenant does - say you try to fix the things but he is refusing for you to come and inspect and/or let contractors in - your word against his mate! You got to play dirty in certain aspects, like I said not all of us are made of £££, some landlords might be mugs and if you are go spend that cash!! Easily spent but hard to earn! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caravanj Posted September 27, 2012 Report Share Posted September 27, 2012 So more costs, yay! LA's are bent as hell they favour tenants especially housing benefit tenants. They are a lot worse when it comes to council tax and want the landlord to be liable and try to get extra out of us, what a joke! Once again, for reasons best known to yourself, you attempt to belittle my comment. If the originator of this thread had paid for an inventory check then it would have proved far less costly than having to repair damage that he knows has been done by the tenant but can't prove it's been done by the tenant so I suppose my reply to your " So more costs, yay!" comment would have to be the phrase 'penny wise, pound foolish'. I paid for an independent inventory / condition check & it's just saved me from having to pay for the renewal of a large corner bath in one of the en-suites, saving me around £500. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest tenants_from_hell Posted September 27, 2012 Report Share Posted September 27, 2012 Once again, for reasons best known to yourself, you attempt to belittle my comment. If the originator of this thread had paid for an inventory check then it would have proved far less costly than having to repair damage that he knows has been done by the tenant but can't prove it's been done by the tenant so I suppose my reply to your " So more costs, yay!" comment would have to be the phrase 'penny wise, pound foolish'. I paid for an independent inventory / condition check & it's just saved me from having to pay for the renewal of a large corner bath in one of the en-suites, saving me around £500. You seem to take this personal but I dont - grow up and learn to take some criticism. Like I said not all of us can afford to fork out on extras. It is already enough as it is. You might be made of money i.e. have a few businesses elsewhere so you can afford these petty extra costs which you will tab on your tax Some of us dont have extra businesses and rely purely on the properties and juggle/struggle around. Please also learn to broaden your thinking whilst you learn to take criticism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carryon Regardless Posted September 28, 2012 Report Share Posted September 28, 2012 As a criticism tfh I think your criticism is unnecessary and overly hostile. I find Grampa's comparison of LA's to be informative and helps me open my thoughts to possibilities that my view of LA's may be a blinkered view. I would be foolish not to recognise that I am cynical of many things, how about you ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.