Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Flip

1 2 ··· 16 17 18 19 20 21

Original poster

to stay in current house even though landlord has asked us to leave? dilema

501 replies

arieschicke · 19/05/2015 17:13

I am a single parent with 3 dcs. 2 have complex sn.
2 months ago ll served me notice as he is selling the property. I have been trying to secure a private rental with no such luck.
The council have advised that when we leave we will be placed in bnb accommodation, then temporary house or flat share and then after approx 6 months we could be successful in bidding for a council property.
now my ll has sold the house and is exchanging contracts in 2 weeks. has asked me to leave by then. council have advised we will be placed in bnb. shelter have advised me to stay until the court evicts us, which means another 6'8 weeks here but the landlord could lose the sale.
I really can't decide what to do. any advice would be really appreciated.

OP posts:

BarbarianMum · 22/05/2015 19:02

She has a verbal offer of B&B accommodation. May not be suitable, esp as she has a child w special needs, may not be close to children's schools and no idea how accepting will affect her long term chances of getting suitable accommodation. Most importantly, nothing in writing. Hence the advice from Shelter.

pod78 · 22/05/2015 19:57

Ptolemys I really wonder why you are pursing this line of debate. If one of your family members was in the OP's situation through no fault of their own, and you as the guarantor could stump up 6 months rent in advance but it STILL made no difference in securing private rent accom; I wonder what you would advise them to do? Of course you would advise staying put until you have an offer in writing.

Posters have said that the OP is in an awful position, she said she does not want to cause her LL any difficulty but she cannot risk being on the streets with 2 children. She has NO CHOICE.

NO ONE has said this is how the system SHOULD work, but how it DOES work. Give up commenting here and use the time to write to your councillors and MP instead - it would be more productive.

CitrineRaindropPhoenix · 22/05/2015 20:03

A LL with a grain of common sense should allow at least 4 months to get a tenant out from the date on which they serve the 2 month notice because many tenants will leave at the end of the notice period, but you shouldn't be relying on that as a LL if you're trying to sell. If you really need vacant possession, you have to make sure you have sufficient time to get a court order and bailiffs etc.

Unfortunately a lot of landlords are greedy and don't realise that the s21 notice isn't an order to leave, it is a notice informing the tenant that the landlord will apply to the court for possession of the property after the expiry of the notice. The notice itself doesn't compel the tenant to leave, and the tenant can't where they need to be rehoused by the council.

I do feel sorry for the LL risking his sale, but it is only his fault he's in this position.

oddfodd · 22/05/2015 20:42

Citrine is a landlord with her head screwed on.

It's a risk. Every investment carries a risk. It's utterly pointless throwing your toys out if your investment goes tits up.

And the OP is not doing this because she's a vindictive person - she's doing it becuase it's what she's been advised to do to get the best for her children.

And I defy any of us to do the same if we were in her shoes

NoNameDame · 22/05/2015 23:11

Can't you and the LL agree (pretend) a date where he gave you notice that will mean you are evicted sooner? I.e in time for his buyers.

That way you are doing what you can to help him out without hurting your chances of getting a new house

PeppermintCrayon · 22/05/2015 23:15

Eviction is a legal process, you can't just invent dates for things.

PeppermintCrayon · 22/05/2015 23:16

It's also possible that, if the LL has assured the buyer of vacant possession without enough time to actually ensure this, the judge won't be particularly sympathetic.

NoNameDame · 22/05/2015 23:22

Apologies I thought the council were going to swoop on on the date the 2 months notice ran out and offer her accommodation.

I didn't realise it would have to go to court before the council does anything

pod78 · 22/05/2015 23:28

Sadly councils don't 'swoop' to the rescue NoNameDame!

MidniteScribbler · 23/05/2015 00:22

In this case, he's decided to wait until the last possible minute to get the op to move out because he doesn't want to forgo a couple of months rent, so he might lose the sale instead.

Or maybe the LL is not a totally heartless bastard and thought that letting the OP stay as long as he could would be the considerate thing to do. Not every LL is a total bastard, despite the bizarre parallel universe that seems to exist on MN.

Goatlington · 23/05/2015 07:59

We have no idea what the OP is like or how hard she has been trying - none whatsoever.

I'm loving how some of you automatically assume the LL is a greedy, grasping bastard and the OP is a sweet saintly victim.

No one here knows the truth at all.

But - and this is the crux of the entire thread, This is appalling for everyone involved but the landlord owns the house and has followed the law. This is why, as a private LL, I never accept DSS/HB and only let to professionals without children

For every OP , several will suffer as more and more LL simply refuse to let to HB tenants for ALL the reasons listed on this thread. That is the sad outcome.

And I'll add - the LL owns the house. He has bought it and pays for it either through his own money or by letting it out. It's possible the Op has it for free. Doesn't pay a penny of her own money as is on benefits. So not only has she benefitted from a free house for however long she know wants to stay in that free house until The State can provide her with another free house of her choosing because the free house they have pffered isn't what she wants.

And some of you reckon LL are the greedy, grasping ones....

pod78 · 23/05/2015 12:35

*"But - and this is the crux of the entire thread, This is appalling for everyone involved but the landlord owns the house and has followed the law. This is why, as a private LL, I never accept DSS/HB and only let to professionals without children

For every OP , several will suffer as more and more LL simply refuse to let to HB tenants for ALL the reasons listed on this thread. That is the sad outcome.

