Missed rent payments. I can't pay it.

[imogeneration]

Before this situation got to this point i posted in legal matters but didn't get a lot of traffic so shamelessly posting here. Sorry.

We rented a 2 bedroom house. Tenancy was up for renewal a last year. We renewed (with a rental increase) (blinded not knowing what was coming our way). 4 days after renewing our tenancy agreement we were told the house was going on the market. Obviously had we had known this was going to happen we wouldn't have renewed. In the mix of all of that, I was struck with a cancer diagnosis. Meaning out of work and no income. We told them after this, that we couldn't pay the rent due to the circumstances. I moved back to my parents annex. Because I was still under contract I am still liable for the rent. Because of how vulnerable my health is, I couldn't have viewings and people coming in and out as I had to, and still do, have to shield whilst having treatment. The landlord would not let us go. But we moved out. I know the advise is to stay until getting evicted but I tried to do the right thing and not hinder a sale as I doubt any non investors want to buy a house with sitting tenants. All viewings have been family viewings and AFAIK it's a family the house has now sold to.

We are now obviously months in arrears. The house is sold. The landlord has informed us he has claimed on his insurance to get the money back.

I'm just wondering what will happen next, what will the insurers do? I did speak to shelter and there are parts of the agreement that the landlord did not stick to which we were unaware of. I can't really say what they are as they're very specific and outing but the landlord did something outside the contracted agreement after he told us the house was going up for sale.

As you can imagine, it's an already stressful hard time. The cancer is here for the long run, but with the treatment and surgeries we are hoping for me to still have some time left. It's a cancer you sort of 'live with' as long as it stays stable after my initial treatment.

It's obvious that the landlord waited until renewing our tenancy before telling us so there's no gaps in the rent / sale. But due to it all happen in at once, we couldn't afford to stay. DX came days after the notice of selling the house. I needed to move back in with parents as I need help with DC at the moment after having treatment.

What happens now, will the insurer take me to court? Will they decline his claim for breaking the contract? Will I have to go to court?

Im expecting a battering for this. I know I've made some wrong decisions but I've had little to no choice. Not able to get social housing as DH earns too much. But without my wage, (main breadwinner) we simply could not do the rent. I tried and tried to come to a compromise but LL didn't want to know. Wanted the full rent (plus increase) and that was that. Didn't want to let us go. I just want to know what we'll expect in the next coming months now he has submitted a claim to the insurer. Deposit is in the correct scheme and the house was half managed by a letting agency.

Thank you.

I would say that by still pursuing you for the rental payments he is potentially committing insurance fraud.. If he's been paid out by his insurance company to cover the missing rent payment up to the end of your tenancy, there is no reason to still be pursuing you for it, you were unable to continue the tenancy because of illness and he has rightly used his insurance to cover the shortfall, it's there to cover you if your tenant doesn't pay. As far as I know the insurance company don't then pursue the tenant.

I'm sorry if I've misunderstood or if you've already answered but are you in any arrears for the time you actually lived there, or is it just for the unfulfilled contract? Did you give him any notice (even though he didn't accept it)?

How did he inform you the insurance has paid out, in person or in writing? If you have it in writing I'd be inclined to forward that to the estate agent sending you the reminders of arrears as proof that the matter has been dealt with and resolved.

He shouldn't have got you to sign a new tenancy agreement knowing full well he was going to sell in the first place, and he should have allowed you to surrender with a small notice period once you got your diagnosis, he's an utter prick, and he deserves to be out of pocket for being so bloody greedy.

Not sure on the deposit, it isn't held by the landlord (or it shouldn't be!) so if you know where it's being held you may be able to apply for it back. Shelter has a way of finding it and applying for it back if the landlord 'refuses', could be worth a try.

Check your tenancy deposit is protected - Shelter England

To all those saying he shouldn't have allowed her to sign a new tenancy - SHE WOULD BE HOMELESS. This tenancy gave her housing security for a year. Just because she couldn't afford it,

He should've given the option. Not tie us into a tenancy with the intention to sell. 12 months wouldn't have been secure as he would've given us notice when the buyers bought the house. (He has told us this.)

