Reluctant Landlord

the article is good - highlights the process...but...

there is more cost involved for the LL to chase this debt never mind the time and energy needed. It would have been good to see the individual costs against each stage too so this is understood (NB court costs just increased across the board).

None of this is a quick solution and at the end of the day even if you have ticked all the boxes, got the judgements etc, the debt may never be repaid.

You have to seriously determine if some debt is worth chasing from the start or you are just going to be throwing more money at it.

If tenants are on benefits the amount you can get back is capped, and if they have other debts, the amount you receive will be even less. There is a hierarchy of debts and deductions to be aware of.

https://data.parliament.uk/DepositedPapers/Files/DEP2023-0365/052_Deductions_priority_order_V7-0.pdf... Read More

Get the engineer to test the alarm in the flat below or above and when it goes off knock on his door to say its showing a fault and you need to check if there is something in his flat that might also cause the same issue. This would surely deem the situation as an emergency and you were just carrying out your legal duty???... Read More

...they are going to be built in Cloud Cuckoo Land (a Manchester suburb apparently...)... Read More

and no surprise either that they have been left empty for years.
I would stick my neck out and say there is no (sane) LL that is going to want to buy a property such as this now due to all the work and cost required bearing in mind the future proofing aspect (EPC C) that will have to be taken into consideration too. Issues getting trusted trades too not helping.

I see properties like these possibly shifting at auction only to LL's where quick fixes are done just to be able to let asap. Nothing to the right standard and where application for selective licences for example will be ignored.

Cash only rents and no proper AST's. Everything under the radar. Letting to 'illegals' is inevitable - they are not likely to go complaining about property condition are they? Problems? send 'Dave' in to remove tenant...
With a shortage of accommodation there is money to be made and also tenants to be taken advantage of ........ Read More

I will never sign up to anything billed as 'voluntarily' by any council.

They should be spending their time chasing those LL's that are not adhering to MANDATORY legislation first and foremost if they are trying to achieve what they say they are doing. Isn't that more important?... Read More

Deposit protection have refused us the deposit on the grounds that the tenant says he paid all his rent, it seems he can refuse arbitration, claim he has paid his rent, with no proof.

Go back to them and state unless he can prove he has paid the rent then you have a valid claim on the deposit for rent arrears.... Read More

this issue is going to come to a head.

Putting aside the obvious implications from the PRS LL view, the councils themselves are going to be stuffed.

At present most councils will only provide a deposit and RIA to a benefit recipient IF they find a private property to let, on the basis the LL offers a min 12mth contract.

If the legislation kills min term contracts dead, then councils can't demand a min period. That's going to play havoc with their cash flow and they are going to want to think very carefully who they want to fund...

Councils are therefore going to have to pay out for every single tenancy a PRS LL may offer if they want to get anyone off their list, with no guarantee that the same person wont be back on their list again within the first 12 months........ Read More

Councils can't even keep a pace on basic repairs. maintenance and annual gas/safety checks as it is.
None of them are even close to being able to implement and find the money for Awaabs Law and that was live legislation from April.

The only properties they can sell off are going to be the ones that are already empty which they have no money to invest in or make habitable, so who is going to buy them? They will probably just remain empty. No private LL's are going to want to bother if they are that badly maintained and need a huge amount of cash (to get up to EPC C if that threat comes back) and if not in a great area, rent potential will be capped and probably the type of tenant base too. Why bother? No big investor is going to be interested either - they want large scale flats/blocks in areas where private payers want to be located.

As a result expect to see Selective Licencing introduced at pace now in every council....they all need money in the coffers as fast as possible with very little effort to get it.

The prs is a sitting duck.... Read More

...get a crystal ball ordered from Amazon people....put it on expenses....... Read More

yes and it might be a way of pushing T into kicking off with the council! The knack is getting T to understand what will be the personal implications of this to THEM.

THEY need to go hell for leather to the council to demand they help and not take no for an answer.

If T then turned up at the council and claimed homelessness the council still have a duty to house them in emergency accommodation if they believe they are in priority need and need more time to assess this. Make sure T is aware of this. If they fit any of the following categories then offer them a tenancy surrender. This will immediately stop them being liable for any further costs.

Priority need is deemed as,,
a) You are a pregnant woman, (this includes anyone living with you).

b) You have children who rely on you financially and they need somewhere to live.

c) You need special help either because you are old, mentally disabled, physically disabled or other special reason.

d) You became homeless because of a flood, fire or another disaster.

e) You are a child aged 16 or 17 and you are not in local authority care, or recently left long-term care. (In Wales 16 or 17 year olds will be regarded as in priority need, regardless of whether or not they have been in care.)

f) Any person aged 18, 19 or 20 who is at particular risk of sexual or financial exploitation, (applies to Wales only).

g) Any person who is not yet 21 years old, but who was at any time between the ages of 16 and 18 being looked after, accommodated or fostered, but are no longer. This does not apply if that person is also in full-time, further or higher education, (social services would be responsible for accommodating those students), (this applies to England only).

h) Persons aged 21 or over who have become vulnerable as a result of having been looked after, accommodated or fostered, (this applies to England only).

i) A person who is 18, 19 or 20 and who has at any time been privately fostered, lived in a children's home or been in the care of a local authority, health authority or voluntary organisation, (this applies to Wales only).

j) Any victim of any form of violence, (except self-inflicted) who has left their home as a result of violence or threats and has become vulnerable as a result, (this applies to England only).

k) Any person who has been subject to domestic violence, is at risk of domestic violence or would be if he or she returns home, (this applies to Wales only).

l) A person who formerly served in the armed forces and has been homeless since leaving those forces, (this applies to Wales only).

m) Any person who is vulnerable as a result of having been a member of the regular naval, military or air force, (this applies to England only).

n) Any person who is a former prisoner and has been homeless since leaving custody and has a local connection with the area of the local authority to whom they apply, (this applies to Wales only).

o) Any person who is vulnerable as a result of having been in custody, (this applies to England only).