And some of you reckon LL are the greedy, grasping ones...."*

and with one message, Goat sums up everything that is wrong with some people...

and if you change the sentence slightly - the landlord doesn't pay a penny of his/her own money as the tenant pays for it. So not only has the LL benefitted from a free house for however long as the LL can get a tenant to pay for it..

Some people actually think that landlording counts as 'earning' money. It is just shameless profiteering in so many cases.

I'm sure Goat is just waiting for oxygen to be privatised so he/she can get a piece of that 'investment' too.

Goatlington · 23/05/2015 13:10

Nope - the LL BUYS the house with his/her own money. Takes the risks, takes the gambles and rides out the highs and lows of the market. He pays his mortagage from the rent paid by teh taxpayer on behalf of the tenant.

The tenant gets a free house courtesy of the taxpayer. End of.

expatinscotland · 23/05/2015 13:24

'The tenant gets a free house courtesy of the taxpayer. End of.'

PMSL! The tenant has no asset. The LL gets a second or subsequent home courtesy of the taxpayer or tenant. End of.

Goatlington · 23/05/2015 13:35

Then both are winners under the present system and the taxpayer is the loser.

PtolemysNeedle · 23/05/2015 13:39

You don't end up with an asset when you pay to stay in a hotel either, you pay to stay there temporarily, just like when you pay rent.

LaLyra · 23/05/2015 13:45

This is why, as a private LL, I never accept DSS/HB and only let to professionals without children

Good luck with that. The longest running, and worst, issue I had with a tenant was a "professional" couple without children who then had a baby and decided to make a play for a council house by him moving out and her pretending to be single. It took months and cost me a fortune.

My 2nd worst tenant was a professional who lost their job and stopped paying. Again it took me as far as court to get them out.

People's situations change. Landlords take risks with EVERY tenant. Putting blanket bans on HB is madness from a LL's pov imo. One of the best tenants I ever had was a lady who worked and then had to give it up when her baby had significant needs. She had a terrible time finding a new place (mine is up 3 flights of stairs) when the time came to leave which was madness to me. She had been with me for 5 years, never a problem, rent always paid on time and, to be very blunt, she wasn't going back to work because her child was always going to need 24 hour care so she was far less of a risk than someone who could get sacked or made redundant.

I never understand LL's who don't deal with tenants on a case-by-case basis because those who pay 'their own' rent are just as unreliable as those on HB, sometimes more so. The only time I'd say it was reasonable to have a complete ban would be if a LL's mortgage banned it (although you are on slippy ground if your tenant gets made redundant or hit by a bus midway through).

Kvetch15 · 23/05/2015 13:47

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

LaLyra · 23/05/2015 13:48

Also if the OP's LL delayed the S21 to benefit her by giving her the longest time possible then it shows they are an inexperienced LL or a LL who hasn't bothered to find out how things work.

As a LL you NEED to know how your local council deal with people. You should be well aware that a tenant who can't work due to caring responsibilities is likely to struggle to find another let and therefore you should be aware of how the council deal with homelessness.

expatinscotland · 23/05/2015 13:51

'You don't end up with an asset when you pay to stay in a hotel either, you pay to stay there temporarily, just like when you pay rent.'

And when you rent that space, the hotelier cannot come in and start showing it around to other potential visitors whilst you are in it.

LapsedTwentysomething · 23/05/2015 13:55

Not rtt, but as a landlord wanting to sell, I gave notice and waited for the tenant to leave before putting the property on the market. It was the only way to guarantee vacancy upon possession. OP your landlord has compromised their own sale here by selling the property whole it was still occupied. It would be easy to feel guilty here, but really, you're doing your best and you shouldn't.

Goatlington · 23/05/2015 13:56

Well actually, they can do what the hell they like as a hotelier - much more than a LL can.

And the Op should know her rights in which case to say no to allowing potential buyers around.

StupidBloodyKindle · 23/05/2015 14:37

My tenant pays the interest on my mortgage not the capital, we are trying to do that (could only afford an interest only mortgage). By the time I add in the maintenance, letting agent fee of 15% +vat, repairs, and insurance, I am breaking even or making a loss but the actual capital is being paid off by me slowly
This thread is chasing its own tail. Everyone knows the score...by tarring all LL as big bad evil profit making bastards or HB as feckless lazy spongey scroungers neither of you are getting anywhere. The OP has a guarantor, 6 months rent in advance but a shitty credit rating (due to having credit card debt when out of work due to caring for SEN dc, having worked for three decades) The council's verbal promise means nowt unless it is on paper. There for the grace of God.
End of.

StupidBloodyKindle · 23/05/2015 14:42

Oh, and whilst you may still hate us or claim we are incompetent, 'accidental' landlords do NOT have a second home.
They are renting out their ONLY home. accepts has to detach from thinking of let house as being home

lotsofcheese · 23/05/2015 15:10

And let's not forget that LL's pay tax on any profits they make if they are lucky enough to make any.

Anyone who thinks BTL or accidental landlords are rolling in it are sadly delusional

Flip

1 2 ··· 16 17 18 19 20 21