Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

AIBU to ask tenants to move before or after new baby?

319 replies

CatWithAPetDog · 30/05/2026 15:09

We are landlords and have a property that our son would like to move into at some point in the next year. Our current tenants have a toddler and have just told me that they are expecting another baby in November.

If you were the tenant, would you prefer to have to move out whilst pregnant or with a young baby. I know it’s not great timing for them either way, but which would you say would be easier? We can wait a while as long as my son is moved in this time next year, but then they would have a toddler and six month old baby, so it may be easier to do it sooner with just a toddler?

They’ve been good tenants so I would like to cause them the least stress possible.

Sorry forgot to make boring make sense

YABU - Get them to move before the new baby arrives

YANBU - Get them to move after the new baby arrives

OP posts:
Datafan55 · 30/05/2026 20:08

Unnecessaryletter · 30/05/2026 19:51

We're obviously coming at this from different angles. You believe that security is only 'earned' if you own a property. I disagree and don't see at all why that has to be true. I'm not saying landlords should be restricted or unable to deal with bad tenants, but I think 'I want to do something else with my investment now' isn't more important than the fact it's someone else's home. It's a policy choice that doesn't exist to this degree in other countries. I'm sure renters rights will be rolled back again, anyway, in the coming years, so I wouldn't worry.

A renter should not be going into the transaction with the attitude of 'It's mine now and they can't do what they want with the place anymore'.

Honestly, I am shocked at the entitlement of people.

Unnecessaryletter · 30/05/2026 20:08

YourPoliteTurtle · 30/05/2026 19:57

I am not worried either, but when you see how many landlords are selling , or simply keeping the property empty, and how harder is it to find a rental already, I think the ones who will lose out are not the landlords.

Being a landlord if you are unable to sell and adapt to your life circumstances only works for the really wealthy.

Being a tenant has so many positives, it's cheeky to expect to have all the positives of being the owner as well, but without any of the negatives.

I don't think tenants cheekily expect all the benefits of ownership, but I do think if we have a huge population of tenants in this country, they should be able to expect long-term security. Having a secure home is a pretty fundamental 'human right', surely, and if the UK can't get its act together sufficinetly to make home-ownership possible for all (which wasn't even so much of a national obsession until Thatcher!), then it needs to sort out the system so renters can have this right, too.

Renters are not failures or wasters. Many (increasinly young people, and plenty of decent earners) have been let down by the shit system we are running.

YourPoliteTurtle · 30/05/2026 19:57

Unnecessaryletter · 30/05/2026 19:51

We're obviously coming at this from different angles. You believe that security is only 'earned' if you own a property. I disagree and don't see at all why that has to be true. I'm not saying landlords should be restricted or unable to deal with bad tenants, but I think 'I want to do something else with my investment now' isn't more important than the fact it's someone else's home. It's a policy choice that doesn't exist to this degree in other countries. I'm sure renters rights will be rolled back again, anyway, in the coming years, so I wouldn't worry.

I am not worried either, but when you see how many landlords are selling , or simply keeping the property empty, and how harder is it to find a rental already, I think the ones who will lose out are not the landlords.

Being a landlord if you are unable to sell and adapt to your life circumstances only works for the really wealthy.

Being a tenant has so many positives, it's cheeky to expect to have all the positives of being the owner as well, but without any of the negatives.

EmeraldShamrock000 · 30/05/2026 19:57

NoWordForFluffy · 30/05/2026 19:56

RTFT.

MYOB.

NoWordForFluffy · 30/05/2026 19:56

EmeraldShamrock000 · 30/05/2026 19:54

Tell them now to give them plenty of time to prepare for the move. I would give them 6 months notice.

RTFT.

EmeraldShamrock000 · 30/05/2026 19:54

Tell them now to give them plenty of time to prepare for the move. I would give them 6 months notice.

Unnecessaryletter · 30/05/2026 19:51

YourPoliteTurtle · 30/05/2026 18:55

WHY should they have security? You have a yearly lease, you commit for a year. Should tenants be stuck in the property equally, or should they keep the right to move out when they want/ need?

Freedom and flexibility must work both ways. Both tenants and landlords need to be able to come out of the agreement legally but without months and months of fight.

If you want a permanent home, buy one? Then accept to pay all the costs that go with it.

We're obviously coming at this from different angles. You believe that security is only 'earned' if you own a property. I disagree and don't see at all why that has to be true. I'm not saying landlords should be restricted or unable to deal with bad tenants, but I think 'I want to do something else with my investment now' isn't more important than the fact it's someone else's home. It's a policy choice that doesn't exist to this degree in other countries. I'm sure renters rights will be rolled back again, anyway, in the coming years, so I wouldn't worry.

