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.

Renters won't leave the house I'm buying, they 'can't find anywhere suitable'.

873 replies

wirldsgonemad · 12/02/2021 17:42

But thanks to covid, a section 21 means people have 6 months instead of 2 months to vacate and this means I get charged £4,250 extra in stamp duty, plus mortgage application fees and survey of £1k plus my life being on hold for 6 months.

They are fully aware of my position, they know I'm a single mother of 2 small children and they don't give two hoots that they're actions are costing me £5-6k and months of waiting.

God give me strength to get through these next few months without attacking them on a regular basis.

What would you do in my situation???

OP posts:
Radio4Rocks · 13/02/2021 12:11

The law is not wrong. I can't be bothered to argue any further with you on this matter.

At least you've finally grasped what I was saying, it took a while.

And the law is wrong ...

Livelovebehappy · 13/02/2021 12:12

Sure they can ‘find somewhere suitable’. They’re just being awkward and hoping you’ll pull out so that they can stay longer. Why do tenants do this when surely they know when they rent a house that it’s not theirs, and that they can be asked to leave at any point? And I say that as someone who has rented for many years before getting on the property ladder. God knows why anyone would want to be a landlord - the drama it brings must surely outweigh the financial gain it brings.

Sheepies · 13/02/2021 12:12

Yes those poor landlords having their multiple mortgages paid off by the people living in a house they couldn’t give a shit about and only see as an asset

In my experience that isn't the case, but okay.

AngelicPP · 13/02/2021 12:15

@EachBleachBlairTrump

The seller here is a greedy so and so, who's now caused himself no end of trouble and cost, OP has been astonishingly naïve and it's clearly been a great over head purchase. However the tenants only signed a six month lease, in AUGUST, six months is up, personally if I was looking for an long term home I wouldn't be looking at somewhere with a six month lease, 12 month minimum is the norm, they've also been offered a large sum of money to vacate which they are not entitled to, so I don't think they're faultless in this either.

I don't think 12mnths min is the norm at all. We have had to unfortunately move every couple of years all the way throughout my children's childhood and it's been awful but nothing we can do because we can't afford to buy a house and we are on disability benefits as I'm actually bed bound and my husband is my full time carer, we have 3 kids at home aged 15 and under now (we had 4 children up until a few months ago at home but have now moved out with boyfriend & we had my stepson stay with us regularly until his mum sadly moved and stopped contact-but that's another story! So mostly we had 4/5 children to think about when having to keep moving) every single time we've found a house we have had a 6mnths min term tenancy agreement which would then switch to a rolling tenancy month to month. Or in one case only we were able to negotiate a 12mnth contract after our initial 6mnths were up. Each time we have been looking for a long long term let and have made that very clear and each time we were assured that this was the case. But time and time and time again we have ended up being loved on for various reasons such as...landlord pregnant and wants home back for herself, house needs to be sold and a couple of times because the landlord didn't want to do quite extensive work to the house that needed to be done to keep us in there legally they decided to just sell rather than having to do the work. Not sure how that exactly worked as they would've had to do some work to sell anyway but think they prob just wanted to bodge it up to tide it over until sold and no longer their problem which is what they did to get us to live in in the first place too (this has happened a couple of times to us so not uncommon obviously!)