If you fall into any one of the categories a - o above then you are eligible to be given priority when it comes to council housing.... Read More

true enough. You can't be expected to pay for something you aren't even told about in the first instance.... Read More

all you have to do is remind the T that the Council ADVISE is to stay put but the implication and COSTS if they do so are down to them and you will look to take them to court to get this back.

Make T aware that they should make a formal complaint to the council for not acting on their duty to rehouse them as they are under the threat of homelessness, and by default they are ensuring they will be personally liable for ALL costs as a result - these could run into thousands of pounds. A CCJ will prevent them from getting any prs rentals in the future.

Tell them to look at obtaining Legal Aid to fund a claim against the council for not carrying out their duty. Give them Shelter's number and the CAB. Tell T to contact their (probably new Labour) MP to ask them to intervene. Remind them they promised 'change'!

About time T got personally motivated. If they are made aware that access to the prs will be shut off to them in the future then they need to point their venom towards the Council/gvt etc and not to private landlords.

We will always prioritise tenants with good rental history, those who pay the rent on time and in full and look after the property over anyone else.

End of.... Read More

on the flip side good tenants (unfortunately for them) will have no choice than to stay put where they are as there won't be anything else available to move into. Stability of rental for those LL's left in the game.

For everyone else (as it already is) there will be a fight for what limited supply there is left. LL's will be able to pick from the best candidates so the rest will be left behind.

Maybe that will be default raise the quality of T's, and make them think very carefully of how they behave when in a rental?

As the PRS has ALWAYS said...if the tenant pays in full, on time and looks after the property then there is no reason to ever ask them to leave....... Read More

... Read More

if you have already got a court order and they have ignored this then next step bailiffs ASAP! Sort out what they owe you after they are out. What is key is getting possession as quick as you can at this stage surely?... Read More

you could use a dummy email address and fake name to email them to ask what their policy is such a situation for reference? That will give you an indication of how they view the situation.
Make clear that 'your friend' wants to do the right thing now, but fears repercussions for late application.

Push it back to them that surely it is best that a LL seeks a licence without fear from prosecution rather than not applying at all, if the whole point of the scheme is to 'raise property standards' as that is the reason behind the SL scheme? Make it clear it is a genuine oversight if it is (as you had a licence previously) but have absolutely no record of receiving a reminder to re apply at any point.

Se what they respond with?... Read More

I contacted them directly after their 'appeal' in April with a 4 bed house to offer them. I had just got a fully refurbished property prepped and ready to let. New kitchen new bathroom, fully re carpeted throughout.

I had to do all the chasing for info about T directly with T (the council were no help). Council said they would pay deposit and RIA and an 'incentive' to the LL for coming to them (£250 I think it was - pitiful) . Council would not pay a holding fee to reserve the property.

Despite the council agreeing this was the best thing for the family of 6 (they had nothing to offer them other than a room in a Travelodge), at the last min T said no and refused to move. Council could offer no help and if T changed mind nothing they could do.

I will NEVER be going down this route again.

Councils only have themselves to blame. Even when they agree a property offered is perfect and meets the full needs of the family, AND will SAVE them thousands over expensive temp accomodation costs that will be avoided, they still refused to ensure the T takes up the property.

A month later I get an email asking if my property is still available...!

As far as I am concerned they can now stew in the mess of their own making. They are allowing the tail to wag the dog. Clearly there is no housing crisis afterall....... Read More

not simplistic - idealistic.

It's about numbers/financial risk.

On the basis of probability not every tenant will go through the process of a full complaint and then take time to then go via the SO. It can take weeks/years.

Easier (and cheaper) to wait for the SO to make a decision and then pay what is usually a nominal fine. Any bad press is accepted and the cycle starts over again...... Read More

There should be one law that fits all - renting housing standards should be the same across the board and applicable to every property equally.

Anything less is pure TENANT discrimination, mandated and upheld by the government itself. How can one tenant's safety be deemed less important than another just by default of who they rent from?

Council/social tenants are getting a poor deal - and they know it, but they are stuck. They can't afford to rent anywhere else (private market) and they know the council have nothing better to offer them.

Just like in the PRS when you have more legislation it comes at a cost. If Awab's Law is going to cost to
It's only going to get worse....... Read More

Council officers completed a review and found there have been positive impacts on a number of issues such as increasing property values and increasing average rent levels.
They see this as a positive??? Increased rent levels are BECAUSE of the licencing fee being added on! It also means less chance of those on their housing list being able to afford these properties so more stay in expensive temp accommodation. Shooting their own clients in the foot.
They are just trying to get LL's buy in to call for the next 5 year scheme.
Someone needs to do an FOI and determine exactly how many 'improvements' have been made as a result of the SL last time and just how many 'rogue' LL's have been prosecuted etc. How many fines issued for properties that never applied for a licence? Then throw these figures back at them! If they cant justify this then they can't justify a new scheme.... Read More