Surely I’m not expected legally to have this tenant in my property forevermore??

[Saywhetw]

Tenant been in property since 2017. I need to sell. Solicitor telling me we can’t used section 21 as I didn’t provide the right information at the time of the tenancy and also didn’t carry out electrical report or gas safety checks. This was oversight on our part. We can’t seem to use section 8 as tenant paid rent and isn’t a nuisance or anything but she literally won’t move even though we’ve asked repeatedly she just says she hadn’t got anywhere to go. It doesn’t seem right there’s no way out of this?? Solicitor said best they can do is write a letter asking her to vacate. I will get a second opinion tomorrow but really panicking now

I understand the beef with shit LLs but the general MN approach to LLs is mad.

Some people need to rent. What would we all do if no LLs existed and you simply couldn’t rent properties.

All irrelevant. At the point the OP decided to become a landlord they took on the responsibility of maintaining basic safety standards for other human lives.

It doesn’t matter if private individuals don’t bother checking their own houses, it doesn’t matter what has happened to the current or former owner. Tenants are entitled to know that at least basic safety checks are done - that is what they are paying the landlord for.

If one of my DC had a landlord skimping on such absolute basics I’d question what else they have skimped on.

quickly checking my tennants gas safety is in date

> which only benefits the corporate landlords. ...
... who, surprise surprise, are huge Labour donors

Rather too many people have had experience of hobby landlords. Frankly if hobby landlords all disappeared from the market in favour of better professional management of letting then the market would be better.

The buy-to-let craze seemed to take off big time in the 90s with a whole raft of new landlords just trying to make the dual buck of both income and capital growth where most commercial landlords know that over the long term you take one or the other if you are to maintain a decent property and decent tenants.

Hobby landlords trying to max the £ for the minimum of input are a plague on the rental market and the fact that a long term, reliable tenant can be kicked out of their home with a months notice by any hobby landlord looking to hike the rent has aggravates the problem. A stable rental market needs to include stable contract models.

And what if a landlord wants to sell, can't sell and wants to relet to avoid house being empty. I'm not aware of any provision for that in the RRB. It's a blunt tool.

I guess being a terrible landlord does actually have has consequences after all.

If they can't sell then they can lower the price until it does.

Or move in themselves and rent out the house they are living in

Or set up a company and sell it to the company, then let it out, that might get round the new regs.

Essentially, if this clause wasn't in there, the dodgy landlords would just say they are planning to sell, put in on right move for a week, then re-let at a higher rent.

@Saywhetw The law has changed since I worked as a solicitor doing possession proceedings but I’ve done some legal research this morning.

In the non-binding county court case of Carson Property Ltd v Monty Shooktz [2018] it was held that the GSC must be provided to the tenant at the start of the tenancy and the LL is unlikely to be able to serve a s21 notice where it is served late.

However, in the case of Trecarrell House [2020] the Court of Appeal held that a LL who fails to provide the tenant with a copy of the gas safety certificate before the start of the tenancy can remedy that default by providing the copy before serving a s21 notice, so long as the certificate was in force at commencement of the tenancy.

The position may be different if the LL has not obtained a certificate at all before the tenant took up occupation or if he has not retained a copy of the certificate that he can provide later on.

In the non-binding county court case of Byrne v Harwood [2022] the judge set aside a possession order, finding that if a LL has not obtained a GSC at all before the tenant takes up occupation he will be forever prevented from serving a s21 notice. However in another county court case Cassell and Cassell v Sidhu and Sidhu [2025] the court held on appeal that the LL’s failure to provide the tenant with a compliant GSC (the certificate omitted the LL’s name and address) was remedied by the provision of two subsequent complaint annual certificates during the course of the tenancy and the s21 notice wa therefore valid. This case is also non-binding and does not align with Byrne so the position remains unclear.

I imagine your solicitor will say that your options are to either (1) negotiate with your tenant (possibly by offering her compensation) or (2) to rectify the default (including deposit protection, prescribed information, EPC, etc), serve the s21 notice, issue possession proceedings, and wait to see whether the court makes a possession order. The first option is probably cheaper, quicker and less uncertain.

That's because you're putting someone else potentially at risk via the transaction of renting them a property. What you do in your own house is up to you.

The landlord will need to be very sure that the market will allow the price they want before evicting their tenant won't they? Any house will sell at the right price. If a landlord evicts their tenant to market the property but markets it too high that's their own fault and problem. You say 'what if they can't sell' as if it's not within the seller's control whether they sell or not.

A terrible landlord finally getting punished what a blessing to see! About bloody time.

Sure, but all these things make life harder for good landlords who abide by all the rules, while bad landlords don't give a shit and are mostly non-compliant.

At a time when governments have abandoned their housing responsibilities and provided no social housing for years, good landlords are not the enemy. I think people forget this.

Get your electric and gas safety checks done now! This is a legal requirement.

Agree
I would rather see enforcement of current regs, rather than more regs that wont be enforced.
Council housing dept's have no staff and no money.

To make my point, the OP had no certification going back 8 years, despite it being a jailable offence.