Now we find ourselves in the position yet again of taking on a 6mnths initial term but we were assured that the LL wanted a very long let. But at the 6mnth mark we were given a section 21. I can tell you when you get that letter and you had no idea your heart just sinks. We are in debt purely because of the amount of times we have had to move. So we thought here we go yet again! This time though we've had enough of private renting and the unstable life we have given our children (which really upsets me how much upheaval we've had to put them through) and we have decided we need to wait for social housing because it's the closest thing to being secure for us. We are 12mnths in now because the serve is an old section 21 at first so had to serve us another section and restart the process (we have no choice but to wait until the very last moment we can because social housing requires us to) I feel bad for the LL because they want to sell and are having to wait but at same time I'm a bit annoyed that they thought it was ok to rent to people they know have a family with disabilities who made it very clear needed as long a let as possible! We found out after we were given notice that they had the house surveyed the month before we moved in and that they knew they were planning to sell. We signed just before the pandemic (Aug) so Feb was when we were first given section 21 and the virus was known about by then so they wouldn't have known of the upcoming problem to get us out and that has bitten them now really because they can't really do a lot to get us out now as long as we are paying our rent- which we are. But we aren't staying out of spite we really want to move now and finally get settled in social housing, but it's taking a long time to find something suitable. We have a 4bed housing need and we need somewhere either adapted or has room to be adapted. We keep coming first on houses now but they aren't suitable so we get bypassed and it's extremely stressful. It will be worth it once we finally get a place but it does take time. We aren't wrecking the place and we are paying our rent and trying to keep the LL in the loop of what's happening but sadly until we are offered a house we just have no choice but to sit tight. I have my kids to think of and no parent is going to put a LL or potential buyers situation before their own..and rightly so!
We are close I think now to getting somewhere but then again we keep getting our hopes built up then something is wrong like can't have adaptations done or the one house got wrecked by the previous people so we couldn't have that one...but we are hopeful it will be soon. Our LL hasn't actually put the house on the market yet though so we haven't that to worry about..they did consider it but because we have a lot of stuff in our house and have started packing already so boxes everywhere it's not the best for good pictures to put on site to sell and it would be quite disruptive doing viewings while we are here due to the kids and we have dogs and obvs in bed bound (but we have our bedroom in living room) so it doesn't show the house off the best it can atm. So the LL is waiting till we leave before putting it on market which is the sensible thing to do really. As always there are things that the LL hasn't fixed while we have been here so they will need to sort all that out too. Can I just point out aswell that we have always passed all of our house inspections in every house so we weren't being given section 21 because we were wrecking the house or anything, we have no record of complaints and we have always paid our rent (housing benefit because of our situation) just in case anyone thinks we were being bad tenants and that's why we have moved so much.

Phew! Such a long reply sorry! But we have a lot of experience dealing with LL and LA and having to move house!!...and currently living it now. Please don't blame the tenants because I would almost guarantee they weren't told the house was up for sale when they signed.

SorryStateOfAffairs · 13/02/2021 12:17

They'll be lucky to get a landlord reference when they do decide to do the decent thing and move out.

Except that, if the LL refuses to write them a reference (which will only cover things like how they kept the house and whether rent was paid on time), they'll be there even longer

And, as they are acting legally, and there for the duration of the notice period, the LL has nothing to complain about and no one to blame but himself.

canigooutyet · 13/02/2021 12:17

Thankfully tenants do have some laws and the days of the ll and mates can come and boot you out are now illegal

They were verbally asked to leave whilst still in their contract period.
They are now at the end of near the end of their tenancy and as long as they are paying their rent, allowing official legally required visits, the tenants aren’t doing anything wrong nor are they squatting.

A lot of tenants also don’t wreck the property. Because of scum ll thankfully the rent deposit scheme was introduced.

Perhaps if these ll’s didn’t exist to begin with then private tenants wouldn’t have required additional laws to protect them.

CodenameVillanelle · 13/02/2021 12:18

@Livelovebehappy

Sure they can ‘find somewhere suitable’. They’re just being awkward and hoping you’ll pull out so that they can stay longer. Why do tenants do this when surely they know when they rent a house that it’s not theirs, and that they can be asked to leave at any point? And I say that as someone who has rented for many years before getting on the property ladder. God knows why anyone would want to be a landlord - the drama it brings must surely outweigh the financial gain it brings.
A) they haven't even served out their legal notice period yet B) when you rent a house it is yours until the tenancy is legally ended C) tenants can't be 'asked to leave at any point' D) tenants have as much right to feel at home as owner occupiers E) being a landlord is a business and should only be entered into by people prepared for the work it involves. For those who treat it as a business it can be financially viable. The 'drama' is the work involved to make money. Anyone who expects landlording to be free income for no work is misled.
GreenSlide · 13/02/2021 12:22

Funny how tenants are such an inconvenience when the landlord wants them out, but not when they're collecting the fortune in rent they pay every month.

SorryStateOfAffairs · 13/02/2021 12:26

I've said several times that I know it's legal. I just don't think it's right and the law should be changed. What part of that was too difficult for you to understand?

It doesn't matter if you think it's wrong though!

There are lots of laws that people disagree with. But it's still the law.

So arguing about it is pointless. It's not an opinion and it's not something you can change people's minds about. Its just how it is.

