Revenge Eviction or was the landlord right?

If you think Shelters Facebook page is comical check out these fools, they want to get rid of section 21, and probably hang all landlords lol
https://www.facebook.com/#!/OneAngryTenant

Reply to the comment left by "Rob " at "02/11/2014 - 10:55":

This link?
https://www.facebook.com/OneAngryTenant

It interests me that ending a tenancy (via a Section 21 notice, for example) is seen as 'eviction' by tenants. I always thought of eviction as something that happens when tenants are thrown out for having broken the terms of an agreement.

I guess that's too pedantic a point for Shelter!

Reply to the comment left by "Steve Hards" at "01/11/2014 - 14:46":

hi steve,
brilliant work. how did you find it?

Reply to the comment left by "N S" at "31/10/2014 - 10:20":

'... there were real structural problems with the insulation etc. I reported this to the landlord a squillion times, but they weren’t prepared to fix the ventilation problems that would sort it. Sometimes it is almost impossible to keep a place free of mould and rot where there is not proper ventilation and the house is in poor structural condition. I moved out – but for many low income earners there is little choice of what they can rent – and it is not easy and its expensive to move.

I am surprised that you consider that it should be the tenants responsibility to fix up problems that the landlord should be responsible for. It should not be the tenants responsibility to paint the walls/remove peeling wallpaper or re-grout if there is mould – that is clearly a landlord’s responsibility.'

REPLY - MOULD IS OFTEN CAUSED BY TENANTS LIFESTYLE AND LANDLORDS ARE UNDER NO LEGAL OBLIGATION TO IMPROVE A DWELLING EG IMPROVE INSULATION, VENTILATION AND HEATING ETC. LIKEWISE LANDLORDS ARE NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR REDECORATING UNLESS THE NEED RESULTS FROM SOMETHING THE LANDLORD IS RESPONSIBLE FOR. I THINK ALL THIS CONFUSION ABOUT WHAT IS AND WHAT ISNT A REPAIRING OBLIGATION IS DRIVING A LOT OF THIS PROPAGANDA AGAINST LANDLORDS. I HAVE A FLAT WHERE THE BATHROOM IS FULL OF MOULD BECAUSE THE TENANT SEALS ALL THE VENTS AND FAN, AND DOESNT HEAT IT PROPERLY. I WARNED HIM WHAT THE RESULT WOULD BE. IM NOT REMOVING THE MOULD AS IT IS HIS RESPONSIBILITY!

i also have had properties which have been mould free for years - due to sensible life styles - and then someone else comes in - won't ventilate, dries wet laundry on radiators and then grumbles they have a wet house.... guess who the council believe ?

I sometimes wonder why we do this !

Reply to the comment left by "Joe Bloggs" at "02/11/2014 - 14:00":

Sure - sometimes it is caused by the tenant - but my point is that sometimes its not. Certainly in my case it wasn't - it was an internal bathroom with a piddly fan that did nothing and even if I ventilated it as much as I could with the door open, removed mould with bleach, painted the walls with anti-mould paint etc it is was an unwinnable war against the mould. Similarly the problem with the mould in the bedroom was that there was pretty much no insulation in the walls and no ventilation apart from the windows - it was a ground floor flat with no security bars so I couldn't leave the windows open for ventilation when I wasn't there. I even got in a specialist to look at it who reported that better (ie some!) ventilation needed to be installed or the mould problem wouldn't go away - the landlord refused to do so. I'm lucky because for me it was pretty easy to move and find somewhere else to live - but for some people (especially with families) it's just not that easy.

You say that landlords should not be under an obligation to provide heating, insulation and ventilation. I strongly disagree with that - a landlord should be required to provide housing that meets minimum basic standards - which I consider includes heating and sufficient insulation and ventilation to avoid problems with damp and mould.

To be honest I have found this thread of comments to be pretty unconstructive and disappointing. It's incredibly naïve to think that there are no bad landlords who fail to provide or maintain properties to a basic standard - of course there are some bad landlords who provide sub-standard housing to vulnerable people. Just as there are some bad tenants - but just because in your experience mould is caused by tenant's behaviour does not mean that in other cases the problem is not structural.

It's just not helpful to characterise it as an Us v Them dynamic - there is good and bad on both sides of the fence. I would much rather have seen this forum advocate for all landlords to maintain minimum standards and to show what being a good landlord looks like, instead of denigrating entirely plausible scenarios proposed by Shelter where bad landlords exploit vulnerable tenants (even if the mock up photo may not be brilliant).

Reply to the comment left by "N S" at "02/11/2014 - 15:16":

I have read the first paragraph.
You should have had a good look round and upon seeing the "piddly fan" as you put it, not moved in.
You have no right to moan about landlords.

