Tenants won’t move out…how does this work?

[SisforSarah]

Explain to me how this works please. Tenants moved in 2 years ago, it was a long let. The landlord served notice over 6 months ago. They can’t find anywhere else to rent or buy (they are in a particularly busy property hotspot) so are refusing to leave indefinitely, and apparently that’s legal. So the landlord can’t sell his property and benefit from the inflated prices, or move back into his house. How long can they stay there? I’m a bit dumbstruck at this? What would happen if the landlord needed the money from the house sale for something else? Would he be forced to remortgage? I am neither this tenant or landlord or a tenant or landlord of any other property.

Regards rent increases, on a periodic tenancy the landlord can increase the rent annually.

[quote mercimacherie]@LoislovesStewie

So to be clear, you believe that every single tenancy can only be legally ended by the landlord taking the tenants to court? You don't think that a correctly drawn up and signed by both parties tenancy agreement (contract) is legally binding? [/quote]
Why so keen do pretend landlord/tenant law doesn't exist?

Yes I went through the courts to be evicted under a section 22 and I paid my rent on time throughout

*do=to

@SpittinKitten

I'm fully aware of the law, my point is it is not normal behaviour for tenants to refuse to move out after being given notice. If the notice is in accordance with the tenancy agreement, which they have read, presumably understood and signed why do they feel the entitlement to break that agreement?

A tenancy is a business arrangement, if the tenant knows they will want to remain at a property for years they could ask the LL if they would agree to a longterm fixed tenancy. If they are on a periodic they should be aware that they can be asked to leave, with relatively short notice. Having to take a tenant to court is not in anyones best interests and could prevent the tenant from finding another landlord willing to rent to them, I certainly wouldn't.

can't believe how many emotions some bring to their investment choice. To decide to retain an asset or try to make some money by letting a property comes with risks. Empty properties can develop problems and letting a property comes with potential problems.

However, to be ignorant of the fact that local authorities will tell a tenant to stay put for the usual 12 months to eviction is not any indication of how “decent or nice” the tenant is. It is how the system works. Stating you’ll give them a bad reference is neither here nor there as everyone else understands that’s how the system works – it doesn’t indicate anything other than the tenant may have lost their job/marriage breakup/drop in salary/ill-health/mental health issues/addiction/pandemic…etc etc

Anything that can happen in life can happen to a tenant and the Tenancy Agreement offers no protection against the above scenarios as the local authority will tell the tenant to stay put until courts evict them. If the landlord tries to forcibly evict then there are legal consequences.

Life happens and a decent landlord takes it in their stride – woman’s husband decided to run off and live single life leaving mother and children for example. To access local authority support for housing the mother will have to stay put until eviction. Someone’s mental health slides and potential past addition comes into play, lose job etc Everyone involved understands this is part and parcel of becoming a landlord, if you don’t you’ve been lucky until now (but as with all investments: past returns in no way predict future returns). Do not imagine a Tenancy Agreement provides protection from the above.

I wonder if they regularly turn up outside Fund Managers offices to berate the losses of a particular investment fund etc – or is it just those they perceive to be “lesser” than them ie. “tenants” that they’re “loaning” a property to that deserve to have their morals questions? It’s an investment, grow up and if you can’t hack the losses with the returns then it’s clearly not the investment for you. Lots of landlords swallow losses and don’t believe it puts them in a position to determine any tenant’s moral fortitude based on the circumstances they find themselves in. It’s a rather revealing quality to think like this, but in real life it does help the rest of us to steer clear.

@Marmaladeagain

can't believe how many emotions some bring to their investment choice. To decide to retain an asset or try to make some money by letting a property comes with risks. Empty properties can develop problems and letting a property comes with potential problems.