JustLyra · 13/02/2021 12:30

@Radio4Rocks

The tenancy didn't end. A 6 month FTC just means that's the minimum length, it then becomes a rolling tenancy. This is perfectly normal and how the vast majority of tenancies start and then continue. Calling them squatters is ridiculous.

They've been told to leave. The landlord doesn't want them there. For them to stay is squatting where they are unwelcome. It may be legal but it's daft. And the law needs to be changed.

No wonder desperate landlords take matters into their own hands to get their property back.

I don't understand why anyone would think it's fair to stay on when you've been told to leave a house that isn't yours. Madness.

Desperate landlord? No comment on the greedy fucker who tenanted a house he was in the middle of selling?

Besides which they haven't been told to leave yet. The LL can advise, by means of a S21, that he'd like them to leave, but he didn't bother his arse doing that.

Now he has they will have to leave when they are told to leave.

LLs like this greedy fucker are why the laws on evictions have to be so rigid because so many people are like you and think the law doesn't apply.

WombatChocolate · 13/02/2021 12:30

RadioRocks, luckily, the law is in place, rather than your view of what the law should be.
Are you suggesting landlords should ignore the law because they think it’s unfair (and actually most don’t)

When you choose to be a landlord, you do it in the basis of the law that applies. That means tenants have contracts and the law specifies time scales for when notice can be given, how long the notice is and what happens if tenants aren’t gone by the end of their notice. No-one has to become a landlord but does so on the basis of the law. once they sign a tenant up, they have agreed to the law. They can think it’s unfair if they like, but they have gone into the legal agreement willingly and no one forced them.

If you think tenants should be in a position where a landlord (because they are the owner of the property) can ask them to leave at any point and they will have to go without specified or decent periods of time to vacate, the landlording clearly isn’t for you and probably many tenants will be glad you’re not their landlord.

No-one should have to go through a process where they move into a property with the expense and efffort involved in that, to have zero security or certainty, because it’s not their owned property. People pay substantial rents and whilst they cannot have permanent security (and very many every year have to move when they would rather not) it is totally right, that time periods are specified on contracts and laws to establish exactly when notice can be given.

Without the law about only giving notice in the last 2 months of a 6 month contract, any tenant could be given notice within a week or 2 of moving in. Do you think that’s right? Even so, they can still be given notice after being there 16 or 17 weeks. The notice starts from then. Usually it’s 2 months, so the landlord would give notice at 4 months if they want the tenant gone at 6 months usually. Currently, at 4 months, they need to give 6 months notice meaning it will be 10 months since moving in until the landlord can expect the property back. That’s assuming the tenants go by this point ...and the vast majority do.

So why would you let in the current circumstances if you needed to market or sell the property within the next 10 months? Honestly, you wouldn’t unless you don’t understand the system. Might that mean some time without rental income. Yes. That’s the nature of it and as a business owner, that has to be factored in. Simply shouting ‘the law is wrong’ doesn’t make it right or business sense to do otherwise.

The time when it can be difficult for landlords is when tenants don’t go by the end of their notice period. After this point, it is still not accurate to describe them as squatting. There are systems for legal eviction. Sometimes people have nowhere to go and sometimes they are waiting for social housing and the social housing system won’t house them until they are made homeless and for this to happen, they have to be evicted. So, often, tenants who don’t go aren’t actually being awkward to get at the landlord, it is their only way to get their next housing.....very annoying for the landlord (especially if they are not paying....but this isn’t usually the case when people are waiting to be rehoused) but it’s a feature of the current system, which isn’t so good, but you can see how it’s come about.

There are tenants who are bad tenants and know the law and play the system. At a crucial point, they stop paying rent, or they stop paying and then pay a little bit again to avoid notice being given (at the appropriate point) or don’t pay and don’t vacate after notice is given and take a long time to evict. Landlords are victims to this, but that doesn’t mean the law to protect tenants is wrong.

AngelicPP · 13/02/2021 12:37

@Radio4Rocks

I feel sorry for both sides here and think OP is being given an unnecessary kicking by some.

The tenancy is up and the tenants should move out - they knew this was coming. It's unfair that tenants can squat when the tenancy is up and the property needed as a home by someone else.