Sirzy · 30/05/2026 19:48

Sounds perfect for everyone then!

meercat23 · 30/05/2026 19:46

Glad it has worked out well for you and for your tenants. OP I think you did exactly the right thing by talking to them and by allowing them to move as soon as it suits them. Great result all round.

CatWithAPetDog · 30/05/2026 19:33

I can see that people are arguing with each other over the rights and wrongs of landlords but just a quick update for anyone interested.

I went to see my tenants and they were absolutely fine about it. It turns out they are planning to move closer to one of their sets of parents soon so that they can help with childcare when their baby is born. They have already started to look at properties so were going to give their notice soon anyway. I feel really relieved.

There is a chance that they can move into a bigger property, a 4 bed, within a couple of weeks and I’ve agreed that if that’s possible, they should go for it.

Thanks everyone!

OP posts:
Dollysleftnip · 30/05/2026 19:16

narnia2025 · 30/05/2026 19:14

we are on more then that at the moment.
i don’t smoke
i don’t drink
I also rarely hug myself clothes or go out out, get my done etc

stilll wouldn’t be able to afford a mortgage. Would definitely not been able to when I had no kids either.

You need to go and see a Mortgage Advisor then cause I can assure you you most definitely could afford a Mortgage
But you’ll have to make sacrifices along the way and you’re probably not up for that

narnia2025 · 30/05/2026 19:14

Dollysleftnip · 30/05/2026 19:09

That’s 1800 disposable income after bills
Put the vape’s away, stop drinking and you’ll soon be able to cobble it together
As two single working adult adults with no other expenses because you’re doing this before you have children remember

we are on more then that at the moment.
i don’t smoke
i don’t drink
I also rarely hug myself clothes or go out out, get my done etc

stilll wouldn’t be able to afford a mortgage. Would definitely not been able to when I had no kids either.

Dollysleftnip · 30/05/2026 19:09

narnia2025 · 30/05/2026 19:02

rwht around here 1500 and with council tax and bill. There is a very good chance peoples outgoings are over 2k a month.

it can be very difficult for people to save.

That’s 1800 disposable income after bills
Put the vape’s away, stop drinking and you’ll soon be able to cobble it together
As two single working adult adults with no other expenses because you’re doing this before you have children remember

Dollysleftnip · 30/05/2026 19:07

TheDrswife · 30/05/2026 19:04

‘In charge of an infant’ needs a house because…?

You’re of the opinion that babies don’t need anywhere to live ?

I’m sure there’s 1 million problems that you can find for every solution offered. But if a couple cannot find £277 per month of disposable income on the take-home pay of minimum wage which I believe is £1900 after tax.
So £3800 minimum between them
And they can’t cobble together 555 quid then the bad parents and they shouldn’t be parents
But most importantly, they’re making their own lives difficult and it’s not the OP’s problem or any other landlords

TheDrswife · 30/05/2026 19:04

‘In charge of an infant’ needs a house because…?

TheDrswife · 30/05/2026 19:03

Dollysleftnip · 30/05/2026 19:00

Several major UK lenders offer mortgages requiring a minimum deposit of just £5,000 (a flat £5k rather than a percentage), specifically designed for first-time buyers. 1, 2]
Providers offering this deal include:
Lloyds Bank: Lloyds Bank £5k Deposit Mortgage
Halifax: Halifax £5k Deposit Mortgage
Yorkshire Building Society (YBS): Yorkshire Building Society £5k Deposit Mortgage
Accord Mortgages: Accord Mortgages £5k Deposit Mortgage 1, 2, 3, 4, 5]

babies don’t arrive with the stork, if you can’t save £5000 over nine months between two working adult adults you really shouldn’t be allowed to be in charge of an infant.

Gosh. If you’re so blind to reality then you shouldn’t be posting. Many, many people have £0 to put upfront, never mind £1000sss

narnia2025 · 30/05/2026 19:02

Dollysleftnip · 30/05/2026 19:00

Several major UK lenders offer mortgages requiring a minimum deposit of just £5,000 (a flat £5k rather than a percentage), specifically designed for first-time buyers. 1, 2]
Providers offering this deal include:
Lloyds Bank: Lloyds Bank £5k Deposit Mortgage
Halifax: Halifax £5k Deposit Mortgage
Yorkshire Building Society (YBS): Yorkshire Building Society £5k Deposit Mortgage
Accord Mortgages: Accord Mortgages £5k Deposit Mortgage 1, 2, 3, 4, 5]

babies don’t arrive with the stork, if you can’t save £5000 over nine months between two working adult adults you really shouldn’t be allowed to be in charge of an infant.

rwht around here 1500 and with council tax and bill. There is a very good chance peoples outgoings are over 2k a month.

it can be very difficult for people to save.

