[Closed] Tenants not paid rent.............

I'm about to rent place out in Bristol.

First attempt at this renting lark. So is it defo worth getting a letting agent ?

Also, anything of the peg contracts worth running with ?

Renton - If I were you I would get professional advice - your agent does not seem up to much and some of the advice you have been given on here is dodgy to say the least from what I know.

redthunder - its important you get teh contracts right for the let - so get pro help for that if you are unsure but if you are reasonable local to the property don't bother with agents. That would be my advice

redthunder - given rentons experience I would defo not use an agent, my own experience is that they are not up to much. I have 3 props and manage them all myself. In 10 years I have only lost £150 in unpaid rent. from 2001-2005 I managed 35 other props for mate during which we had a 98% record ( the losses were due to him overriding my cautious nature on choosing tenants), I have recovered money from tenants who have legged it. My advice to you is read loads of forums and join the [url=www.rla.org.uk/]residential landlords assoc[/url] and use all of their excellent support services.

renton, if the tenant has got it together to pay up maybe he is a good egg? A bit of smoking could be tolerated compared with a months lost rent looking for an unknown quantity. A full steam clean of all the curtains carpets and furniture - about 500 quid, and maybe you can get them to pay for that when the time comes. TBH he sounds OK to me.

Tj can you point out the bits that you think ive been misled on just so i can do some research myself please.

Redthunder i would definatley get an agent, but make sure they know what they are on about!!

renton - it'll just cause a row. Some of the stuff about going into the house for sure - could get you into a lot of trouble and there appears to me to be other misapprehensions as well

That landlords forum will be able to help as well at a guess

Toys19..we havent heard for the tenants though and it was only due to the fact that the letting agent could not get hold of the tenant so she then got hold of the gaurentor who then proceeded to flap a bit and who then paid the rent for the tenants.

leting agent has still not heard from the tenants...

TJ i am aware that i cant just turn up at the house as its in breach of the tenants right to privacy or something along the line.

letting agent told me that as they had signed a 6 month contract we can issue them a s21 in the fourth month so they have to move out at the end of their 6 month period??

is this correct?

renton - I am not entirely sure - I don't think so as they are in breach of the contract so a one month notice might be appropriate - although this can vary with the contracts.

The advantage of getting professional advice is if they eff it up you have some recourse although when an agent effed one up for us costing us a lot of money the only real recourse we had was refusing to pay his fees and the entertainment of MrsTJ tearing him off a strip quoting at him all the things he had done wrong.

You have to be V careful about entering the house. If I go without notice, I knock and ask if I can come in, otherwise I would only enter if its a safety issue or me and the tenants have a good relationship, and I know they wouldn't mind. If you go overboard you can get done for harrasment.

TJ i am aware that i cant just turn up at the house as its in breach of the tenants right to privacy or something along the line.

letting agent told me that as they had signed a 6 month contract we can issue them a s21 in the fourth month so they have to move out at the end of their 6 month period??

is this correct?

You can turn up, post a letter 24 hours previous and under the circumstance this is classed as [i]reasonable[/i].

They will have to move out at the end of the 6 month period as long as notice has been served on fourth month. I would guess you won't see any rent in month 5 as they will pull the old 'take it from my bond' chestnut....

Ask your LA who is holding the bond and do your homework in getting in back in a timely fashion.

I became a letting agent because all 5 i used were utter shit. They are in general an unregulated, poorly trained and unprofessional industry, I would (as TJ has suggested) self rent and get on them thar forums, you'll learn far more from experienced landlords and their experiences and often get access to solicitors who advise for free on them too.

good luck

letting agent told me that as they had signed a 6 month contract we can issue them a s21 in the fourth month so they have to move out at the end of their 6 month period??

is this correct?

Yes but make sure you give it the day before the anniversary date, ie if they signed on 28th of the month then give it on the 27th

And don't trust letting agency's, scum of the earth

Renton, i may not know the whole story but having been shafted by agents and landlords i have long lost any respect for landlords and agencies. My experience places them as pond scum out to shaft anyone they can. Repairs not done, promises broken, legal threats when you confront them with their breech of contract, living with the fact you are on two months notice at all times, etc.