But what do you expect a renter to do if they have nowhere to go? You can't expect people to walk out and make themselves homeless (which is what social housing would class them as- intentionally homeless) the end of the section 21 is not when they HAVE to be out it's when the LL WANTS them out. But legally they don't have to leave until it goes through the courts and they give the legal date for them to leave. Until that time they will have been told to sit tight. We were told this by social housing and Shelter (Shelter is a really good place to get info on housing and problems etc)

AngelicPP · 13/02/2021 12:38

@murbblurb

English rental law is easily accessible online in the how to rent guide, written in very simple terms.

No sane solicitor will let the OP exchange contracts on this place, because that will make the OP the landlord with all the responsibilities. Landlords cannot end tenancies, they can only apply to have tenancies ended. Only bailiffs (and tenants) can actually end tenancies, the former after due process which even when the eviction ban ends will take 18 month or more.

A section 21 never meant 'two months to vacate'. It meant 'two months until the landlord can start the repossession process'.

OP, you can't have what you want. That's it, really. I'm sorry you weren't aware of that before. Do not threaten anyone because of it.

Yes this! You explained it much better than me!

WombatChocolate · 13/02/2021 12:40

Angelica gives a fairly typical description of being a tenant. I say this as a landlord.
Her landlord took a risk in signing a tenancy when really he planned to sell a few months later. He hoped they would just move out. And now he faces exactly what the Op’s landlord might face too....a tenant who hasn’t gone at the end of their notice period because they are waiting for social housing and need to be made homeless to qualify...that’s the problem in the social care system, not the making of the tenant. This landlord fortunately hasn’t got a buyer going at the same time (like the nightmare situation in the Op) because presumably he knows that’s foolish and it’s impossible to exchange with a tenant in situ. He is waiting until the tenant is gone to market it. And presumably Angelica is still paying him rent too. He took a risk that she would go, which didn’t pay off. If he had really wanted to sell, he needed to keep the property vacant.

The key thing is you can’t have a tenant and sell at the same time. It’s one or the other. If you’ve got a tenant follow the law to reclaim your property and only then look to sell. Anything else means a big risk of coming unstuck for a landlord, unpleasantness for the tenants and disappointment for a buyer.l..as we see in this thread.

SpudsandGravy · 13/02/2021 12:44

Buy a different house.

user1467048527 · 13/02/2021 12:47

@Radio4Rocks Which bit of the law is it you think is unfair? It’s reading as though you think that because a tenant doesn’t own their home they should leave if the LL wants - even if it’s during the period of the agreed tenancy (whether the initial 6m or the rolling periods that follow). Surely you can’t argue there is a moral argument for that?

If you’re arguing against the fact that LLs are often forced through lengthy and expensive eviction processes because tenants won’t leave when their tenancy has legally ended, then I’m sure there is a lot more sympathy for LLs. Tenants too, though, as they may in the position where they need to do this to protect themselves from being made homeless and to access support. But this isn’t the op’s scenario, is it? This LL didn’t give notice in a timely manner and the tenancy is still in play.

Making it known that you don’t want someone on your property is not at all the same thing as validly serving notice on them.

Gubanc · 13/02/2021 12:50

@SorryStateOfAffairs

They'll be lucky to get a landlord reference when they do decide to do the decent thing and move out.

Except that, if the LL refuses to write them a reference (which will only cover things like how they kept the house and whether rent was paid on time), they'll be there even longer

And, as they are acting legally, and there for the duration of the notice period, the LL has nothing to complain about and no one to blame but himself.

I'm sure there comes a point when the LL can evict them.
sneakysnoopysniper · 13/02/2021 12:50

As a previous poster remarked if the s21 is not absolutely correct with all "i"s dotted and all "t"s crossed then it can be thrown out of court and the LL will have to go back to square one. LL also has to have various documents in place as well for the S21 to be valid - and if the tenant challenges then the eviction can fail.

I am very much against the use of the term "landlord" in the 21st century because it implies an asymmetrical social relationship. No one nowadays is a "lord" over another. There is nothing wrong with the terms "owner" or "property owner".

Owners need tenants to pay the mortgage and tenants need somewhere to stay, so it ought to be an equal business relationship. Owners who dont know the rules and get it wrong can be, quite literally, taken to the cleaners by a clever tenant who knows how to manipulate the rules.

sunshinesupermum · 13/02/2021 12:52

I rented put my aunt’s house to pay for her care. I am now selling it to pay for her care. The tenants have refused to leave. How is this my fault?

