Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

TRying to sell the house with tenants in - undisclosed dog

420 replies

Newbrummie · 28/01/2017 14:07

So had a viewing at the house yesterday and the patio was covered in dog shit, as was the garden. I figured it would take a few months to sell so was happy for them to stay whilst it was on the market. Am now starting to think this is going to be impossible isn't it ?
Can I afl them to remove the dog for the rest of the tenancy ?

OP posts:
Cromwell1536 · 30/01/2017 09:07

Landlords can keep a protected deposit in their own bank accounts. The deposit is protected by the scheme, not held by it. So the OP would be returning the deposit directly by bank transfer, and notifiying the scheme.

Haven't read the whole thread, just working through it now. I have had tenants on AST for many years, with no problems, thankfully. Managed by an agent, who covers the legal side. So I may be wrong on this - but surely at a break point in the contract, either side can simply opt not to renew and give whatever notice is specified in the contract? Why would the OP need to have an elaborate court procedure for getting tenants out if she's willing to wait a few months?

Cromwell1536 · 30/01/2017 09:10

Oh, and the deposit protection scheme I use requires me to return a deposit (assuming no disputes) within 3 months of the end of the tenancy. Of course I've never made a former tenant wait anything like that - once the keys are handed over and the end of tenancy inspection all clear, they get their deposit back. That's standard practice, isn't it?

thecatneuterer · 30/01/2017 09:24

Yes exactly. There is a deposit protection scheme that allows the LL to keep the money. The scheme is basically insurance. There is nothing to stop the LL returning the deposit even before the tenant leaves if they so wish.

thecatneuterer · 30/01/2017 09:26

Cromwell, once you RTFT you will see this has been covered. Indeed, Section 21, which is what you are referring to, is the obvious answer. We are all baffled as to why the OP has apparently issued a Section 8 requiring evidence and court proceedings and are agog to know the ground she is relying on for this.

brokenheartdog · 30/01/2017 09:27

Cromwell.

To end a tenancy at the end of a fixed period a section 21 must be served with at least two months notice.

Quote from a legal site

'if the tenants refuse to leave at the end of a fixed term tenancy then a landlord will need to make an application to a court for possession. Before applying to the court for possession a landlord must first serve a section 21 notice to quit on the tenants giving them a minimum of two months' notice.'

Hence court is still needed.

Luckily for op with that she is saying and if how she behaves on here is anything to go by I think they will go.

OurBlanche · 30/01/2017 09:28

Why do people think the OP hasn't put the deposit in a protection scheme when she's repeatedly said she has well, she now says she has put the effin thing in an effin bond board - which could mean OP accidenatally looked at a US site, has deposit in an insured shceme not custodial, or just doesn't know!

And hasn't explained the 'mandatory reasons' for a S8.

Lots of terminology and apparent expectations simply do not make sense.

It is odd to make such a song and dance about a tenant who has NOT DEFAULTED... and to be so very deaf to all suggestions as to how to make any eviction process far less anxiety ridden.

Greta84 · 30/01/2017 09:29

As I said before the op is taking the Biscuit

Cromwell1536 · 30/01/2017 09:32

Sorry, the penalties of coming late to a lengthy thread. And another good reason to pay a decent managing agent to make sure the contract is properly done. Any time I"ve been tempted to save some money and manage the whole thing myself, I turn to threads like this!

brokenheartdog · 30/01/2017 09:33

Yes a landlord can keep the deposit in their own bank account if they pay a small fee to the dps to protect it.

However seeing one of ops initial responses was that her landlord hadn't protected hers and she wasn't moaning and given her lack of basic tenancy knowledge and ranting followed by backtracking that she has done things then I'm not so sure.

thecatneuterer · 30/01/2017 09:33

Brokenhearted - with a Section 21 you make an application to the Court, but there is no requirement for anyone to attend court. It just goes through automatically as long as everything has been done correctly.

With Section 8 you actually have to attend Court and provide evidence. It takes longer and there are no guarantees.

Therefore to use Section 8 in this case is utterly baffling.

brokenheartdog · 30/01/2017 09:36

I am going to be in your situation in a couple of years Cromwell and will definitely be using an agent for this reason!

brokenheartdog · 30/01/2017 09:38

I agree thecat.