If your not fine, your one of the exceptions. And yes people have reasons for letting etc etc.

But it is not a game, it is not some quick get rich fix that seems to be the prevalent attitude. Either treat it as a business and accept that you are going to get shafted once in a while, and make sure you have the insurances, finance, etc in place, or don't do it. IF you have acquired a second property because of circumstances just sell it unless you intend to be a proper landlord. You won't be doing anyone any favours least of all your self if the s*** hits the fan.

Oh and have nothing to do with agencies, you pay for credit checks they won't do, you pay for inventory checks knowing they will loose the paperwork, deny, hide, withhold deposits for any reason. As for their behaviour to landlords, don't believe a word they say, as long as they are making their cut they will lie, deceive, etc.

Which in effect has exactly the same outcome does it not?

yes but the "then the bank owns it" suggests the mortgage payer did previous to any arrears.

renton, sounds like a stressful time for you and your tenant. It doesn't sound beyond hope with the tenant trying to do the right thing and the guarantor stepping in to help.

It shouldn't be stressful to the agent though, this is their bread and butter. If you think they can manage it well enough, take a step back and let them get on with it. Might be worth asking them to ask the tenant to have a think about where they stand long term and whether they think they are able to maintain payments beyond month six. If they know where and when they are off, everyone should de-stress a bit.

I know it's hard to see someone in your house not treating it as you would. If you do have to cut your losses though, don't underestimate cold hard cash. I had a nightmare tenant who needed evicting once, I laid out all the steps to eviction pointing out what a ball-ache it was going to be for him, then offered him a cash alternative to move on voluntarily, cost me less than the court fees by a long way, and he didn't trash the place as he wanted the cash.

Yup, agree with Tj here. There is some very dodgy advice flying about and some of the 'landlords' here need to read up on their law.

Contract law is one thing, but some of the advice here is bordering on(and some outright)criminal.

Ditch the agent, and try and build a dialogue/relationship with the tenant so you both know where each other is coming from.

I have two houses and have hit this problem with two separate tenants but both were essentially good people.

The first hit hard times so I just went nice and gently and they paid in full the missing two months rent before they moved out.

The second is supposedly a friend. Paid the first two months then missed two. And lied. Bonus is that as she is paid through the social after missing 8 weeks I now have it paid direct to me. At £14 extra every 4 weeks she may eventually catch up.
On that note, I charge monthly but the housing pay every 4 weeks! What does that cost the country?

So, you have two choices.

1. If like me you are a good landlord (inspite of the way we are put in the same basket), you can give people the benefit of the doubt, prepare your evidence/proof and go round for a serious chat.

2. If you are big and scary, tell them to leave before you bury them on't moors!

3. Start proceedings, which sounds like a long, drawn out process 🙁

Good luck. I hope it never happens to me but I'm sure it's inevitable

Geordie mick, as far as I am aware there is no such thing as right of entry even after notice, the notice is essentially a request to allow entry, they can refuse and then the only way in is via the courts.

Mugboo-I think you are joking about no2 because threating behaviour like that leads to prison..

Nightmare, this is the only thing that stops me renting my house out. Tenants have way to many rights.

You cant evict people in the winter months in most of europe...

If folk hadnt bumped house prices up by purchasing buy-to-let places, house prices would be more affordable for people that actually want to live in the house.

No sympathy for people who end up with dodgy tenants.

Nightmare, this is the only thing that stops me renting my house out. Tenants have way to many rights.

Tenants have almost no rights in the UK. They can be evicted at any time for no reason - no security of tenure which we used to have and most of Europe has.

Tenants have almost no rights in the UK. They can be evicted at any time for no reason - no security of tenure which we used to have and most of Europe has.