Good landlords are collateral damage but what's the alternative? The renter reforms are part of a number of approaches to tackle the housing crisis. Property conglomerates are more likely to adhere to regulations than individual landlords so it doesn't bother me that non professionals will be forced out of the market. As long as local authorities continue to build and invest in new housing alongside making it harder to evict private tenants the direction is the right one.

Current regs do nothing to address the housing crisis even if they are enforced. I rented from 1999 to 2021 so I've experienced the absolute Wild West of private renting and letting agents and I've seen improvement for tenants' rights over that time but the crisis has got worse. Extreme measures need to be taken.

AND has been for many years! We rented out our house while we went abroad for 4 years and we've been back (and sold that house) for almost 20 years.

Mind, we used a reputable, local letting agency and paying them to do things properly for us was well worth it. The tenants left the house in fantastic condition, too.

Good landlords have been 'collateral damage' for over a decade now. And here with are with a housing crisis which is worse for tenants than it's ever been. What an own goal.

Perhaps if the landlord lobby groups didn’t vigorously oppose every small improvement in tenant’s rights and every responsibility for landlords then landlords in general might have a better reputation.

I agree that successive governments have left the rental market too much to “market forces”. Across Europe most countries have rental models for long term, short term and mid term, much more stable rental markets and far less of the bad reputation assigned to smaller letting businesses. Attempts to introduce such models have generally been opposed by landlord groups and lobby groups representing landlords and of course - the landlords sitting in the house.

I think if the tenant was taken to court your breach of the law on gas and electricity means they get all their rent back! You are in serious trouble on this one. Depending on the area I'd offer a cash to vacate deal so she has a deposit for new rental.

Surely rent hikes are legal, or how come they’re going through the roof?

Oh come on! I was a landlord years ago because i had to (couldn't sell house and had to move for work) and even i checked out properly what was expected. You know full well you need to provide gas and electricity checks etc. I bet you didnt deposit protect either. Have you declared this on an income tax return as well? I am sorry you are struggling, but the woe is me is a bit rich. You have deliberately not followed relevant legislation and this is what happens. Agree with PPs that you will have to everything that you are meant to do (and the new renters bill is coming in!) and then issue section 21, but there may be more hoops you have to follow. i dont think there is an easy way out of this. Certainly not a quick one.

You've made a massive mistake unfortunately and it is going to cost you money.
You can't ever issue a s21 as you didn't issue the gas certificate.

It doesn't mean the tenant can stay forever though - you can get a possession order by going to court on the basis you want to sell. It may actually be possibe to do this via a s8 as wanting to sell is considered a valid reason even if the tenant hasn't breached the tenancy conditions.

I would speak to a specialist solicitor.

Be prepared though. By not fulfilling your legal requirements the tenant can claim quite a lot of money from you in compensation. And when you take them to court for possession they'll need legal advice so it's unlikely they'll not know this by then. And anyway, the court can rule on the compensation as part of the repossession - it can be several times the monthly rent so can really add up.

Plus obviously court and solicitor fees and potentially bailiff fees if the tenant doesn't go quietly. Not to mention the risk of damage.

You could talk to the tenant and see if they are open to moving out. Explain you need to sell due to financial difficulties. Maybe imply that the house might be repossessed as you can't afford it.

Be as proactive as possible. Offer to help her find somewhere suitable - something nicer would probably help. Show her some potential places.

Offer to pay their deposit on a new place to help them out. Even offer to help them move. Be very apologetic and look as helpful and sympathetic as possible. They may see that as a good option rather than risk losing out in a reposession situation. That will undoubtely be a lot cheaper than any other option.

The previous owner of our home had this problem. It delayed the house purchase by several months. In the end he had to give the tenants a 6 month deposit (their credit rating was awful) and find a suitable tenancy on their behalf in order to persuade them to leave.

His MIL recently moved in next door to us. She told us how sad it was for him that he'd been taken advantage of and how shocked he had been to find, on their departure, that instead of the single woman he had let to there was a family with 5 kids and several pets who had caused significant damage to the property and stolen fixtures and fittings.

Of course, no sympathy was expressed for the people who had to fix the damage and replace the fixtures and fittings, tear up all the carpets due to being ruined by pet waste, deal with the bailiffs for the previous tenants due to the unpaid debts (he clearly hadn't bothered to run credit checks before letting) and undo the bizarre "decorating" and dodgy that had been done. AKA us.

What fixtures and fittings actually were left in place were of such poor quality that they had to be removed anyway, or have since broken. We are trying to get round to replacing the door handles as nearly all of them have either broken or fallen off. The boiler was so old that they had stopped making the model before the turn of the century.

Break out the tiny violins for the man who did as little as possible, failed to fulfil his legal obligations, never once inspected his own property in all the years they were moving in children, dogs, cats and ferrets, spent the bare minimum required to make the house habitable, and promptly abandoned the whole situation when he realised the house he had sold to us was not the house listed in the deeds or the one we'd been shown around.

The gas certificate was just one example of his incompetence and laziness.