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.

Flip

1 2 3 4

Original poster

Is this legal (posting for traffic)?

97 replies

Anywhichway123 · 30/12/2016 12:28

Trying to move from our privately rented 1 bed flat to a 2/3 bed and we keep being told 'no children'. I can understand no pets but no children. Who rents a 3 bed house for just 2 people. Is this even legal? I live in the South East.

We're both professionals, trying to save to buy so renting atm.

Both our children are house trained!

We would look after the property because not only are we respectable and respectful we want to live in a nice home! We would replace, repair or redecorate anything that was needed before we moved out.

OP posts:

sirfredfredgeorge · 02/01/2017 09:41

What sort of weird tenancy contract would you be using the "dog kept in breach" part of it to get someone out, rather than an appropriate notice, it sounds like an excuse attempting to be used for other reasons.

It should be difficult for such a minor point to cause immediate possession (as opposed to the damage - ie extra cost incurred) So the courts are acting correct here I'd say, just as you can't force people into contracts, breaches of them do not end the entire contract.

lovelearning · 02/01/2017 09:47

a much wider problem with housing in this country

On the Today programme this morning, Dame Kate Barker spoke of Britain's housing shortage:

"the population is rising"

Andrewofgg · 02/01/2017 12:18

If you want to keep the house, garden and furniture which you own and intend to go renting out free of pet hair, smells, damage, and shit it's not a minor point. It's not as if that was a difficult clause to comply with. Just don't get a pet.

BBCNewsRave · 02/01/2017 13:44

Andrew Could that be because to the LL it is an investment, not a home?
Well, yeh. What are you getting at?

Liiinoo But we now have an investment property and I would rather leave it empty than rent to a family with children or pets.

Oh good for you. It's not like there's a housing shortage or anything, is it? Leaving a property empty rather than the risk of a family with children or pets being housed is just great. FFS sell it if you don't need it.

Justaboy I see our properties as homes for people to live in. I treat them like humans and they are fine with that.

Good grief, be careful! You might set a precedent.

LRD Forgive my ignorance - but is it actually 'eviction' if you just, well, ask someone to leave? I always associated 'eviction' with something more forced.

Asking someone to leave can end up in formal eviction proceedings if the tenants have nowhere to go. Councils will only step in with emergency accomodation at the very last hour. This is horrible for all involved.

SheldonCRules · 02/01/2017 14:28

They can let to who they want. Children cause a lot of wear and tear, they are usually in the house a lot and even well behaved can still cause a lot of issues.

Families are also told to stay put after an eviction notice if they want social housing and the court fees etc are yet another cost to the LL.

Not worth the hassle to many.

BusterTheBulldog · 02/01/2017 14:31

We had a 4 bed house that we rented out, the landlord advised us to say no children.

Andrewofgg · 02/01/2017 14:49

Families are also told to stay put after an eviction notice if they want social housing and the court fees etc are yet another cost to the LL.

Indeed. Councils cynically using LLs to provide accommodation.

BadKnee · 02/01/2017 15:10

Of the people slagging off landlords for needing to make a profit how many have investments of some sort? A pension scheme maybe? A savings account? All invested at a profit in some way, (including property).

How many have jobs that are with companies who are making a profit from a range of investments and activities that may well include property.

A small landlord with no pension fund though should NOT make a profit as that makes him an evil bastard.

The Landlord Tenant relationship works well if people respect each other and the law. Like the employer/employee relationship.

I was a landlord and a tenant. Am currently neither but will be both again soon.

e1y1 · 02/01/2017 15:14

Yes legal, but still shit.

Quite a while ago, we had the reverse, a LL wouldn't let a 3 bed house to DH and I because we DIDN'T have children.

Just the way it is sometimes.

Andrewofgg · 02/01/2017 15:14

The Landlord Tenant relationship works well if people respect each other and the law.

BadKnee Spot on. And bringing a pet in when you have agreed not to shows a lack of respect for both.

Justaboy · 02/01/2017 15:16

FuzzyOwl If your properties are close by why not DIY we've only had bad experiences of property managers. As to tenants trust your instincts there a far better indicator then any else;)

Also there is a dilapidation deposit taken that can be used for restoring the premises to how it was! I take a lot of detailed pictures, I have one copy the tenant has the other also i do call by and see them from time to time and see how their treating the place. We all get on rather well overall:)

I do realize that there will be some wear and tear, even happens here and from time to time redecoration needs to be done on of our tenants has recently repainted his home made and excellent job of it. I paid for the materials he gave the labour, it was a win win:)

KnittedBlanketHoles · 02/01/2017 15:17

I think it's disgusting that housing in this country is used as investment when there isn't enough affordable housing, totally immoral. Legal, but still immoral.

Justaboy · 02/01/2017 15:21

KnittedBlanketHoles so you say and to an extent true. I don't know why its not more of a political issue there're barking on about a development here going on about provision for "affordable" housing .

