“Don’t Shoot The Messenger!” Harassment vs Chasing Overdue Rents

Ben, I fail to see how the supermarket analogy is any different. Most people would agree that food is more important that shelter to sustain life, yet the supermarkets are supported from theft through the law, and police would come to an incidence of non payment.

I said in my note, I support the law where it is for true cases of harrasment, and certainly no one should be carryout acts of violance, and should people be evicted when their husbands are away fighting for the country, absoloutly not.

....but then equally should landlord be guilty of a criminal offence, because the lazy good for nothing tennent, has buried his/her head in the sand, refuses to anser the door or return the calls...absoloutluy not.... As per usual the law has been set up for the right reasons, but has gone too far to overcompensate

Looking forward to your next article!

Who placed the women in there Sharon?

If property is provided by homelessness units then it must be 'Suitable' and one characteristic of that is that it must be affordable. The way they calculate this is by looking at the local LHA rate for the property £1,200 may sound a lot but if LHA covers it then it is affordable and it will be the women's money management skills that are at fault, urged on by the hated housing benefit direct payments.

A social tenancy would have been half that but now we have another wonderful new initiative called 'Affordable Rents' which is the system whereby council's and housng associations can raise their rent to 80% of PRS rate in return for extra handouts from government, so 'Affordable Rents' arent going to be so 'Affordable' for much longer.

Only a politican could come up with a scheme to raise a person's rent dramatically and call it 'Affordable' haha

Can I explain rent arrears? No, there are many causes of it, some social, some personal, some government driven but as I have kept saying throughout this thread until I have grown hoarse (metaphorically speaking) Rent arrears are one of the attendant risks of the lettings business and always have been. In an ideal world every tenant would pay their rent on time and every landlord would maintain safe and clean properties. We dont live in an ideal world, it is what it is.

When I was a landlord I had a total of 3 tenants through the flat. 1 left witholding £2,000 rent because she said the mould on the wall (condensation caused by her not opening the windows) had damaged her clothes, the second one paid on time but left the place in a bit of a state when she went and the 3rd tenant went on to become a life long close friend. Its an assorted bag.

Everyday I face so much vitriol from landlords who seem to despise tenants that I think why do this to yourself? Surely there are easier and less stressful ways to make a living.

Hi Ben,

Many thanks for the reply. I don't know for sure who placed them here but my concern stems from two angles: the fact that the landord is crap and puts both tenants and the block at ris and secondly, if tenants get into arrears for whatever reason, the service charges don't get paid and my job gets even more difficult!

The tenants have also told me that at their request, LHA is paid directly to the landlord but the payments office are not going to meet his rent demands, which is where I really get confused.

Interesting what you note about 'affordable rents' and I totally agree that only a politician could come up with something like this. But as we all know, politicians don't inhabit the same world as the majority of the rest of us!

I totally get what you say about the letter of the law though!

Replying to this is becoming a full time job in itself LOL

@Billy you can take the view that morally rent arrears are theft but legally they arent, it is a breach of a contractual arrangement between 2 parties. No amount of complaining will change that fact and so the law and the procedures that surround it are entirely different animals.

When I was a full time trainer I did 3 months of work totalling £12,000 for a guy who went bankrupt which subsequently caused me to go the same way but that wasnt theft, it was a business arrangement that went down the pan, same with the legal relationship between landlord and tenant. As annoyed as I was I dont consider the guy to have stolen from me.

@Sharon I think I understand you query. The daftness of the current scheme is that HB payments go direct to the tenant, whether they want it or not UNLESS they are in 8 weeks of arrears, then payments start going to the landlord or the person is considered vulnerable in some way, which is quite loosely defined. They have to make a special case to be considered (You cant just say they are vulnerable even if they ask, which they do and yes I have tried to change their category, it doesnt work)

With the impending Univerrsal Credit mooted by the government these direct payments are being extended to council and housing assoication tenants too. Watch the arrears go through the roof now!!!!!

And Billy????? It still wont be theft 🙂

the thing that for me beggars belief is that government keep wittering on about giving tenants choice but what they have done is take choice away. Under the previous system the tenant had the choice about whether HB payments went to the landlord or the tenant. As with 'Affordable rents' only a plolitician could take someone's choice away and then re-label it choice. What is amazing to isnt that they come up with these things in the first place but the fact that we dont throw rocks at them

Thanks again Ben. This'll teach you not to write such provocative pieces!

;0

I know this is an old post, but, as it has been re-advertised.....

I had one agent who changed the locks when the tenant was in arrears and wasn't responding to communications, but left a notice on the door saying the the property was presumed abandoned, and that if the tenant needed access, they could contact the agent. This seemed sensible to me, but could this be construed as harassment?

JayEff This is known as an Abandonment Notice and they are very dangerous because they absolutely no legal status and WOULD NOT protect a landlord from prosecution.  This is even more serious than harassment it is considered Illegal Eviction and carries very heavy financial penalities - upwards of £30k is common.

Suspected abandonment should be dealt with through the legal Possession process under either Section 21 or Section 8 of the Housing Act 1988 whichever applies. Its a royal pain but it is the only safe way to regain possession/access

Yes I agree Mary.
To cite a practical example I had an eviction notice pending a month hence.
I had been advised by my tenants below that they had seen her and her assistants move stuff out of the flat.
As the flat was on the 1st floor I could not see into it well.
Nowhere to store ladders when you have a flat!!
The tenants below stated they had not heard annything in the following month and I monitored the flat throughout that period until eventually the eviction notice was enforced.
I was extremely tempted to put an abandonment notice and change the locks.
What would have happened if she had returned stating that she had been on a long holiday.
I would have to give her keys for the new locks whilst waiting for the eviction notice to be enforced.
As it turned out she didn't return.
Trashed the place
Stole items
The toilet was left continually flushing for over a month.
Glad it didn't cause a flood to the flat below which was mine as it would have cost the insurance company a lot of money and me possible loss of even more rent , but of course I would have been able to access the property due to a flooding emergency.
I am glad that there was no flood and that I did not enter the flat until eviction was served.
I cannot under any circumstances afford to have a crimainal record for wrongful eviction.
That stain would remain with me for the rest of my life.
So I agree with you wholeheartedly; frustrating though it is; you must allow the Section 8 or 21 process complete it's due process.

When we were renting the AST said we must tell the agent
if we were going away for more than 2 weeks. Would that cover this case, or is it unenforceable?

If you are asking if this clause would enable a landlord to enter the property without the express permission of the tenant the answer is no.  It is a fair clause to ensure that the landlord is aware that the property is going to be empty and for him to advice the tenant on turning off water etc., the landlord might drive by but he must not use "insurance" to gain access unless on a drive by he found water pouring down the road or a similar emergency - even then he should get an independant witness