Roommate to Rogue – Landlord faces £24k debt on Nightmare Tenants Slum Landlords

Watch Paul tonight on channel 5 9pm if you can readers 🙂

Don't forget catch up TV if you are out too 😉

Well I watched it.

What I saw was the following.

I saw a landlord that was first live in, then live out, then live in again, then live out again, a house in total disrepair, a landlord that has no management structure in place and then expected his tenants to ignore the state of the place.

A very expensive issue of a section 8 notice, then the landlord arriving back at nighttime for what he claimed were his own belongings, without giving written notice of his intended visit.
This guy was indeed owed rent, but he was asking for what he got.
I thought HMO's in Manchester and London had to be licensed, how the hell did that pass any inspection?

Then he ignored advice and issued his guests new tenancy agreements.

Then we saw the Asian lady get ripped off and have her canary wharf property trashed.
I have some sympathy for her - but we never saw her tenant.

I then saw the police in Manchester ignore tenant harassment, (saying it was a civil matter) and Shelter do nothing about an illegal eviction.

The we had the squatters in the old swimming baths that turned it into a refugee centre for smack heads and drunks and an eviction system that is completely busted.

Apart from the entertainment value, what is the purpose of this programme?

Does our Housing or Justice Minister ever watch this sort of stuff?
If not, why not?

The eviction system is a complete mess.
The prevention from Eviction Act is ignored by some Police forces.
Shelter are a useless
Some landlords should be in prison for harassment.
Some tenants should be in the cells with them.

I haven't watched it yet, but I'm somewhat puzzled by the above account of the "live in then live out then live in again(?)" landlord... If a resident landlord moves out COMPLETELY, the renters then have exclusive possession - that is, they cease to just be licensees, and they become tenants.

However, it's possible to remain a resident landlord provided the property remains your MAIN home AND you spend some of your time there, but I fail to see how this is possible if you're living abroad (unless "abroad" is the Irish Republic or just over the Channel and you come back often). I have heard of HMO landlords using the HMO as their main home, but maintaining their real home as a second home elsewhere, to keep control and enable them to quickly get rid of trouble makers, as licensees are obviously much easier to evict than tenants.

If the landlord in question did completely move out, he can't then re-assume his resident landlord status, and therefore can't legally re-enter the property without the tenants' permission.

As the owner of a lodger advice website, I have often come across this scenario (where a landlord moves out or just spends a lot of time away and lodger tries to assume possession of the property). It goes without saying that ANY landlord needs to thoroughly reference someone they will rent to, but if you're a resident landlord who spends time away from home, this is particularly important, as is being very clear with your lodger and others about when you will return.

Reply to the comment left by "Mandy Thomson" at "07/04/2016 - 11:10":

Hello Mandy,

Watch the programme and it will all make sense.

The guy couldn't make his mind up on what he was.
You needed the wisdom of Solomon to figure out both sides of the story.

Reply to the comment left by "Gary Dully" at "08/04/2016 - 01:35":

Hi Gary

I watched it, thanks.

The landlord believed himself to be a resident landlord, and Landlord Action obviously agreed, or they wouldn't have attended while he entered the property.

However, his renters were regularly referred to as "tenants". While this is a common and understandable mistake made by people outside housing and property, as the programme was being produced on behalf of Landlord Action, I expected the legal position to be accurately presented, and legal terms respected and explained, which are more than semantics in that context.

The programme also failed to explain that a resident landlord wouldn't ordinarily need to resort to having notice served by eviction specialists (that particular landlord had obviously done it because his lodger's were so aggressive). Where living accommodation (bathroom and kitchen) is shared with the landlord, a renter is a licensee and is only entitled to "reasonable" notice to quit, with no Court order required to enforce. In the case of that lot, the 28 days notice being given was far too generous IMHO.

I can imagine a lot of people who were thinking of renting out their spare rooms throwing their hands up in horror imagining they'll get the lodger from Hell and they'll take over their house!

Leaving aside the landlord's apparent stupidity in not only allowing the "renters" to remain, but actually granting them another...what? Tenancy? Again, is this just lazy research and script writing, or was the landlord actually moving out and granting them exclusive possession of the property as full tenants??! On further thought, I wonder if they'd blackmailed him?

The lodgers were claiming they withheld rent because the landlord failed to maintain the property. A resident landlord is not subject to the repairing obligations that a landlord under an AST is bound by. A lodger landlord is (like any occupier of a property or space) in regard to repairs, simply subject to the Occupiers Liability Act 1957 that says reasonable precautions must be taken to ensure premises of any kind are as safe for visitors as possible under the circumstances (although resident landlords do need to comply to some degree with the same health and safety legislation as "regular" landlords, such as gas safety certificates).

Even with the 5 lodgers, I don't believe the landlord was in violation of HMO regulations either, as the house seemed too small (under 3 storeys) to be subject to mandatory HMO licensing, and the London Borough of Enfield is not subject to additional HMO licensing, following Constantinos Regas' successful Court challenge against Enfield's proposed additional and selective licensing schemes. For the record, I've met Constantinos a few times and I know for a fact he would NOT approve of the bedsit depicted in the programme.

In the case of the lady and child threatened with illegal eviction, I was glad to see them re-housed, and Shelter did good by sourcing the property, but I couldn't help but wonder at Shelter making use of a landlord or letting agent when it suits them, without acknowledging the fact that most private landlords and agents are decent and giving credit where due...

While I agree that the programme is mostly for entertainment value, there are other programmes about landlord and tenant issues, I’m thinking of The Housing Enforcer in particular, that usually only tell the tenant’s side of the story, whereas at least Nightmare Tenants, Rogue Landlords shows both sides, which is much needed with increasing demonisation of landlords.