38cody · 30/01/2017 09:47

I do t do pets due to allergies but surely having a dog doesn't equate having a shit-fest all o we the patio and garden. If they tolerate that what will they do to the inside! If you can possibly afford it I'd get rid of the remnants and disinfect before you can sell. Yuk!

SpongebobRoundPants · 30/01/2017 09:47

OP: AIBU?

Mumsnet: Yes!

OP: No I'm not.

Foxesarefriends · 30/01/2017 09:55

Apart from the odd poster completely missing the pointConfused

Cromwell1536 · 30/01/2017 10:14

Following the thread and picking up some of the earlier discussion about respective responsibilities of landlords and tenants re. repairs and cleanliness. According to CAB's advice on the legal position, tenants ARE required to keep their home reasonably clean (highly subjective, I know, but an absence of poo would cover most people's definitions, I"d guess! - sorry, I'm not trying to be goady, just work out what would be reasonable). Equally, I"m required (as a LL) to fix problems with pipes/drains, and I couldn't pass that over to the tenant by inserting a clause in the contract; BUT if a tenant blocks a lav by attempting to dispose of a nappy/sanitory towel down there, I could reasonably require the tenant to pay the costs of unblocking it, because they've misused the property:

Looking after your home

The law implies a condition into every tenancy agreement that the tenant must use their home in a ‘tenant-like’ way. This applies whether you have a written or an oral tenancy agreement.

Using your home in a tenant-like way generally means:

doing minor repairs yourself, such as changing fuses and light bulbs
keeping your home reasonably clean
not causing any damage to the property and making sure your visitors don’t cause any damage
using any fixtures and fittings properly, for example, not blocking a toilet by flushing something unsuitable down it.
Your tenancy agreement may also set out some express terms on what your responsibilities are for repairs, for example, that you are responsible for decorating your home.

Your landlord cannot include a term in your agreement that would pass on any of their repair responsibilities to you, for example, that you are responsible for repairs to the roof. This type of term would not have any force in law.

thecatneuterer · 30/01/2017 10:19

Cromwell, no Section 8 would stick on the basis of a bit of dog poo in the garden/on the patio. I think it would have to be full on storing bin bags in the gardens to the extent that the place is full of rats and environmental health being involved for it to be able to be used.

There is a huge fox turd on my patio right now. It's been there at least a week. It's winter so I'm not using the patio and I can be arsed to do anything about it. I would probably feel the same about a bit of dog poo on my patio in the middle of winter. Cleanliness is certainly subjective and things would have to be horrendous for a LL to get an eviction on the basis of it.

Morphene · 30/01/2017 10:20

I absolutely HATE LL...but I can't work out why the hell everybody is so against this particular one?

also "you should have put the deposit in the DPS" is the new cancel the cheque....

PigletWasPoohsFriend · 30/01/2017 10:23

I absolutely HATE LL...but I can't work out why the hell everybody is so against this particular one?

Partly I think because people are aware of the OPs past posts.

thecatneuterer · 30/01/2017 10:25

Well I can cope with your hatred Morphene. Lol at the new 'cancel the cheque;. You're right Grin.

I think it's her general hostility and generally coming across badly that is getting people's backs up rather than anything specific.

Foxesarefriends · 30/01/2017 10:25

And the lack of knowledge of basic tenancy law

thecatneuterer · 30/01/2017 10:26

Piglet I have no idea of her past posts. I have taken against her based purely on this thread [smile}

thecatneuterer · 30/01/2017 10:26

ffs Smile

Foxesarefriends · 30/01/2017 10:27

Me too Smile

Cromwell1536 · 30/01/2017 10:30

Cat, no absolutely fair enough. I don't imagine the law was ever framed with the intention of having courts full of Hyacinth Bucket types seeking to impose their views on tenants. But it seems obvious as well that tenants do have reciprocal obligations, beyond paying their rent and can't simply say, "My home, my rules, la, la, la, not listening." Luckily, there are plenty of considerate and responsible tenants out there, and if landlords provide decent properties and maintain them properly, they in turn are more likely to get those tenants...