In england this is frankly untrue, in my experience, (which isnt extensive as I only know of about 6 evictions where I was involved or knew someone who was involved) where despite arrears and property damage a judge will not turf someone onto the street. I know a case very well where tenant was given valid s21 notice, (despite being an excellent tenant, LL wanted to upgrade property and get much more cash, so the existing dss tenant was deemed surplus) the tenant refused to budge on the advice of the LA, and this lead to proceedings. The judge refused to grant eviction as the tenant had a small child and at the time of the hearing had no where else to go, so he essentially ordered that she looked for a new flat asap, but told the landlord he wasn't interested in another hearing for at least 6 months. Tenant found somewhere 6 weeks later.

Is the story different up there then Teej?

I don't believe that story Toys19. No court would not grant possession if a valid s21 had been served. There is no discretion within the law that allows for it.

There is some really dangerous opinions being posted as fact on this thread. Some of it means little, but some it will possibly get you 2 years in prison and a 5k fine especially if you harass your tenants.

Wot steve said toys. Its absolute - serve the notice properly you are entitled to possession. If a judge did that they would be reversed.

thats the whole point of the short assured tenancy - to not give security of tenure.

I don't believe that story Toys19. No court would not grant possession if a valid s21 had been served. There is no discretion within the law that allows for it.

So Steve and Teej are you accusing me of lying?

I don't know if he's saying that you're lying, more that you are incorrect in your presentation of the details of that case.

I don't believe your story if thats what you want me to say.

The judge refused to grant eviction as the tenant had a small child and at the time of the hearing had no where else to go, so he essentially ordered that she looked for a new flat asap, but told the landlord he wasn't interested in another hearing for at least 6 months.

all of this bit. its not believable. The court has no power to adjourn for 6 months if a valid s21 had been served

Well go and boil your head, you just don't like anyone having an opinion on tenacy as it happens to be your job. I was there, it happened. Why wasn't it reversed? I don't think the LL had decent representation, I kept waiting for the tenant to be summonsed back for eviction but it didn't happen.

edit: and the LL had to pay all their costs.
edit:

The court has no power to adjourn for 6 months if a valid s21 had been served

My limited experience of judges is that if they feel they can intimitade one or other party then they can bend the law. The LL was a pillock and the judge gave her the hairdryer treatment, after which she did as she was told.

Fair enough

refused to grant eviction

My point is that in my experience the courts tend to protect the tenant to a greater degree than some people think.

The court has no power to adjourn for 6 months if a valid s21 had been served

I've just been discussing this with my pal who is now a QC, he asked if you had ever actually been in a court room? As in his experience, judges go well beyond their powers on a regular basis, and any reports of poor or incorrect judgements were all the more believable. 😀

toys - I think you will find steve makes his living doing this sort of stuff. he is the genuine article on this.

yes judges and courts do make judgements that have no basis in law - and the then get reversed and admonished if they do.

I think you will find steve makes his living doing this sort of stuff. he is the genuine article on this.

You are abit of a patronising old so and so teej, I wonder if you ahve any idea how un-endearing it is. I know exactly what he does for a living, along with trying to rubbish anything anyone else says about tenancy law as he likes to feel like the only gay in the village when it comes to tenancy issues on the forum. I'm only speaking from experience, and from doing an awful lot of digging and learning. I am lucky enough to have a good few mates in the legal system, lawyers and barristers, who prevented me from maing the kind of mistakes that are being propsed on here (like changing locks or just walking in 24hrs after slipping a note under the door saying I was coming) so I happen to have some "genuine" things to say too.

and the then get reversed and admonished if they do.

lol. thats quite funny, you get pulled up on STW and go ring your QC mate. Most amusing. 🙂

Toys19, its very difficult to have a rational discussion of housing law with bits missing, misinterpretations and all the assumptions that go along with all of it. Forums are a terrible place to ask for an opinion as you'll get 20 different ones.
Now that you explained that the LL was possibly aggressive in court then it does make a bit more sense, but i'll stand by my point that no court would refuse to grant an eviction even if the ll was a prat and based on your brief synopsis.

