Landlord lying to mortgage holder and letting agent

[WhistlingPot]

A few years ago we discovered (through debt collectors arriving at our door) that not only had our landlords not been paying their mortgage for the past 6 months, they hadn't had permission from their mortgage holder to let out their house.

Thanks to Shelter, we learnt that the mortgage company had legal rights to evict us with two days notice, should they wish, regardless of the notice period we had signed up to.

Being 5 months pregnant at the time with our second child, and in the understanding it would be a long term let (we had been there 4.5 years) this was an exceptionally stressful time. We were served formal notice by the ll as they were obliged to put house on the market. We found somewhere else asap, less than ideal (by borrowing and using up valuable savings) and in fear the mortgage company could still evict sooner.

We were then evicted from the new place after 6 months due to ll selling up (even though had promised long term after initial 6 month let) and rented another place. We have just gone into social housing due to being evicted again as our home has just been sold (after being promised long term).

We have never defaulted on any rent and always looked after our homes, paying for thorough end of tenancy cleaners etc.

AIBU to feel agrieved that

A) Our original ll failed to sell house but gained permission to re-let, and the new tenants are still there?

B) The letting agent allowed the property to be let (and managed it) without permission from the lender, therefore compromising our position?

Do we have any legal rights?

You are extrapolating admittedly your bad experience into a global disaster that the government and banks should be trying to fix. Private renting is being discussed in parliament today - again - as should be but your 'problem ' has to be considered in a wider context. Shelter as you obviously know are aware and can advise how to deal with these circumstances but making things too complicated and too legislated will ironically actually provoke and cause the very thing you want to campaign against ie Landlords not being able to afford the mortgage or getting so pissed of they just sell up or abandon to the banks.

I don't understand how making it a criminal offence to let out your property fraudulently is making things too adversely legislative.

I am glad private renting is being discussed today, I hope that sensible plans to protect the innocent and vulnerable are at the heart of debate, over and above protecting landlord profits.

It may seem that I am in a minority (my feeling is I am not, but as stated, others in what has been described as a fairly common situation, are not able to speak out whilst in it) but in any case it is irrelevant, the law should be there to protect the innocent.

With respect to whether a crash or gentle deflation is preferable, I think we need a controlled crash, whatever the cost, so we can start over with a fairer, more just system.

I don't understand why it is that a gentle deflation of house prices, through more house building, won't see lls getting into difficulty in any case, and the same scenarios occurring more frequently.

There is no such thing as a 'controlled' crash and most people who own houses aren't buy to let landlords but normal people who have worked and saved to buy their houses and would be stuck unable to move with no exit plan - who could then end up having to let thier houses and rent - escalating the cycle. A controlled decline would give people time to make plans and look at other financial operations and would start to dissuade BTL to a degree - oh yes and it would mean that the whole economy doesn't get fucked up.

Why criminalise something - do you think it would really stop people doing it or just criminalise some probably fairly desperate people as well - do you think people don't pay their mortgage just because ? i think the police have enough ral crimes to deal with don't you

Actually, re: the matter of letters to "The Occupier" this is ringing bells with me. Shelter did advise not to ignore any letters addressed as such. They warned me that many such letters do get dismissed as junk mail similar to those delivered frequently via Royal Mail. So if this thread is of any use at all, maybe it will serve to help make tenants aware of this, if nothing else.

X post.

I think it would help stop people in shit situations from passing their shit onto others. That seems fair to me.

You do know that personal attacks only serve to weaken and discredit any point you may have?

i don't think they were making any point on the thread , just a general observation

Do you want to mention Nazi's yet ?

Er, no.

Let's attack the posts though eh?

I don't think it is too out there to look at how countries like Iceland turned things around.

I find their sense of justice, bravery and spirit of starting over quite inspiring.

Whistling - you make perfectly sound and reasonable points and you are being baited on this thread.

Yes, of course it is wrong that one person's shitty situation can be passed onto another, but 'that's life'.

Yes, you are right to campaign for change. to make it less likely though.

