Evicted for the 2nd time in less than a year!

[EvictedAgain]

AIBU to think this is just untenable?

Lsst landlord wanted to sell but did it really sneakily insisting we allowed viewings 4 months into a one year contract. We didn’t of course so were served with a Section 21 after 6 months.

We had to take current property last August (£500 month more than last place as nowhere else available). Now been served another Section 21 as landlord is not happy that we refused to pay for a professional gardener (his mate) which wasn’t in contract, or allow him to take the toilet seat that’s been in the property. This is revenge because he was unhappy about having to fix the shower and faulty dishwasher!

We are a large family and have loads of stuff. I can’t believe we’re having to pack up and move again!

AIBU to think that LL’s shouldn’t have the power to kick people out of their homes at whim and notice should be 6 months not two months?

The landlord here hasn't insisted though have they. They suggest the tenant may wish to use the professional in circumstances where they haven't been able to or carried out a term of the tenancy for upkeep of the garden. The tenant chose not to hire the professional.

But it was in the contract she had to maintain the garden properly and she hasn't so he made a suggestion which she chose not to use. Which is fine. But also she then shouldn't be surprised he exercised his legal right to serve notice.

I was replying to the post I quoted that said “Unless the contract stipulates professional hedge maintenance, they were not "breaching the terms" of anything. A tenancy agreement is a legally bind”

Yes and on this occasion the tenant is in breach because they aren't maintaining the garden correctly. The LL made a suggestion she may want to use a professional if unable to do it herself.

And on this occasion, whether connected or not, the Landlord has correctly served notice under the legally binding tenancy to bring it to an end.

The result is the same the tenant has been served notice and will need to leave or be evicted. If the garden isn't maintained properly at the time she leaves the landlord will instruct a professional to rectify it and legally withhold the amount required from the deposit.

Maybe if the tenant had not breached the tenancy ie maintained the garden she may not have been served notice, or maybe she would and its unconnected. We don't know - it is the tenant assuming they are connected.

(Actually, the OP reports that the garden is fine and they were maintaining it, but that the landlord has said his mate has to do it, which differs from the original agreement.)

Nonetheless, my point was about someone else’s post that said landlords could put clauses in the tenancy agreement about paring for professional services. They cannot.

*paying

This.

It's rarely in a landlord's interest to serve S21 because it costs more to get new tenants in and is more hassle. Even though many landlord-haters seem to think they do it just for fun...

And thus poster was talking about people on benefits . If they do have a private landlord . Then benefits are paying their mortgage

No one needs to rent out 11 houses ffs. I think you think if you if you keep telling yourself what a great landlord you are it will justify that it's ok. You'll never understand you are part of the problem.

FFS you'll never get it do you ? One of the reasons people can't afford to buy their own properties is because people like you have bought up multiple properties contributing to pushing up house prices. Then you come along making out you are bloody landlord of the year and you are doing everyone a favour. Makes me sick. I understand some people become accidental landlords , but deliberately buying up so many properties is just greedy and obscene.

Seems like a case of ESH

Well what’s actually happened is they “suggest the tenant may wish to use the professional” …. But if they don’t they’ll lose their home. Not really a suggestion is it.

The landlord messed up at the start but not putting in the contract that Bob always trims the trees, and the tenant agrees to pay towards half the cost (£100)
IF it’s legal to do so ?

But he gave them the option to do it themselves and now doesn’t like it.

@EvictedAgain Why are you attacking the LL who said they are charging 250/300 below market rent?
You so realise that most landlords don’t make much profit at all from renting their houses? The rent is overinflated because house prices have been overinflated for years, also the last couple of years mortgages have shot through the roof. Most LLs only make money once the mortgage is paid off in 25 plus years.

Trouble is "maintain" is subjective. If a landlord has particularly strong feelings about the appearance of a hedge, the wording in the contract needs to be very specific or they need to manage it themselves. It's not a breach of tenancy to refuse to pay for professional hedge trimming.

That's what the tenant has assumed to be the case. They may or may not be connected. However where the tenant seems to be being awkward in other reflects perhaps the landlord is taking advantage of the fact that the s21 procedure won't be available to use soon so has decided to use it now whilst they legally can?

As far as I'm aware you don't need to leave when the section 21 comes to fruition if it's in the middle of an assured shorthold contract (eg. 6 months into a 1 year contract). You should have stayed. The council can advise you on that and speak to the landlord and assist you with going through court if you refer yourself to the honelessness prevention unit (even if just for advice if you're capable of renting elsewhere). I'm being evicted right now, section 21 sent 2 months exactly before end of tenancy, the council advised to tell the landlord I'm unable to leave until I find suitable accomodation elsewhere. They have said that if the section 21 is invalid (which it can and often is due to many reasons such as missing docs at beginning of tenancy or out of date gas safety etc) then they need to issue one again with the correct documentation and the 2 months starts again. Even when the 2 months is up, you're able to stay as long as you pay the rent, until it goes to court and you're issued an eviction notice which will be 14 days from that date to move out. From the issuing of a section 21, you on average have 4 months before you need to leave the property. This does not affect future renting, you won't get a ccj, etc. if this happens again for you and I'm crossing my fingers it doesn't because it's awful isn't, then stay put until you find similar priced accomodation elsewhere. If you're financially struggling at all I would recommend going through councils homelessness prevention unit and you could end up with an affordable council flat, which then would allow you to save to buy. The council can advise you on this. That's if you don't mind the long haul of temporary accomodation, but you could end up in a much better position long term (obviously depending on how much money you have coming in and your lifestyle). Good luck.

I agree and have if you read my posts never said its a breach to not use the professional. Yes it's subjective too. The tenant admits they haven't done the top section properly, but the landlord isn't giving notice on that basis. The landlord is serving a s21 notice which is a no fault no reason procedure which they are entitled to use (whilst it is still currently legal to do so). This is not subjective. If the relationship hadn't been soured would the landlord be serving? We simply don't know.

I think the issue is landlords still see the house they renting out as their house & not the tennents homes.
As long as your not causing damage landlords should leave you alone to be able to live in the property in peace and quiet.
Hope you can find somewhere new

Im sorry this has happened to you . So many landlords selling up and not enough social housing . its shit .

Well @Mementomorissons seems to think all LA can afford to buy new houses and no LL are needed in future. Over the last 2-3 years loads of LL have sold up. That has not resulted in cheaper houses for sale as @Mementomorissons thought it would and instead it's resulted in higher rents.

Ah right. Seems a silly thing to have caused so much hassle over x

I haven’t said landlords build houses??? I said where would the people who don’t want to buy/can’t buy live if there weren’t rental properties (and therefore landlords)?? You’re not naive enough to believe there are enough council houses for all these people are you? Or should they just live with family until they want to buy or can afford to buy? Or should they just find a nice shop doorway to live in until they want to buy or can afford to buy? 🙄

Prior to buying my home I rented for a few years as I was undecided where in the country I wanted to settle. I didn’t want to buy and then sell and I decided to live elsewhere , didn’t have family in the area I rented and didn’t fancy living in a shop doorway therefore I rented an apartment from a landlord until I’d decided where I wanted to be and saved a deposit up. What would I have done if there weren’t rental properties/landlords?

This place was already costing them an extra £500 a month, maybe they couldn't afford to pay out more money for the landlords mate to do the garden.

Maybe they couldn’t afford a gardener.