Oh definitely. And I know she has started this post from the point of view of understanding that liability.

But that liability doesn’t change because of her (very unfortunate) health issue. I understand that OP has provided background information to explain now her circumstances changed, but she didn’t stop paying her rent because the landlord is selling, she stopped paying it because she was in a poorer financial position than she had been.

@imogeneration you are blaming your poor financial situation on the landlord. You couldn't afford the rent so had to move out. That's nothing to do with the landlord selling the house. Had the landlord not been selling the house you wouldn't have moved neither would you not signed a new agreement for 12 months. You were happy to pay the rent increase..... it's just unfortunate the landlord sold because you can use that as an "excuse".

@imogeneration you can move from a property if you have a secure tenancy. Just because the landlord sold it doesn't mean anyone can end your tenancy - the new landlord has the same terms and conditions. You will not be forced to move.

Cant*

This is why when buying a house mortgage that it's not a buy to let the mortgage company will make sure the tenancy has ended before the deal has been finalised. Or it's sold with a sitting tenant.

The new owners wouldn't have been able to buy the property with a sitting tenant who had just signed a new 12 month agreement if they needed to live there.

This is untrue. Of course we would've moved. My cancer diagnosis came in a matter of days of the news he was selling and I knew my income would be compromised...

So, of course I would've moved.

The buyer isn't an investor. It's a FTB family moving in.

I'm still currently under tenancy.
This is where the lines are blurring.

I'm just going to have to wait until the insurance contacts me.
I have nothing to give them.
Nothing in savings.
I'm long term sick..

Take what they want. I've got nothing to give them.

Exactly.

@imogeneration the landlord selling the property wouldn't have affected your decision to sign. You were happy with the rent (hence why you signed). Your diagnosis was a causation of you leaving.

As I've explained 20 times, you wouldn't be kicked out and there is something fishy as the new owner didn't buy with vacant possession.

They did. The property was vacant. Possession is a physical fact and OP had vacated. They bought with a tenancy in place but nobody was residing there.

I know you've explained, but I've explained that when we got given the information that the landlord was selling, it explicitly said the landlord is only happy for us to stay as long as he doesn't have a buyer. If a buyer was found before the tenancy was up, the landlord wouldn't let us be at the property. We have that in writing.

Whether he's allowed to do that is another thing, but I don't know the ins and outs of the law and took that information as face value.

So taking my illness out of the equation, had he told us 4 days prior we wouldn't have signed the tenancy agreement. Purely by the fact of if a buyer came along, we would have to leave and had no idea how or when that would be.
We can't afford the property now because we can't pay 2 rents at once. Plus my income is non-existent.

We signed the tenancy with the intentions of having a secure and liable home only to be told 4 days later otherwise.

Perhaps I'm missing something. My brain is fucking fried and I'm so mentally and physically exhausted.

Jesus it's like banging my head against a brick wall.

You signed a tenancy which guarantees A tenancy.

Your landlord selling means nothing. Stop using it as an excuse. You can't afford the rent.

But she wouldn't BE homeless if she hadn't have signed the new contract. Written into a standard (1-2 year etc) tenancy agreement is that at the end of the term it will automatically move on to a 'rolling contract', normally giving landlord or tenant 1 or 2 months to give notice at any time after the initial tenancy period.

Signing a NEW contract for 1-2 years at that point only gives you security that the landlord isn't going to sell, and gives the landlord security that the tenant isn't going to up and leave within a couple of months, it makes sense for both parties assuming that they are in it for the long term.

As a landlord myself, he should NEVER have made them sign a new agreement knowing that he was immediately going to sell up. He also should have allowed them to surrender on the tenancy (with a 1-2 month notice period of course) because of her diagnosis, only a hard hearted bastard would make them pay for a property that they no longer can afford to live in. ESPECIALLY as he's already been paid out by the insurance for loss of rent and the property has now been sold! A tenancy agreement is only valid if one or both sides choose to enforce it.