It was Shelter who alerted us that is could be an eventuality,

It sounds like shelter have you good advice. They said that it COULD be an EVENTUALITY. You got scared and jumped the gun and moved out ASAP. You could have been still living there if you had listened to the advice properly.
I don't agree with what your ex landlord did but I don't think that you can change things. Although ignorance is not a defence acceptable in Law I have no doubt that your ex landlord will claim ignorance and say that it was a complete oversight on his part. The police and prosecution will likely not be prepared to take any action because the cost of action outweighs the chance of conviction and possible punishment. It's about the greater good and in this case the greater good is with the public purse and not spending money on something that isn't worthwhile.
You have an assured tenancy now and you might not have had that if the shit hadn't happened so look on it as short term pain for long term gain. It shouldn't have happened but it did and it's highly unlikely that you can do anything to punish the landlord so sadly you have to move forward and hope that karma comes his way.

Its not quite as rosey as they make it look
fortune.com/2013/08/12/iceland-is-europes-ticking-time-bomb-again/
Plus they have a very unique economy - we are too tied into Europe and our main bloody income in London is financial services - it would be a slight own goal

and wtf it has to do with your landlord being an arse I just cannot fathom

I did not "get scared" I took the most sensible decision to give birth in some sense of stability. Our house was on the market and we had been served notice.

Even so, I still think it is a shit position for anyone to find themselves, more so for those who are vulnerable.

How easy is it for a potential landlord to not inform mortgage company and download fake forms?
Is this really a big problem?
Can anyone link?

Why do they need fake forms?
Some letting agents (the more reputable ones) might ask for confirmation that they have permission to let out the property but others won't. The landlord might not even admit to having a mortgage on the property.
Landlords can also let houses without the use of an agent - so no questions asked.

OP - whether you say you didn't get scared or not it doesn't change the fact that no buyer had been found for the property and it could easily have sold to another landlord with you as a sitting tenant. You would not have been evicted within 2 days. You did what you thought was best but you were not forced to leave when you did. There in no point complaining that somebody else now loves there, because you could have still been living there. As shelter explained 'it could have been an eventuality'. The council would have considered you to be voluntarily homeless if you had presented as homeless in those circumstances.

In your circumstances I probably would have sought alternative accommodation and moved out too. The only difference is that I wouldn't be complaining that somebody else now lives there because I would just be glad to be away from the rogue landlord and glad that he isn't getting any of my money. Just tell yourself that he could possibly have really shitty tenants now causing him all manner of problems.

Mellow I cannot link but if you Google Iceland financial recovery the most recent article to come up is newer than your source, in October, and gives quite a positive feel.

Maybe you are right, inthedark, but there still remains the matter of other's finding themselves in that situation and not being so lucky.

The housing market is overheated due to the availability of credit. , not lack of housing stock.

When people finally can't pay over the odds sellers will have to sell lower. This is what brings prices down. More available housing is nice, but won't bring down prices.

I don't think luck has much to do with it (other than getting social housing eventually which required a certain amount of good fortune and good timing). I think you found somewhere else to live quickly because you were determined to sort something out and do things for yourself, there Is no luck involved in that.
Out of curiosity; did you give the rogue landlord a deposit and if so, did you get it back? There is relevant legislation around deposits on rental properties.

Yes we did at least have our deposit protected,
thankfully.

I think there is also something about letting through an agency, and having some come back. A lot of the contracts we have signed state that the ll has signed to say they have permission, rather than the la actually requiring the proof. I think there are so many checks on tenants, it wouldn't be unjust to require Las to contact the mortgage lender for direct proof, as another layer of protection.

And Mellowautumn, the relevance of looking at the broader picture, rather than just my own situation is connected to what changes we can make to better protect the vulnerable.

As far as I am aware, Iceland took strong action against their rogue bankers, by sending them to jail and making a firm stance against risky practice and protecting the most vulnerable. We could do well to do something similar, and have faith that society doesn't have to fall apart, but can be rebuilt, even if it means we are overall poorer for a while, the potential for a greater, if different future is there.

Oh and thank you firstchoice for your post Btw.

I was indeed being baited there. Not pleasant.