AIBU to end a tenancy so my niece can live there?

[SunnyDaysAndCoolNights]

We have a house that we rent out to a family with 2 children who have been in the house for about 7 years. The house is in the same city that our niece is at university in.

Just after Xmas, my niece asked us if she could live in the house for her second and third year at uni, (possibly longer) as the houses she had looked at weren’t very nice and she can’t stay in halls.

After speaking to my husband, we decided to say yes and we gave our tenants a section 21 notice in February. Our tenants were/are not happy and have been advised to stay in the house by the council. We thought that may happen which is why we served the notice in February despite my niece not needing the house until September. We were also aware of the new rules coming in soon which would make it harder to end a tenancy.

Since finding out that we have ended the tenancy for our current tenants, my brother and his wife (not nieces parents) have told us that we are ‘typical arsehole landlords’ for ‘kicking out a family’. They think our niece, also their niece is selfish for asking, that she could have found somewhere herself and that we should have put our tenants first as they have been our tenants for quite a long time and they have children. My brother and his wife rent with their children, so obviously that may play a part in their feelings on this. I feel upset they would say these things as I think it’s normal to put your own family first. My other brother and his wife who are parents of my niece are very annoyed at our other brother and his wife.

Would you have done the same as we have or would you have put the tenants first and said no to your niece? I do have sympathy for my tenants, they’re a nice family and have been good tenants, but obviously we love our niece and to us, she comes first.

That’s a tough one. My nieces mean the absolute world to me and there aren’t many situations I wouldn’t do all I could to help them.
But I think I’d have drawn the line at evicting a family from their home of 7 years. Especially with her only wanting the house for a couple of years.
I think I’d find it hard to justify that one.

They really should not always come first if they have no genuine need. .
If your niece and her kids were escaping domestic abuse and could not find a safe space to live - put them first and end the existing tenancy.
If your niece fancies having a whole house to herself at a time when most youngsters are sharing or living in a studio flat - tell her it's not appropriate.

But you can still put her first without evicting your tenants. I guess there' s no point in this thread as your mind was made up from the start.

You say you wanted to know if you were unreasonable but obviously you don't care anyway so there isn't really anything else to say.

I'm glad to hear you have a lovely brother though. He's obviously not entitled like the rest of your family and sounds more grounded and caring 🙂

My mistake. Your siblings are falling out over it, Including her parents. That's going to make her feel awful.

A horrible thing to do to a family, and all because of a teenager who doesn't want to stay in halls and doesn't like anything else she's seen. I know blood's thicker than water, but a whole family's being put out on the street here. Absolutely reprehensible.

Worked with homeless young people for five years. Full time. Worked in an addiction unit for two years. Worked as a part time worker in two homeless hostels when I was at uni for over a year. Worked for three years in another homeless unit - and have done plenty of volunteering as well

Which University is she at, OP?

There's a very big difference between putting your loved ones first and disregarding everyone else's needs because of your relatives whims.

Your niece did not need the house.

Not sure it's her parents -possibly though.

Well then this thread is completely pointless then, isn't it?

Yes, you are a shit landlord but if you know that and are doing this anyway, this is all a waste of time isn't it.

Doesn't sound like a good decision for you financially, but you're under no obligation to continue your tenants contract outwith the terms of their contract. You're not a charity.

You've gone 'above and beyond' by giving them several months notice when a section 21 only requires 2 months.

As for the local authority advising them to stay put - this is the real moral failing. They are doing this because it's the LAs responsibly to house them, not yours.

The Government created this situation by selling off most of the council houses and now expects private landlords to act as social landlords to pick up the slack. People don't want to pay enough taxes to ensure adequate social housing then expect private landlords to shoulder the burden so they don't have to feel guilty.

We as a society need to do better but it's not your fault OP.

I can see this from both sides as this happened to me in February of this year.

Very happy where I was, but my landlord's grandchild, her partner and new baby decided to move closer to their family because her partner lost his job and it's much cheaper living here than in central London - I should know, I have lived in both areas. He was very upset when he gave me my notice and gave me a generous six months to find somewhere new.

I said to him: "Look, family comes first, they have a new baby, they're moving to a completely new country. I will find somewhere as quickly as I can." And I did, in fact I moved within a month. Much easier for me as a single person with no pets to move than for this new family to find a place live. So it's what I did.

So I completely understand that family comes first and I think my landlord did the right thing. That said it's the opposite way around with you - it's making a family find a new home, rather than a single tenant. Much easier for single people to find new accommodation than a family. This is where I think a different solution could have been found - somewhere else for the niece more suited to a single person than moving into accommodation fit for a family.

Not typical landlord at all. Most landlords are looking at the financial side of things and looking to make a profit. In this case you are letting your heart rule your head. You are evicting a reliable, long standing tenant for someone who will be paying less and be gone soon leaving you vulnerable to having new tenants who won’t be as reliable as these you have now.
So from a business point of view, you are being unreasonable.

Is your brother a 'loved one'? Why not let him live there for free if money is no object. You sound horrible.

Multiple times someone has posted 'you're not a charity' as if a single person has ever been the illusion that private landlords are.

You’ve clearly made your mind up and a lot of people as this thread shows do think it’s a shit thing to do. I also judge you for it.

You’ve made your choice though - 10% or so people think you’re not being unreasonable the rest unreasonable so if you really wanted to know this indicates the vast majesty agree with your brother who had a go at you. Not sure what else you expect here?

Obviously this is your prerogative as landlord OP, but I would not have evicted a decent family in favour of your niece.

You’re getting a really hard time on here OP - it’s your house and you can do whatever you want with it! You don’t owe anyone your house, regardless of how good they’ve been as tenants.

Margaret Thatcher created a social housing shortage by making the right to buy more favourable for tenants, not allowing local authorities to use that revenue to build more homes, which are now often in the hands of private landlords. All because she wanted votes from working class people. Why should local authorities build homes, let them and then have to sell them at a massive discount? Does that make good business sense to you?

Councils are going to advise people to stay put. Pretty sure Shelter would advise the same. I live in a town of around 33k people. There are 14k people on the list for a council house. Just because they have legal responsibilities doesn't mean that they will be able to find accommodation for everyone who needs it. When I worked in supported accommodation some people including pregnant mums waited two years for a home in the area they wanted to stay in - due to lack of housing stock as you've just said

If you are so convinced of your decision, why have you come on here to ask for people’s opinions especially if it’s not going to change your mind?
90% of voters voted that you are being unreasonable and I agree, as a landlord myself, I wouldn’t do it in these circumstances.

You are putting your niece's nice-to-have comfort above the basic necessity of a roof over the head of the family you're evicting.
Shame on her for suggesting it, and shame on you for doing it.

Yes I agree it’s a shit thing to do.

turfing out good tenants who have been in your property for 7 years so you’re niece can have it for 2.

what happens after that?

Also a decent family are far more likely to treat it like their home than family and students ( yes I’m stereotyping!)

Family come first, and it’s within the rules to evict tenants, so I’d just press on.