Forum menu
I think the over-crowding issue is the problem here more than the dog. If anything happens and people get burned to death - how would you feel ? It also may void the owner's insurance.
If you were the landlord would you want a friendly neighbour to let you know ?
I would tell them, in a friendly non-complainy "for your info" kind of way.
My sister has just moved into a house they have let for 18 months, the dog there has ruined various soft furnishings.
I'd let them know.
Would I want to know if the positions were reversed? Yes.
There's your answer then. If and when they do find out, the first question would be "why did my mate Jezza of 20 years not say owt?"
Ultimately, whether or not the tenants' behaviour is acceptable or not is not TJ's decision to make, it's the landlord's. TJ won't be saying "they've got 4 people and a dog, you must evict them immediately!" but rather he's empowering the owner to make an informed decision.
Looking after a dog for a couple of weeks seems plausible. For several months, they're lying.
the dog there has ruined various soft furnishings.
Not all dogs eat houses. Mine are fine.
I think the over-crowding issue
How is it over-crowded? 4 people living in a flat? According to shelter it isn't "over-crowded".
https://england.shelter.org.uk/housing_advice/repairs/check_if_your_home_is_overcrowded_by_law
The flat belongs to the woman in Spain who I have known for 20 years. She has asked me to keep an eye on the flat.
The contract will be between the tenants and the agent who is acting on behalf of the owner
The flat is not overcrowded but with 4 people in it needs to be registered as an HMO which requires amongst other things a proper fire alarm which it doesn't have
My concern is for the flat interior. Previous tenants had a cat which damaged furniture and upset the owner.
I am caught between wanting to do right by the owner but not being a shit to the people living there. It would be easy if they were bad neighbours but they are OK and the dog does not bark or cause a nuisance
The flat is not overcrowded but with 4 people in it needs to be registered as an HMO which requires amongst other things a proper fire alarm which it doesn’t have
How do you know that it requires to be a HMO?
If they are part of a family group then it doesn't need to be. In fact if 2 of them are a couple then that would be fine as well.
Have this conversation with the neighbour, the next time you bump into them.
"Hi, I'm TJ. You may remember me from such epic internet arguments as helmets and politics..
Look, I don't want to get you into trouble or anything, but the owner of your flat has asked me to keep an eye on the place and she really hates dogs, because we're all a bit like that round here.
I remember you said that you were only looking after it for a while so, she might be fine with that....but, i'm in the position where, the next time I'm talking to her I can't really not let on.
It's what I agreed to do, after all , I'm sure you understand.
Is this your dog? Does he enjoy bumming?"
HOOOOOF!
Gobuchal
HMO regs are very strict in Edinburgh. It certainly is being used as one. This is why it is only let for two to share officially.
In all seriousness I’d just chat to the neighbours. Tell them you know the owner and it’s putting you in an awkward position.
The dog will keep your bike safe.
Worse neighbours could move in!
No problems? Leave it.
perchypanther
Member
The obvious solution is for TJ to buy the neighbouring flat and evicting the dog, thereby solving his neighbours problem, increasing his vice like grip on the Leith property market and furthering his ongoing canine vendetta.It’s a win-win-win scenario.*
*not for the dog.
Steady on - we don’t even know if it has a smart meter fitted or not!
HMO regs are very strict in Edinburgh. It certainly is being used as one.
It doesn't matter how strict they are, if the 4 people are from the same family, it's not a HMO.
It's not four people from the same family. It's only let for two people to avoid HMO status.
If there was a punch up on the landing between the owner and tenants, who would you instinctively go to the aid of?
That's probably whose side you'd want to come down on in these sorts of things with too many folks and dogs in the flat.
@TJ When you say flat for two people do you mean a one bed flat or two bed flat. Don’t know about Scotland but here flats are let on number of rooms not number of people.
In Scotland, for reasons somewhere between nimbyism and reasonable regulation of landlords renting out flat shares, 3+ people means you need an HMO license.
I kind of opened this thread hoping to see TJ being a busybody, but I think in his situation I would let the owners know - they could be in trouble for not having HMO etc mostly, rather than the dog.
It is a tricky one though.
Report them and then advertise at the local university hospital for nurses and more nurses.
Report them and then advertise at the local university hospital for nurses and more nurses.
Have you seen the nurses from that hospital?