It's not your fault but did you issue the S21 and did you not realise that since lockdown it's been 6 months notice so you have to allow for that. I am really sorry if afterwards the tenants refuse to move and you have to take them to court. That is a bummer.

SansaSnark · 13/02/2021 12:56

I haven't read the full thread, but has anyone pointed out yet that the end of the Section 21 is just the first date the landlord can apply to court for possession?

If the tenants are genuinely stuck and can't find anywhere else to move, or if they are hoping to be housed by the council, then the court process can be quite drawn out.

The landlord has to apply for possession and the renters are allowed to mount a defence. Due to Covid, it takes longer to get a court date at the moment. At that point, you could find out the landlord has fucked up the S21 in some way (e.g. put incorrect dates on it, or has missed some bit of legal paperwork in relation to the house which means the S21 isn't valid) then you're back to square one.

Even if the S21 is valid, it's still a drawn out process, with two hearings and then potentially another delay to get baliffs in if the renters really do refuse to leave. Some councils insist on evictions before they help people, so it's not impossible your tennants will stay until the bitter end. So it could easily be another 6 months before the tennants are out, and they may not leave the property in a habitable state.

I hope that doesn't happen OP, but you are potentially going to end up putting you life on hold for a lot more than 6 months, and having to deal with a lot of stress. Is it really worth it?

AngelicPP · 13/02/2021 12:57

@bloodyhairy

Bloody annoying tenants and vendor. Really, really feel for you OP, and hope that everything works out for the best Thanks

Really?!
Yes bloody tenants expecting to live in a house they only just rented..absolutely disgusting and so rude of them isn't it??!

The seller is to blame solely. The solicitor also hasn't done their job properly.

Lollyneenah · 13/02/2021 12:57

I think you'll be waiting for longer than 6 months- if you need bailiffs to evict you could be looking at 8 x sorry OP

Puzzledandpissedoff · 13/02/2021 13:03

Personally I would never be (a LL), far too much stress. If you are going to do it you need to understand what you are required to do

You certainly do (smile). I'm only doing it myself (for my disabled son) because the accommodation SS were sourcing for him was ghastly, but by heck the regulations go on and on

Most of it's fair enough though, and it works if someone's really committed to doing it, but I totally get why many wouldn't bother - and neither would I except for the family circumstances

Toorapid · 13/02/2021 13:04

I've never lived in a rented house, but I'm still glad there are laws to protect tenants. It must be awful to never know when you might be asked to move on.

Radio4Rocks · 13/02/2021 13:09

[quote user1467048527]@Radio4Rocks Which bit of the law is it you think is unfair? It’s reading as though you think that because a tenant doesn’t own their home they should leave if the LL wants - even if it’s during the period of the agreed tenancy (whether the initial 6m or the rolling periods that follow). Surely you can’t argue there is a moral argument for that?

If you’re arguing against the fact that LLs are often forced through lengthy and expensive eviction processes because tenants won’t leave when their tenancy has legally ended, then I’m sure there is a lot more sympathy for LLs. Tenants too, though, as they may in the position where they need to do this to protect themselves from being made homeless and to access support. But this isn’t the op’s scenario, is it? This LL didn’t give notice in a timely manner and the tenancy is still in play.

Making it known that you don’t want someone on your property is not at all the same thing as validly serving notice on them.[/quote]
I think that if a LL and tenant agree on a 6 month tenancy and the LL wants the house back at the end of 6 months then he should be able to have it. Not whenever the LL says, which would be unfair, but at the end of the contract. I don't see why so many people are getting enervated about it.

You agree to rent a house for 6 months then you move out if the LL wants it back. The law that allows you to stay beyond the original contract is what I think is unfair. The LL shouldn't have to go to court to get back what he owns. That's what I think is crazy.

I'm speaking more generally than about OP's situation. I know of several people who rent out their parents' homes to help pay for nursing home care but may have to sell the house outright if the fees get much steeper. To say a tenant can just stay in those circumstances is unfair. It may be the law but the law is an ass in this case.

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

This thread is closed and is no longer accepting replies. Click here to start a new thread.