Does anyone know what that means other then being the biggest weasel word around?.

kirinm · 02/01/2017 15:21

These landlord threads really do not paint LLs in a good light. It's fucking outrageous that the law lets landlords discriminate against families. I'm 100% with BBC - landlords need to stop claiming that their properties are anything but an investment. If you were providing a genuine service, you wouldn't discriminate and that's what you're doing. Vile.

ThanksForAllTheFish · 02/01/2017 15:28

I was chatting to my new next door neighbours (moved in 3 weeks ago) and they told me they were asked to leave their old rented property when the lease run out as they are expecting a baby in Feb. The landlady didn't want children in her property, she said a dog or a cat would be fine but no children or babies. They had been in the property for 4 years and had no issues paying rent, looking after the property etc so where quite shocked when they were told she wouldn't renew their lease.

I didn't realise that happened but it's not illegal. You would think people would be happy to have families in their properties as they will be less likely to have wild parties, move out after a short time etc. To me a family is more likely to look after a place as it's a family home - ok maybe issues with toddlers drawing on the wall with crayons or sticking stickers on doors (thinking back to my DD being a toddler) but I'm sure most parents would clean up the mess and discourage them from that sort of behaviour.

Saying that my neighbours have given me a heads up they are having a home birth so I expect that will come with a bit of noise (and some mess in the flat I imagine) but honestly in the grand scheme of things it shouldn't be an issue.

desertmum · 02/01/2017 16:21

where about in SE are you? I work for an estate and lettings agent and we have many landlords who allow children. PM me if you want.

user1481140239 · 02/01/2017 17:25

Yes it is legal, they are private landlords and can rent to whomever they want. They can also get more for renting to a few professionals rather than a family. It's awful. It's not as if kids will completely trash the house is it!
How about contacting all of your estate agents and explain what you are looking for and they will contact you if something suitable comes up. There will be something available for families, might just take a while to find the right place. good luck x

sirfredfredgeorge · 02/01/2017 17:31

A normal AST in the UK will not enable you to use the deposit to restore the premises to how it was, that would need to be a different commercial contract and it's unlikely you've done one of those.

Wear and tear is expected, and wear and tear with children is expected to be greater than without (obviously), so if you rent to children you have to account for that.

streetch · 02/01/2017 17:40

I totally agree with everything BBC said, it is truly shit being a private tenant. I do understand that bad tenants can cost a ll lots of hassle and money but they can choose to invest their money elsewhere whereas tenants are stuck - housing is a basic human need!

BadKnee · 02/01/2017 18:33

A small landlord with no pension fund though should NOT make a profit as that makes him an evil bastard sorry - this was meant to be ironic. Posting fail - and then I went out!

Food is a basic but no-one thinks that Tesco shouldn't make a profit. In fact some of you will have shares in Tesco as part of your pension funds or savings pots.

Look up who owns the water companies - and how much profit they make. Is water not an essential?

Clothes are a basic but no-one thinks M&S shouldn't profit. Again M&S shares are a staple of pension fund portfolios.

We need insurance - we all have car insurance if we drive - insurance companies make huge profits - and invest heavily in pension funds - etc etc

So should all homes be state-owned? Should no-one profit from property ownership? If so - that is fine but would mean a complete re-think of how we operate as a society.

Or should everyone own a house? (How would that work???)

It is ridiculous to say that landlords should not make a profit. And we do need a supply of rental properties just as we need insurance companies and supermarkets.

As I said before it is a crucial part of all societies, (doesn't mean it couldn't do with a bit of reforming), but if we respect the law and each other it works well.

JacquesHammer · 02/01/2017 18:50

This is horrible for all involved as a LL who had to evict someone I can confirm it is equally as awful for the LL

kirinm · 02/01/2017 18:54

But Tesco and water companies don't discriminate. Some LLs here do. Those LLs who discriminate are providing no service.

Andrewofgg · 02/01/2017 19:17

Tesco will charge you more for a family's food than for a singleton's or a couple's, and so will the water companies if you have a meter. Is that discrimination?

The trouble is that people call "discrimination" as soon as they are treated differently from others, no matter how valid the reason; which devalues the currency when there is true discrimination. Having children is not a protected status!

Those LLs who discriminate are providing no service.

Yes they are: they are providing it to somebody else.

LRDtheFeministDragon · 02/01/2017 19:19

I think it's different. They don't charge more because you are a family, andrew. Nor do they stop you at the door and demand an extra fee for the wear and tear you cause to the shop by bringing small children in, although patently small children do cause damage in supermarkets.

BadKnee · 02/01/2017 19:21

No true, Tecos does not "discriminate" as long as you can pay. Tesco however sell stuff more cheaply to families who can buy in bulk than to single people who can't. Economics

The word "discriminate" has been taken to mean something bad but all it means is to choose. Every time we choose one thing or person over another we are discriminating.

And in the end, LLs wouldn't choose single professionals over families if you paid enough. If the deposit were big enough, the rent were high enough and the LLs were able to evict if there was a problem.

Insurers "discriminate" against young drivers and in favour of families. I pay more for my car insurance than I would if I were married. As a single person I pay more for holidays. Discrimination or economics?

Flip

1 2 3 4