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

My thoughts.
You don't seem to give a shiny shit about your occupant, and I've been at the other end of it myself as a tenant, as have others here!
I really don't have much sympathy for you.

Go over to the money saving expert forum. There’s a section on renting/buying where professional landlords will talk you through where you stand and what to do if there’s a way forward.

a little advice, many landlords will take a dim view of such oversights so have a thick skin because you are going to experience criticism but try to ride it out and take any constructive criticism on board.

forums.moneysavingexpert.com/categories/house-buying-renting-selling

Your best bet is to sell it through a company like ‘Good Move’ who will buy it with tenant in situ, it will be way below market value, but that’s the consequence for not doing the correct checks and paperwork. Tenant will get to stay in the house with a new landlord.
you've fucked up unfortunately and now it’s come back to bite you.
it will cost you time and money to rectify what you haven’t done and evict legally.

Treating housing as a way to make (mostly passive) income, by exploiting the basic human need of others for shelter, comes with risks just like any other investment. (I mean 'exploit' here in its literal sense, not a pejorative one, though in the case of a landlord who doesn't bother to ensure safety, both might be true).

Someone has to own the risk, and obviously that should be you, the investor. Either the person who chose to make money in this way risks making a bit less money if they have to delay a sale or sell with a tenant in situ, or else the person who is just meeting a basic human need by renting the house risks becoming homeless whenever it suits the landlord to sell up. Of course the law should protect the person with less power, and much more to lose. You seem to think it should be ther other way around. Boo hoo.

Have you ever been in a position of having to rent, yet not meet the criteria for social housing? I have. I don’t get why people seem to think there should be no private landlords. Where do people live if they aren’t eligible for social housing? It’s all fine to suggest that the government should provide rentals for everyone who needs somewhere, but the reality is it will take decades to build enough social housing for everyone who can’t afford to buy.

You can get all of those things done, issue the information and THEN issue S21

It's the tenant's home.

but she literally won’t move even though we’ve asked repeatedly she just says she hadn’t got anywhere to go

Presumably, because she can't afford a comparable private rent now, and if she wants a local authority one, then she will be advised she can't leave until, and unless, you take legal steps to evict her. Blame the system not the tenant (who presumably has been a good tenant until now as you've not said otherwise) and blame yourself for holding someone else's home security in your hands but somehow being so clueless you didn't even discharge the basics.

This 100%

I hope everyone on here crowing at the OP’s predicament will be happy when the only landlords left will be large financial institutions etc. How long do you think they will put up with most of the rights being on the tenants side? They will be lobbying for easy evictions and screwing tenants over in no time.

It’s not harsh, it’s realistic. If she wants to evict a good tenant out of their home when they have nowhere to go, then she shouldn’t have acted in an illegal piss poor way herself. The law protects landlords from treating their tenants like shit and getting away with it, as it should.

Well yes it does, because that's what the law says. A tenancy agreement isn't a 'loan' and a landlord has obligations.

I don't think that the PP is saying they shouldn't be private landlords, just that if you're going to be one - do your job properly.

What a nasty little post.

You could offer the house to the tenant below market value. This may allow them to get a mortgage using your discount as the deposit if that’s the reason they are currently unable to buy (may not be the case at all, but worth exploring).

Bit rich to be whining you’re expected legally to have the tenant in your property forevermore when you don’t give a rat’s behind about abiding by the law anyway.

Only for as long as the owner allows them to stay though. It will never be ‘home’, and it will never feel like home because eventually, whether it’s one year or 10 years, there will be a time when you have to leave. I rented for years. Couldn’t decorate to my taste, couldn’t have that lovely kitchen or bathroom, or extend or lay laminated floor instead of tired carpets. Even if I was allowed to, who wants to invest money into a property which will never be theirs? So I never viewed it as home, just somewhere to live for a period of time until I had to move on again. Luckily my tenancy lasted 10 years before I moved on to another rental for 5 years, and then I managed to get back on the property ladder at age 50. But I know the reality for many is that they are moved on every couple of years, which is crap, but private rentals are a life saver for those who can’t afford to buy, or who can’t have social housing.

You can’t be made to continue as a landlord if you don’t want to surely?! OP, can you on paper ‘sell’ the property with sitting tenant to someone else, DH, family etc, with the proper tests in place, then issue a new contract for tenant with the new landlord and then move forward with an eviction notice then? Just a thought!

It's not irrelevant, because again, that's the law
OP will have to bribe her tenant to leave to make it worth her while.

There's quite the spectrum between only big conglomerate landlords and giving a tenant the basic right of knowing the gas supply and appliances in their home are safe and not going to kill them, FFS.🙄

Considering the number of oversights on the part of the OP, have they been declaring the rental income to HMRC?

That would cost thousands and thousands. Much better to offer half the sum it would cost to the tenant to help her move!

So I’d advise you to speak to another solicitor regarding this. But the way I see it you have a couple of options.

1. buy her out. Offer a lump sum.
2. sell with a sitting tenant
3. sell to someone you know, or partner or family member or a limited company. Once sold you can go through the process of s21 under a new owner. Then they/you can sell once empty.

You need to cost up each option. Option 3 would incur stamp duty. You won’t be able to sell it for a nominal amount as it would trigger hmrc. But you can work something out.

As a former landlord myself, I have zero sympathy for landlords who give no fuck about their tenants’ safety and do not even carry out electricity and gas checks. You do realise that if an electrical or gas fault had killed your tenant, you’d be in jail for manslaughter? You haven’t even answered whether you have obtained these certificates now, so presumably not.

In your greed to make money whilst having no care for your tenant’s safety, you have made your bed and you’ll have to lie on it. Your only option is to pay your tenant to leave and you’ll need to offer several thousand to make it worth their while.

I have a question (completely curious as I know nothing about this). If the owner can't evict and people on here are talking about the owner having to pay 5 figure sums and/or selling at a massively reduced rate then what would happen if the owner just waited until tenant was out at work, emptied the house, changed the locks and moved back in. Morally obviously massively awful and illegal. But what would the impact of that be? I'm assuming court etc, but for what?