However, to be ignorant of the fact that local authorities will tell a tenant to stay put for the usual 12 months to eviction is not any indication of how “decent or nice” the tenant is. It is how the system works. Stating you’ll give them a bad reference is neither here nor there as everyone else understands that’s how the system works – it doesn’t indicate anything other than the tenant may have lost their job/marriage breakup/drop in salary/ill-health/mental health issues/addiction/pandemic…etc etc

Anything that can happen in life can happen to a tenant and the Tenancy Agreement offers no protection against the above scenarios as the local authority will tell the tenant to stay put until courts evict them. If the landlord tries to forcibly evict then there are legal consequences.

Life happens and a decent landlord takes it in their stride – woman’s husband decided to run off and live single life leaving mother and children for example. To access local authority support for housing the mother will have to stay put until eviction. Someone’s mental health slides and potential past addition comes into play, lose job etc Everyone involved understands this is part and parcel of becoming a landlord, if you don’t you’ve been lucky until now (but as with all investments: past returns in no way predict future returns). Do not imagine a Tenancy Agreement provides protection from the above.

I wonder if they regularly turn up outside Fund Managers offices to berate the losses of a particular investment fund etc – or is it just those they perceive to be “lesser” than them ie. “tenants” that they’re “loaning” a property to that deserve to have their morals questions? It’s an investment, grow up and if you can’t hack the losses with the returns then it’s clearly not the investment for you. Lots of landlords swallow losses and don’t believe it puts them in a position to determine any tenant’s moral fortitude based on the circumstances they find themselves in. It’s a rather revealing quality to think like this, but in real life it does help the rest of us to steer clear.

My landlord/agency were great when I had to go eviction route. I used to phone them to see if there were any update they would let me know what things meant when I got letters etc. They never made me feel bad in anyway. They just saw it as that's how the system is. I managed to sorted it out so we were not moving furniture etc out whilst there was a bailiff watching over us. I managed to get all our stuff into storage the day before and for one night we just slept on a mattress/ blow up bed. So first thing in the morning of eviction day we just went to the council we already had the paper work . So I just posted keys through the letter box never even saw the bailiff.

The scary part is the unknown as you don't know where your sleeping that night. But if you have an understanding landlord who knows they system it makes a massive difference.

Also where people are saying offer money that does not help someone having to use eviction route.

that's good to hear generalpost and yes generally any landlord that has cirtical thinking skills would have researched a bit of landlord and tenant law prior to investing ££s. They would not be under the misguided concept that they're "loaning" someone use of something and get it back as and when they demand. Also having luck in the past doesn't mean it won't happen to them in the future, it's the risk of being a landlord.

I agree throwing money at it doesn't work either and not particularly good advice when a tenant is waiting for the eviction process to complete.

The threat of "well I won't let the property out and I'll give a bad reference". That's all to the good as they shouldn't be a landlord in first place.

It is entirely that type of landlord that causes no end of grief for everyone (including poor unsuspecting people exposed to such unpleasant thought processes on forums). Would be nice to imagine such thinking died out in Victorian days with insights upon morals by their lack of financial "luck" , unbelievable. Where's the workhouses when you need them?

Take the risk, swallow the losses or don't be a landlord. Simple.

What rankles is having to spend money to get your property back. It's ridiculously expensive to evict a tenant who ignores requests to go at the end of the agreed term.

Court costs should be awarded against the tenant, perhaps.

As I said, with one exception, we've had lovely tenants and a good relationship with them. The exception has a CCJ against them for damage caused. I wish we could have got back court costs as well.

@DancesWithTortoises but notice is legally letting a tenant know you can evict them through the courts if they don't leave. Not that they HAVE leave. Councils encourage tenants not to leave until this point. They're technically not doing anything wrong by not leaving. It's a risk you take when you decide to get into running a lettings business

@MeAndDebbieMcGee

They can stay until court ordered eviction is enforced. How long that takes depends how busy the court is.

But the tenancy continues until the court ends it. They'll have to pay rent ofc so all is not lost.

If the tenants are anything like some here the landlord will be vary lucky to see rent without a separate eg small claims court action .