Why serve a Section 21 notice just after a tenancy agreement has started?

Reply to the comment left by "Paul Barrett" at "05/08/2013 - 21:19":

It's not wise to keep admitting that on a public forum Paul. You may well be technically insolvent but clearly it pays for you to hold onto your properties for as long as possible, otherwise you would have simply thrown the towel in already. I suspect you've not done that on the basis that your properties provide some positive cashflow? If not why bother?

Just bear in mind that a creditor could bring this to an end for you by serving a statutory demand. If you don't then pay up within 21 days they could then declare you bankrupt. Don't think people wont do this purely out of spite if you annoy them enough. I personally bankrupted a person once for that reason. It cost me nearly £3,000 including fees and I knew that my chances of recovering any money was zero. For me it was a matter of principle at that stage, the person I bankrupted was very smug and believed nobody would "pull the trigger". Well he was wrong! My point is this Paul, I know you post in your own name and you've even gone as far as posting your personal address in the past. Just be careful, you never know who is reading your posts.

Reply to the comment left by "Mark Alexander" at "05/08/2013 - 21:39":

To serve a SD you have to accept the order.
I avoid them like all other court actions; they haven't succeeded yet.!!
But I accept your point and will in future refrain from 'doing myself down'
Wise advise!
Perhaps i was over egging the situation; but IR only have to reach 4.29 % and that's me bankrupt!
Or rather just walk away and leave the lender to sort it al out.
So I'll keep squeezing the positive cashflow as long as I can until the inevitable
I know I will be in good company if IR go to that level.
Many thousands of LL will have the same situation as me.
The CC has still not been teased out of the economy.
We are the ZOMBIE LL!!!!
I'll keep doing the lottery though!!
There will be lots of worried tenants out there.

Reply to the comment left by "Paul Barrett" at "05/08/2013 - 22:02":

I don't think tenants have any reason to worry, there will still be the same number of properties. Remember Paul, I was a landlord in the early 90's when a similar thing happened. The cash rich snapped up a load of bargains and became the sup rich. Lenders soon got wise and stopped selling properties at auction for peanuts, instead they formed housing trusts under special tax breaks which they secured for themselves. From memory the largest was called Quality Street which was put together by the Nationwide building society. Many home owners and tenants were able to remain in their properties as a result. The losses all came out in the wash when the market eventually recovered.
.

Reply to the comment left by "Mark Alexander" at "05/08/2013 - 22:20":

Do you think there is enough cash out there for similar situation to occur.
Are we not in a new paradigm where lenders won't lend and there is not enough cash to buy all the duff properties that LL give up on.
What is the effect on a bank's capital requirements if they take on loads of their own duff properties etc, etc.
I doubt it will be as easy as it was last time.
Otherwise lenders would NOT have exercised forbearance which they clearly have done this time.
I don't think they did this last time.
And perhaps with low IR being signalled by the BOE, perhaps LL will be able to hang on!!!

Reply to the comment left by "Paul Barrett" at "05/08/2013 - 22:34":

There are more regulations in place now Paul, that's why lenders have exercised forbearance. It's nothing to do with lending or availability of funds.

Many landlords are surviving due to low interest rates as you have suggested. I personally feel there is a fighting chance for property values to recover before base rates hit 4% again.

The causalities will peak as we come out of recession, they always do, history has taught us that. Lenders will refuse to take a hit on capital values if they possibly can, save for those which have already benefited from the right off's on their balance sheets. That said, even these lenders stand to gain more by playing the waiting game. In the meantime, expect them to continue to pick off a few targets to show their teeth and prove they shouldn't be messed with.
.

Reply to the comment left by "Mark Alexander" at "05/08/2013 - 23:02":

I see your point; but waiting in the wings waiting to destroy a bank's capital on their mortgage lending is IO mortgages; those with endowment mortgages with insufficient funds to pay down the mortgage.
The answer is to sell up; but all these properties coming on the market would have a depressive effect and who would be able to buy all these expensive properties in the South.
Prices would have to be substantially reduced.to be affordable by present day purchasers.
The ONLY way my mother was able to sell her very expensive house was to sell to doctors with 2 big wages coming in and family to assist.
The demographic of such purchasers is NOT white British.
I don't think it will be that easy to sell and banks will struggle to retain capital values.
I reckon the fall out will be about in 8 years time.
A certain buying opportunity for cash buyers but certainly not enough of them to preserve bank's capital values; unless banks extend the mortgage terms to assist those long term IO mortgages.
Essentially a Japanese situation.
I've never understood why a bank wants a mortgage paid until death occurs or to even pas it on to siblings if they can afford the payments.
We know why because the govt wants to get its hands on the capital value of the property.

Reply to the comment left by "Mary Latham" at "31/07/2013 - 20:21":

If, as you say, the tenancy rolls into a periodic and the section 21 has no shelf life when and if you wish to write to the tenant giving notice to quit relying on the original section 21 on file, how much notice are you legally obliged to give.

The notice is the s.21 notice. You can start court proceedings at any time after the notice has expired without further notice.

Yes, s.21 is rather odd...

Reply to the comment left by " " at "05/08/2013 - 23:22":

Copy pasted from deleted profile poster above.
"The ONLY way my mother was able to sell her very expensive house was to sell to doctors with 2 big wages coming in and family to assist.
The demographic of such purchasers is NOT white British.
I don’t think it will be that easy to sell and banks will struggle to retain capital values."

Taking the middle sentence and the sub-educationally normal use of capitals, this is an offensive comment.
It may have been on the borderline of acceptable, if it had been explained.
Instead, the poster chose to delete his profile and run n hide.
--

Not white? so what.

Money is money and the buyers were professional.

Reply to the comment left by "Romain " at "23/09/2013 - 12:49":

While Romain is quite right, the pragmatic approach is to keep communication open with your tenant and attempt to give them as much notice as possible before you plough down the court route. May even save the landlord time and money if the tenants co-operate. It is different if your tenant is a PITA and you want them out asap but good tenants deserve a little lee-way. If I was a tenant on the receiving end of a s21 court application in these circumstances then I would be fighting like hell NOT to have the £175 court fee awarded against me.