Tiny violins out - private landlord having trouble

[roarfeckingroarr]

I own a flat that I rent out because it no longer suits my needs to live there and I couldn't find a buyer without making a substantial loss during Covid (due to no private outdoor space).

I try to not be a dick - e.g. I charge under market rate, I don't increase the rent unless in between tenants, I get everything fixed as soon as I can (via management agency), I allow pets/children etc. All things that should be standard but too often are not.

Anyway, I have a tenant who is playing games. Every month for the last three she has had a problem paying the rent. First of all she wanted to move the payment date (fine, circs change, but she was a week after the agreed date), then she was late again, then she decided unilaterally she didn't have to pay because the boiler had broken and I couldn't get a new one installed over night. I reimbursed her for heaters to keep warm and had it replaced as soon as a reputable tradesman could install one - about a week in total. I get this isn't ideal and I offered a £100 discount as a goodwill gesture. She eventually paid.

I hate being a landlord and I am v shortly going on maternity leave with my second child so I need to sell especially as the income is now unreliable to use the equity to buy us a family home.

But I'm scared to put it on the market in case she takes that as free reign to stop paying altogether.

Does anyone have any advice that doesn't include "private landlords" and "scum of the earth" in the same sentence? I wouldn't expect her to let people traipse through her home at short notice and would hope to arrange maybe two open house mornings in Jan to minimise inconvenience - but I also expect her to stick to her side of the contract and pay the agreed rent during this time.

@thewayround
would hope to arrange maybe two open house mornings in Jan to minimise inconvenience

it's in the contract that you must allow open house mornings at the LL's convenience?

Unfortunately this isn’t a legally enforceable term.

However, it does mean that the LL completely justified in giving a poor reference and there are (despite previous posters assertions to the contrary) grounds for the OP to claim against the deposit

In this scenario, I would simply suck up fact that my property is unlikely to get viewings due to the tenants refusal to accommodate.

As soon as departed I would progress

and if asked for a reference, I would make clear that this reasonable request that was included in the tenancy agreement. (and it is reasonable) was not agreed to by the tenant.

I suppose I have a problem with the fact that anyone might be a LL and the person providing such a vital and essential service to their tenant, who has zero interest in anything apart from the absolute letter of the law and contract, which is what THEWAYROUND is saying is her position.

Lots of vulnerable people are in private rented accommodation. Lots of people who aren’t officially vulnerable but struggling are there too. They have zero alternatives. Yes, all LLs need to make money and business decisions, but this is a sector supplying an essential service and the choices of some LLs to always only look at the letter of the contract, their own personal self interest and have zero regard for the person who is their tenant, can result in some extreme and unnecessary hardships. Banks and other corporations who have a profit motive manage to bear in mind social responsibility too. I agree that LLs who are so close to the bone, that one month’s delayed rent leads to them serving a S21 notice, shouldn’t be in the industry. Those who decide to sell-up and tell a tenant with a family that they will need to be out in 8 weeks, without any thought at all given to what that might mean for that family, shouldn’t be in the industry. It is the thought and communication that’s required - not a commitment to not ever selling or to making losses. But THEWAYROUND is saying she would have zero consideration for these matters, only the letter of the law. Again, it’s the ‘because I can’ attitude. The law allows it, so she will do it to the letter.

I’d agree, that if anyone wants zero human contact or the annoying interference of the human condition and it’s frailties, LLing isn’t the industry for them.

And I just wonder, amongst people spouting these views which are letter of the law, but no sense of the spirit, how many people you’ve personally known as friends who were long term renters beyond about 35? How many people with kids you’ve known to be serial renters? How many people you’ve known who work 45+ hour weeks but have zero hour contracts, how many people you’ve known in professional degree educated jobs who are still having to use food banks and who won’t have more than a couple of hundred (if anything) in the bank as a back-up? Are all those people not worthy of any consideration at all, beyond the letter of what their contract says? If it suited you to give notice at the end of Oct, so you could have the property vacant on 1 Jan to either re-let at a higher price or market for sale, would you just do it, with zero thought to a family who would be moving in Christmas week? It’s the zero thought and only thought for the letter of the contract that is so problematic to me.

So your problem is with those following the letter of the law without regard to the tenants personal circumstances?

We are talking about an OP who has one property that is tenanted. A woman going on maternity leave and seeing a substantial reduction in her income.

May I ask why the personal circumstances of the LL is so utterly irrelevant in this scenario?

In your view of course.

in my view… the personal circumstances of either party is irrelevant as long as the law is followed

I was a renter for 12 years in London

I was a LL for 4 years on the outskirts

I followed the tenancy agreement to the letter in both experiences. Was I inconvenienced during both experiences at some point? Yes. But did I blame the other party for following the tenancy agreement? Absolutely not.

Yes, I know your view….that personal circumstances are totally irrelevant and not to be considered.

As a tenant, being told OP was selling up to fund a bigger family home for her new baby would make sense to me. As a tenant, I’d appreciate being told that information as early as possible and giving me as much notice as possible to find somewhere else….ie more than 8 weeks. It would be hard, but a bit of communication, acknowledgement of the difficulty of needing to find somewhere else (nine of which is required by law) would go some distance to making it more manageable and to making a tenant feel like they aren’t purely a cash cow whose convenience and purpose has run out….even if that is the reality.

We’ve all met people who are entirely legalistic and who can’t or won’t apply any nuance to any situation. It could be the law, it could be free market economics. Often those people work well with computers and data and perhaps with contracts. Other people might be more suited to working with people and to dealing with issues like housing and making their money in that arena.