Dollysleftnip · 30/05/2026 19:00

TheDrswife · 30/05/2026 18:58

And they get the deposit from…….?

Several major UK lenders offer mortgages requiring a minimum deposit of just £5,000 (a flat £5k rather than a percentage), specifically designed for first-time buyers. 1, 2]
Providers offering this deal include:
Lloyds Bank: Lloyds Bank £5k Deposit Mortgage
Halifax: Halifax £5k Deposit Mortgage
Yorkshire Building Society (YBS): Yorkshire Building Society £5k Deposit Mortgage
Accord Mortgages: Accord Mortgages £5k Deposit Mortgage 1, 2, 3, 4, 5]

babies don’t arrive with the stork, if you can’t save £5000 over nine months between two working adult adults you really shouldn’t be allowed to be in charge of an infant.

Halifax - Internet Banking - Error

https://www.halifax.co.uk/mortgages/first-time-buyers/5k-deposit-mortgage.html

TheDrswife · 30/05/2026 18:58

Dollysleftnip · 30/05/2026 17:07

Then this is the price they pay
But actually its bull shit.
Two adults on minimum wage could secure a mortgage for £200,000

And they get the deposit from…….?

narnia2025 · 30/05/2026 18:56

YourPoliteTurtle · 30/05/2026 18:55

WHY should they have security? You have a yearly lease, you commit for a year. Should tenants be stuck in the property equally, or should they keep the right to move out when they want/ need?

Freedom and flexibility must work both ways. Both tenants and landlords need to be able to come out of the agreement legally but without months and months of fight.

If you want a permanent home, buy one? Then accept to pay all the costs that go with it.

Yearly leases do not exist anymore they are now rolling contracts

YourPoliteTurtle · 30/05/2026 18:55

Unnecessaryletter · 30/05/2026 18:26

The existence of bad tenants doesn't really explain why someone who's paid on time and looked after the property for years should have little security. That's more an argument for a system that can deal with bad tenants properly than an argument against giving good tenants greater security.

WHY should they have security? You have a yearly lease, you commit for a year. Should tenants be stuck in the property equally, or should they keep the right to move out when they want/ need?

Freedom and flexibility must work both ways. Both tenants and landlords need to be able to come out of the agreement legally but without months and months of fight.

If you want a permanent home, buy one? Then accept to pay all the costs that go with it.

Monty36 · 30/05/2026 18:55

In answer to the question which I am amazed the OP has to ask, is to give them as much notice as you possibly can. Not the least amount of time.
Be very sure as someone else said that your son is going to be moving in.
Give them a good reference.

Unnecessaryletter · 30/05/2026 18:26

YourPoliteTurtle · 30/05/2026 18:19

then landlords need more right and faster help to deal with bad tenants.

Security of tenure might work well with landlords like the Duke of Westminster, but it's just impossible for non-wealthy people. Not everybody can afford to keep properties and tenants, life happens, people need to sell.

No landlord protection, and no way to get rid of bad payers/ bad tenants is a terrible idea, and everybody loses out in the long term.

If the market was more flexible, tenants would find it easier to rent right now for a start.

The existence of bad tenants doesn't really explain why someone who's paid on time and looked after the property for years should have little security. That's more an argument for a system that can deal with bad tenants properly than an argument against giving good tenants greater security.

T1mesAreHardForDreamers · 30/05/2026 18:25

YourPoliteTurtle · 30/05/2026 18:19

then landlords need more right and faster help to deal with bad tenants.

Security of tenure might work well with landlords like the Duke of Westminster, but it's just impossible for non-wealthy people. Not everybody can afford to keep properties and tenants, life happens, people need to sell.

No landlord protection, and no way to get rid of bad payers/ bad tenants is a terrible idea, and everybody loses out in the long term.

If the market was more flexible, tenants would find it easier to rent right now for a start.

But these concerns have been addressed?

I dont know why people are pretending like the end of no fault evictions means it's impossible to get your property back.

Section 8 evictions are still an option and the same law that has strengthened tenants rights have streamlined the section 8 process.

Monty36 · 30/05/2026 18:23

Once lovely houses are turned into houses of multiple occupancy. All for money.
People convince themselves they are some sort of social saviours if landlords.
They are not. They do it for profit.
I wish there were more council houses. Or cheaper houses to buy.