I feel for the OP here, she didn't know he was selling up when they signed and she didn't know she was going to get cancer, she said she couldn't afford the rent and that's why she left? If she was someone you knew in real life would you be talking to her with such disdain?

What was the alternative? She could have chosen to stay there, not paid rent at all and wait until he dragged her through the courts to kick her out, house sale would have to be on hold until the matter was resolved, it takes months and months and costs thousands to get a tenant out who doesn't want to go.. he got off lucky when all things considered.

As a landlord.. and a human being.. I'd have let her walk straight away on her diagnosis alone.

Ffs banging my head again.

Had the OP been told the house was being sold and not offered a contract thd new owners would very easy be able to end the tenancy.

The oP was given a fixed term agreement and this has a secure tenancy for a year. The new owners couldn't kick her out.

However the oP was no longer able to afford the rent and that's now "bad landlord".

Fucks sake

No wonder you're grumpy with all that head banging.

Had the OP been told the house was being sold and not offered a contract thd new owners would very easy be able to end the tenancy.

Agreed, assuming the new owners were landlords not residential owners you can't just 'end' a tenancy though, they would have to give notice (of whatever is stated in the agreement).

The oP was given a fixed term agreement and this has a secure tenancy for a year. The new owners couldn't kick her out.

The new owners wouldn't have been able to buy the property with a tenant in situ, without specialist conveyancing or a buy to let mortgage, which they obviously wouldn't have applied for because they cost more, you need more deposit and they are a family who want to live there, so it's a bit of a moot point, it would never have gotten that far.

Besides that, the contract contained a 'break clause' as the OP has mentioned that above, it's normally 6 months in and tenant and landlord can then give notice to leave. I assume that is what the landlord was planning, it takes a good 3 months to complete on a house purchase plus extra time to sell it, so that was probably why he got them to sign, so he had 6 months guaranteed rent.

However the oP was no longer able to afford the rent and that's now "bad landlord".

Can't it be both? Greedy landlord and unfortunate tenant, I'm sure the tenant would rather have stayed in the house and not have cancer, she has stated that that is the reason for the move.

I'm actually wondering, given that tenant default insurance isn't part of standard landlord insurance (it's an added extra), whether he had her sign a new contract JUST so he could claim off the insurance for loss of rent for the full 6/12 months anyway.

The reason he's being pegged as a bad landlord, at least by me, is that he's been paid by his insurance for the loss of rent, due to unforseen circumstances (the situation here is EXACTLY what you pay that for, tenants falling on hard times) and he's STILL pursuing the tenant.. even though he's already been paid out and she doesn't owe anything now. I still think he's committing insurance fraud by trying to reclaim the money from her.. I wonder if he'll give it back to the insurance company??

I can't feel sorry for the landlord, he's not out of pocket, he's not had any drama, he's got his house back clean and tidy and now sold, the only added thing he's had to do is put a claim into his insurance, who have paid, best case scenario for him to be fair.

I do however feel for the OP, she's got cancer, her world's falling to bits and she's got this shit now hanging over her head.

This is rubbish. The property was surrendered by agreement.

How so?

The tenancy has ended. This is not a blurred line.

You're not missing anything OP, you're always going to get a mixed bag of responses on here, don't take any of it to heart.

I've had a look through all my landlord paperwork, I can't find anything that says the insurance company would look to recoup costs from you, the insurance is there for when tenants fall on hard times, due to redundancy or illness, change in circumstances and can no longer pay, a lot of tenants would stay in the property till they are removed, as they'd have no where to go, so you've done right by him by leaving straight away, he should have let you surrender anyway, but he's actually better off this way as he will have back claimed from when you stopped paying to the end of the term in the contract, best case scenario for him.

I mentioned it before up thread but if you have it in writing that the landlord has claimed from his insurance, then forward that to the letting agent to show resolution and that they should stop chasing you for payment, it may be automated on their end rather then them actually chasing you.

I wish you well OP, I hope things improve for you.

OP you need to make a claim for your deposit. It doesn't matter that you won't get any better but you need to make a claim.... and surely that will offset rent money owed?

@sandyhappypeople the oP needs to clarify the break clause