It’s clearly a matter is some pride, to be able to reiterate that only the contract counts. Nothing else needs any consideration…to be convinced if that position and to be willing to back it to the hilt. Very consistent. Totally lacking in any empathy or sense of nuance and recognition that LLs can make many choices about their application of the law, in terms of timing etc. Hey ho! Reminds me of a Christmas Carol.

Ah ok so now firstly we've got an example of an LL believing something which isn't in the contract is something they have a right to.

Secondly we have you saying if tenants hold to the conditions of their agreement they get a poor reference.

And all this while you're telling us that people hold LLs are acting no differently to a bank in their contractual obligations

And Landlords can't work out why they're the pariah of society. Amazing stuff.

Do you understand the difference between a condition and a legally enforceable contractual?

the former…. The tenant has agreed to it but it’s not legally enforceable and so even though the tenant did agree to it, not enforceable and they are exercising their right not to follow what they agreed to. And sothe LL can exercise their right to advise future potential LL in a ref

Guessing you’ve never witnessed the fall out from a foreclosure?

You are romanticising banks to an admirable extent
and i love the Christmas Carol ref! 😂 🎄

Since when do tenants agree to Landlords allowing open days to take place if they choose to sell the house?

And why would someone give them a poor reference for not wanting to get turfed out of a house their paying for for a few hours for the landlords benefit?

Unbelievable stuff.

I was a tenant too for many years….in my 20s. I was frequently given notice and had to move on….with my 3 boxes and single chair. It was a pain but I was flexible and fancy-free. Now, having been a homeowner for 25 years, it’s easy to become complacent about security of tenure and forget what insecurity was like. Until you speak to people and have friends who are long term renters and who have moved 8 times in 10 years, with their kids who have changed school 3 times because of it, you don’t really realise what it’s like into later adult life.

I’m a LL. My property will make up part if my retirement income. I use it to make money. I factor in that there will be voids, the occasional high maintenance cost and there will sometimes be a bad tenant who only pays once in 6 mi ths and has to be evicted through legal channels. I also accept that sometimes a tenancy starts at a point which means the end is likely to be an inconvenient time for me in terms of easily attracting the new best tenants. To mitigate this, I could serve notice to the tenant at a strategic time, to ensure I start another contract at a better time, and probably can raise the rent substantially too. I don’t do that. I let the contract run. I tend to not raise the rent to existing tenants. When a tenant moves out, if they have paid rent all of the time regularly or almost all of the time regularly, and left the property decent, I will give a very good reference. I don’t deduct from the deposit for things like a rather dirty oven, the garden looking a bit scruffy, limited damages. I allow more than wear and tear, especially for tenants who have been there years. I could take a few hundred from their deposit and it would be legally justified as it’s stuff beyond wear and tear. But I remember they’ve probably paid me £40k in rent, are starting afresh and needing to find £1.5k deposit and a similar amount for the first month rent, and I’m willing to let it go. You might call me a mug. I say it’s being decent, along with always giving good tenants as much notice as I possibly can if it’s not going to be possible to continue.

For myself, I’d want the rights of the law to be given to me and I’d understand the letter of the law could be applied to me and I couldn’t complain legally about that, but I’d also appreciate someone treating me as a human and showing just a little flexibility. So I try to treat others like that too.

You don't seem to understand that a reposession (foreclosure is a US term) is when someone is unable to pay their mortgage after the bank has done everything in it's power to help the mortgagee.

Open days are requested when the tenant hasn't broken the terms of their contract or done anything wrong.

For someone going on about contractual obligations and banks treating their customers no different to landlords treating their tenants, you seem to understand very little about all this.

THEWAYROUND, it’s good you feel pleased with yourself and your own position. Perhaps you are proud of yourself. Later in life, we’d all like to be proud of ourselves - might be about business decisions, but hopefully for everyone, how we’ve treated others plays a part in that too.

I know that you’re rejoicing in further opportunities to come back on and say again, with pride that you always stick to the letter of the law and expect all parties to apply it and aren’t interested in that…it’s a pleasure to you to disagree with those suggesting any humanity. We’ve heard you loud and clear, so I’m off now, as no doubt I’m just fuelling you and it’s giving you a bit of a kick.

The hypocrisy of @WombatChocolate

on another thread… the OP asks whether she should self manage her tenanted property or pay an EA

and your advice?

Loads of people self manage perfectly well, but careful record keeping to ensure all legal requirements are kept to in a timely manner, and that your referencing and contracts are watertight, plus you have the ability to get problems sorted as they arise is vital. If you can’t do these things, stick with an agent. Otherwise, go for it and save the money.

just a touch different to what you go on at length about here.

I will bow out and hide the thread as clear @WombatChocolate just adapts her stance re LLs according to what mood she’s in

Because being a landlord is running a business and the expectation is that the landlord understands that. S/he behaves in a professional manner and absolutely according to the law.

Where's the hypocrisy in them making sure that they are doing things by the book? It seems like what someone responsible would do, rather than calling their tenant a dick and trying to organise 2 open days.

And @WombatChocolate on another thread about a tenancy issue!!

Contracts and legal agreements still hold even when someone has a difficult personal circumstance arise.

bloody. Hell. I really will hide now. Depressing to have wasted time debating with someone with views that are so…. Weak

Can't believe someone's lost an argument so badly they've had to go to other threads to start posting things out of context.

Thank you for going into hiding @thewayround .

Thank you @WombatChocolate for shining a light on the human side of being a landlord ( and I see nothing in the wayaround’s curated posts to disprove that). Just paid £1000 to rehouse tenants in a hotel because my rental flat suffered a leak through the ceiling. Have been told by insurance they won’t pay out because flat was not uninhabitable. Upset now but in 5 years I won’t care about the £1000 anymore and I’ll be glad I did the decent thing.

Just completely glossing over the 'piss taker' not having a working boiler for X Amount of time then ...