Reply to the comment left by "N S" at "02/11/2014 - 15:16":

Sure – sometimes it is caused by the tenant – but my point is that sometimes its not. Certainly in my case it wasn’t – it was an internal bathroom with a piddly fan that did nothing
YOU DONT EXPLAIN WHY THE FAN WAS INEFFECTIVE. OFTEN THE GRILLS GET BLOCKED WITH FLUFF. MAY BE THIS IS WHY IT WAS INEFFECTIVE.
and even if I ventilated it as much as I could with the door open,
YOU SHOULD HAVE KEPT THE DOOR SHUT TO STOP HUMIDITY SPREADING.
removed mould with bleach, painted the walls with anti-mould paint etc it is was an unwinnable war against the mould.
WHY WAS IT UNWINABLE. HOW DID YOU DRY WASHING?
Similarly the problem with the mould in the bedroom was that there was pretty much no insulation in the walls
HOW DO YOU KNOW THAT?
and no ventilation apart from the windows – it was a ground floor flat with no security bars so I couldn’t leave the windows open for ventilation when I wasn’t there.
YOU KNEW IT WAS A GROUND FLOOR FLAT WITHOUT SECURITY BARS WHEN YOU TO DECIDED TO RENT IT.
I even got in a specialist to look at it who reported that better (ie some!) ventilation needed to be installed or the mould problem wouldn’t go away – the landlord refused to do so.
THIS 'SPECIALIST' WAS PROBABLY NOT INDEPENDENT BUT TRYING TO SELL A VENTILATION PRODUCT, WHEN PROB ALL THAT WAS REQUIRED WAS THE FAN TO BE CLEANED.
I’m lucky because for me it was pretty easy to move and find somewhere else to live – but for some people (especially with families) it’s just not that easy.

You say that landlords should not be under an obligation to provide heating, insulation and ventilation.
YOU HAVE COMPLETELY MISUNDERSTOOD WHAT I SAID VERY CLEARLY. I SAID LANDLORDS ARE UNDER NO LEGAL OBLIGATION TO IMPROVE A DWELLING EG IMPROVE INSULATION, VENTILATION AND HEATING ETC. NOTE I SAID IMPROVE, NOT PROVIDE. NO WONDER TEHRE IS SUCH A PROBLEM WITH TENANTS EXPECTATIONS.
I strongly disagree with that – a landlord should be required to provide housing that meets minimum basic standards – which I consider includes heating and sufficient insulation and ventilation to avoid problems with damp and mould.
IF YOU RESEARCH SECTION 11 OF LANDLORD AND TENANT ACT 1985 YOU WILL SEE THE MAIN RELEVANT LEGISLATION. ANY PROPERTY CAN SUFFER FROM DAMP AND MOULD IRRESPECTIVE OF HEAT, VENTILATION AND INSULATION PROVISION IF SUFFICIENTLY ABUSED BY THE OCCUPIER.

To be honest I have found this thread of comments to be pretty unconstructive and disappointing. It’s incredibly naïve to think that there are no bad landlords who fail to provide or maintain properties to a basic standard – of course there are some bad landlords who provide sub-standard housing to vulnerable people. Just as there are some bad tenants – but just because in your experience mould is caused by tenant’s behaviour does not mean that in other cases the problem is not structural.
I HAVE TRIED TO EXPLAIN TO YOU THAT THE LANDLORD DOES NOT HAVE TO IMPROVE WHAT YOU DESCRIBE AS 'STRUCTURAL' PROBLEMS. TENANTS SHOULD THEREFORE CAREFULLY CHECK EPC BEFORE RENTING SO AS TO MAKE AN INFORMED CHOICE. LIKEWISE DONT CHOOSE A GROUND FLOOR FLAT IF YOU ARE WORRIED ABOUT SECURITY.

It’s just not helpful to characterise it as an Us v Them dynamic – there is good and bad on both sides of the fence. I would much rather have seen this forum advocate for all landlords to maintain minimum standards and to show what being a good landlord looks like, instead of denigrating entirely plausible scenarios proposed by Shelter where bad landlords exploit vulnerable tenants (even if the mock up photo may not be brilliant).
WHY THEN DONT SHELTER USE REAL PHOTOS OF REAL CONDITIONS AND TENANTS RATHER THAN STOCK PHOTOS???? A PLAUSIBLE SCENARIO IS NOT THE SAME AS A REAL ONE. AGREED BALANCE ON BOTH SIDES IS IMPORTANT BUT WHEN HAVE SHELTER SAID ANYTHING EVER THAT WAS BALANCED.

"You say that landlords should not be under an obligation to provide heating, insulation and ventilation."

HHSRS regulations set the minimum standard for properties - so yes landlords DO have to comply with certain standards. If a LL does not comply with these regs. then a tenant can call in Environmental Health who can demand the landlord complete and repair Grade 1 hazards.... If a LL does not do the work, the council have legal powers to do them and then charge the landlord and fine him.

As a good long-standing landlord I am quite shocked to read some of the other landlords comments here...