I know exactly what he does for a living, along with trying to rubbish anythign anyone else says about tenancy law as he likes to feel like the only gay in the village when it comes to tenancy issues on the forum.

i'll try to dumb it down a bit

toys - not intended to be patronising - sorry - giving you info that I wasn't sure you had.

I'll be interested to see the judgement for sure

lol. thats quite funny, you get pulled up on STW and go ring your QC mate. Most amusing.

but i'll stand by my point that no court would refuse to grant an eviction even if the ll was a prat and based on your brief synopsis.

I think this is your problem - whilst it might be legally correct, it isn't actually what happens. I'll ask the QC's question again, have you ever been to court over a tenancy issue?

yes judges and courts do make judgements that have no basis in law - and the then get reversed and admonished if they do.

not in my case!! I deducted £75 off a tenant's bond for damage to a carpet, the judge was given pre check in photo's, an inventory signed by tenant on check in, photo's of the damage and invoice from carpet cleaners without any additional mark up or admin fee.

He asked me where it said in the contract I could do this and pointed it out to him and he looked at me and threw the contract back at me and said 'well the landlord has had the benefit of the rent' and awarded the judgement to the tenant.

It was at that point when I thought I was taking my commitment as a letting agent too seriously to be getting CCJ's in my name, paid the amount, walked out the door to meet my client who was a 30 year veteran landlord who was gobsmacked that we'd lost.

I sold up within a month and got out. Understandably there are people who hate landlords and agents and a lot are justified but I was the only agent with over 300 properties who could be contacted directly on a mobile by landlord or tenant any time of the week.

Just so you know, the tenant can legally deny you access even if you do give 24 hours notice. Should you attempt to force your way in, you will be committing a criminal offence (insane, isn't it?).

Just so you know, the tenant can legally deny you access even if you do give 24 hours notice. Should you attempt to force your way in, you will be committing a criminal offence (insane, isn't it?).

As a landlord I used to think so too, but they have paid the rent, it is "their" house. I haven't been refused access in a long time, I try to keep them happy so they don't object to seeing me when its necc. But then if a tenant ever did refuse I'd be giving them notice asap, just because I don't want a tenant who doesn't trust me, or I cannot trust.

As a landlord (2 houses/pension fund), it feels like all the risk is mine.

I can take all the precautions I want, the end result is that the bond, which I am now not to be trusted with, would not even re carpet downstairs.

The law may say one thing but the reality is another. Where is the risk to the tenant?

That they get evicted on a whim. No security of tenure, that rent can be increased without reason given.

I remember before the law was changed under Thatcher - you could have secure tenancies - ie you could only be evicted for breach of contract not for the landlords convenience, when rents were controlled so the landlord could only charge a fair rent.

Really - the system is rigged so far in the landlords favour here. People rent long term in continental europe as they have security of tenure.

Edit - life's too short

You rentiers and useres are immoral and going to Hell.Repent your sins.

I didn't bother reading the arguments above, but TJ's last point is 100% correct - thank you TJ for pointing out the inconvinient truth, despite being a landlord yourself (as far as I believe)

Not worth arguing about as usual 😕

It is not right that there are slum landlords out there still.

But neither is it right that a non paying tenant takes so long to be removed. In the mean time they can do untold damage to the house which realistically they will never have to pay for.

In this kind of case, the law prevents the tenant from being evicted. In theory, the law then protects the landlord in pursuing for the damage but the reality is very different.

I have had two problem tenants in 7yrs (recession has hurt them), both I have helped rather than gone for eviction. Eventually though, if I get the Tenant from Hell, the law will not be on my side and will not provide the money to repair my house.

Only take on tenants who qualify for rent guarantee insurance.

The name is misleading though as the reason to have it is so somebody else pays for AND takes care of the legal eviction, and covers the rent if it drags on.

My landlord mate swears by it

Where is the risk to the tenant?

You can chase them for additional damages through the small courts?