Some of them look like Charles Bronson
Some of them look like
Charles BronsonTJ
Well thank you all for helping me make up my mind. 9 dob them in, 11 don't be a grass, 17 suggestions about doing obscene things to the dog
Very decisive. Bum the dog and its all sorted
My neighbour has little choice. She lives in Spain
Well your neighbour could move. That's a choice. (I've corrected your misspelling of neighbour).
the best policy is to say nothing and if later accused, deny you knew anything in the first place.
Ask yourself "what would Jesus do?"
( reluctantly – the owner cannot sell)
They want more money than it's worth for it.
As for denouncing your good neighbours - Stasi, Vichy France, milice... .
TJ has explained why the owner can't sell - there is an ongoing legal case with the Council over statutory repairs - nothing in the building can be sold until that it resolved.
We really are in the midst of a generation of cartoon character ignorance. Don't bother with facts and reading detail anybody just snarkily put forward your personal prejudicial twist, and throw in a comparison to historical events that lead to the deaths of thousands of innocent people. This is THAT important.
(sorry I know - must not feed the obvious troll)
I have known her 20+ years
Then you know what to do. Let her know.
Seems a pretty simple and straightforward one this. If the flat is rented out on the understanding that there are no pets then the neighbours are in the wrong. Doesn't matter how nice they are. By bringing a pet into the place they are being completely disrespectful to the owner's wishes. She will have her reasons for stating no pets and, as it is her property, then thems are the rules. The neighbours do not have to rent that property. They are probably renting it because, as TJ says, it is on the market at a cheap price. People have many reasons for their choices and preferences. Some are a bit odd and some are very understandable. She may actually like animals but doesn't want pets in the place because she knows that some people have allergic reactions or intolerances to them. Which could limit who she is able to sell or rent the place out to once these neighbours have moved on. The pets may also cause damage to the property. It's all very well some of you pet owners saying "well my dog / cat / goat / whatever doesn't damage the house" - but that's kind of irrelevant isn't it, as it's not your pet in the flat next door to TJ. And, if we are blunt about it, looking after the pet for some friends for a short time - doesn't really wash. It's a pet. It's an animal. They are not permitted in the property so they shouldn't have offered to look after it. I would probably take the approach mentioned above and chat to the neighbours and say that you speak regularly to the owner as you have been friends for a long time and you can't help noticing the dog. Check that they are aware that the owner does not want pets in the place and give them the option to give it back to the "owners". Make it clear that you will find it difficult to avoid telling the owner about the dog as it is one of the things she asks. If it turns out that it is actually the neighbours pet then it's a problem they have brought on themselves. It may feel harsh but, knowing that the tenancy prohibits pets, then they should have given it a bit more thought in the first place
You can buy and sell property with all sorts of legal wrangles going on. The buyer buys the legal wrangle along with the property, I've done it. Risks are reflected in the price. It would require more than the explanation we've been given to convince me there's a legal block on the sale, Hels. A link to a court order would help.
Legally it could be sold. Practically it cannot due to the ongoing legals .Thats a simple statement of fact. I happen to know the facts in this case. You do not. What experience do you have of buying flats in Edinburgh with outstanding and disputed statutory notices? do you even know what this is?
Bought and sold much in Scotland?
The point here is simple and I am conflicted because I don't want to be a shit to the tenants nor do I want to let down my friend who asked me to keep an eye on the flat.
Opinion here is divided. I like to ask questions like this on here because it is not an echo chamber. You get a diversity of views which is helpful in giving perspective
Your neighbour has a contract with an agency. It’s the agency’s problem not yours. I presume she is paying something for their service.
It’s nothing to do with you. When you kept an eye out for her elderly father, there was no contract, implicit or otherwise. Hence acting or not was not on the basis of fulfilling a contract of any type. A typical friendly request without obligation. In this case the agency is not fulfilling its part of the contract with your friend.
Kill the dog and one neighbour.
Sorted.
Murder-notoriety may help with selling the flat to the occult-ist buyer group
I don’t want to be a shit to the tenants nor do I want to let down my friend
You're not being a shit to the tenants. You're bringing a potential issue to the attention of the agent. It's then up to the agent / owner to decide whether they want to be a shit to the tenants.
(And if it eases your conscience any, the tenants are already being shits to the owner.)
I've never understood this "don't be a grass" mentality, it just empowers scrotes to carry on being scrotey without fear of consequence. TJ in in Edinburgh, not Wormwood Scrubs.