Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Legal matters

Mumsnet has not checked the qualifications of anyone posting here. If you have any legal concerns we suggest you consult a solicitor.

Tenants requesting a court order!

411 replies

Emily2586 · 29/10/2022 21:49

Hi everyone,

I would really be grateful for some advice. I have a property in England which I would like to move back to. I have given the notice on time and gave my tenants 3 months to find alternative accommodation. The three months have now passed and the tenants have come back to me saying they can not find any place to rent because of their low income and is saying they would like me to start a court order so they could give a letter to the council so that they could assist them.

I wasn't expecting them to do this as I had given three months notice and I had some to them if this wasn't enough time they could let me know and it could be extended slightly to give them time to find something. I was under the impression they were finding a place to rent all this time.

The tenants have been in the property for 10 years and I have no experience of about the legal proceedings in this case. I myself have kids and need to move into this property as I am currently staying with my parents until the tenants move out and I am worried that court proceedings could cost a lot.

Could someone please kindly give any advice of what I could do.

OP posts:
sleephelp2022 · 07/11/2022 20:18

WhatJustHappened321 · 04/11/2022 20:45

@sleephelp2022 'renting is now considerably cheaper than owning.' Really?? My friends mortgages are all at least 50% less than my extortionate rent!!

But if you applied for a mortgage to buy the house you are renting = more expensive. That is what I'm getting at...

Changerofthename1 · 07/11/2022 20:25

@ZeldaWillTellYourFortune Can you reference that data. I recon im £600,000 up personally and over a million jointly. Even with a new boiler every 10 years

Xenia · 07/11/2022 20:32

It is hard to generalise and it depends over what period. In periods when property prices do not rise those landlords with a mortgage will not be making money (as they are taxed on profits they do not make because of the interest changes). If the property were purchased as the second property of the landlord who also owns his home, for 350,000 to let out the stamp duty is £15,500 in England. So until he is into year 2 he will not even have covered his stamp duty costs never mind solicitor's and mortgage arrangement fee and letting agent's fee.

WhatJustHappened321 · 10/11/2022 18:22

Agree. People saying it's not cost-effective to rent are not factoring in maintenance, repairs, upkeep. There have been studies done on the long-term difference between owning and renting, and owners don't come out much ahead.
@ZeldaWillTellYourFortune I'm sorry I don't understand this AT ALL. How can owners not come out ahead? If I rent for the next 10 years, say.. that's £120,000 completely down the drain. I'll never see that money again. But I've contributed £120k to the landlords mortgage. How can they not come out ahead?

BlueSkyAndButterflies · 05/05/2023 14:08

Bigbadfish · 01/11/2022 15:31

No they won't. With the writ of possession the council will assist. Wether that be temporary accommodation or something more permanent. With the writ they will be on a higher band and recognised as involuntary homeless. Leaving without one would be foolish.

This is of no relevance to the OP, but the tenants could be in the same position six months later as the poster you've quoted said.

The council don't always house people themselves. They don't have a duty to house people permanently, only to house them. Obviously in a lot of cases they do go from temporary homeless accommodation into a council or housing association permanent tenancy.

In some areas with high demand and low housing availability, the council rehouse some people in private rentals. They know of landlords who will accept people on benefits, people without references, people who've stayed until the bayliffs evicted them, people with no deposit (the council either pays it or loans the tenant the money for it), people with low incomes and no guarantors. In short, landlords who don't have the usual high criteria private rentals do. This only solves the problem for the tenant temporarily, because when the tenancy becomes due for renewal in six months time the landlord could raise the rent or evict, if they want to, meaning the tenant has to go through the homeless system all over again.

OP, what a shit-show this whole situation is. you've had good advice already. What I will add (because you don't seem to be understanding it) is you need to lose the mindset of thinking you have no money for court costs. The tenants have the legal right to live in your property until evicted by bailiffs. End of. If you own this property you have no choice but to find the money from somewhere to pay the court/solicitors costs to get them evicted.

As was mentioned early in the thread, if you don't own this property (your posts make it sound as if your parents could be the legal owners) and there's no tenancy agreement between you and the tenants, walk away and save yourself the headache of it all. If your parents own the property they are the ones who should be dealing with evicting their tenants. What they do with the property after that is up to them.

If you're living with parents and you don't own this property, and it's becoming impossible for you to stay with your parents, have your parents make you homeless. Which they can do easily without any court order as you're not their tenant, only a guest in their home, and therefore you have no rights to stay there at all. Then you can go through the council homelessness procedure and be rehoused yourself.

You say you're unable to work for health reasons. With the exception of PIP and child benefit (which aren't means tested), I hope you haven't been claiming income-related benefits whilst owning this house yourself. Because property you don't live in is counted as if it were cash in the bank by DWP. So if you own this property and have been claiming income-related benefits, without declaring either the property ownership or the rental income (which would make you ineligible for means tested benefits) to DWP, then you've been committing benefit fraud.

If you don't currently own the property and you're claiming income-related benefits, do not have your parents transfer ownership into your name without first evicting their tenants. Otherwise you'll lose your benefits and the tenants will become your problem, so then how will you get money together to evict them? You can only claim income-related benefits whilst being a property owner if you're living in the property.

IncessantNameChanger · 05/05/2023 14:54

WhatJustHappened321 · 10/11/2022 18:22

Agree. People saying it's not cost-effective to rent are not factoring in maintenance, repairs, upkeep. There have been studies done on the long-term difference between owning and renting, and owners don't come out much ahead.
@ZeldaWillTellYourFortune I'm sorry I don't understand this AT ALL. How can owners not come out ahead? If I rent for the next 10 years, say.. that's £120,000 completely down the drain. I'll never see that money again. But I've contributed £120k to the landlords mortgage. How can they not come out ahead?

I agree. I could sell my house and its gone up from £142,000 to £300,000 in 18 years. So not only do I get back my deposit I have £150,000 profit ( minus tax in my case). Who really rents and saves up £150,000 over two decades? Surely that's not the norm? Is it?! Maybe in nieve and my tennants have £150,000 in the bank? The only major costs has been the central heating which was 3k. 18 years ago. Just knowing I have that asset is a privilege of security to me, but maybe I'm a weirdo. I presume and sympathise my tennants didn't build that up. They go on cruises etc but I just can't imagine they feel the security I do. Do they??!! I don't see it

BlueSkyAndButterflies · 05/05/2023 15:27

PrincessofWellies · 04/11/2022 21:19

One of my properties, mortgage for the full purchase price would cost £1280. It rents for £1125. Once you factor in expenses/maintenance of around £3500/4000 per year I would be losing around £6500 a year.

It's cheaper to rent.

Only cheaper in the short term.

Homeowners are quids in long term because at the end of 25yrs payments (or whatever the mortgage term is) they own the property outright, unlike someone renting.

They can sell up and downsize, move to another area of the country or another country altogether, in order to release some capital from their asset, something a tenant can't do because they have no asset to release capital from.

I know some who've downsized from a family home to a single person dwelling, investing the capital released and living off the interest, enabling them to retire early. I know someone who has moved abroad swapping a small 3bed here for a mansion with land in the new country. Options not open to tenants who have nothing to sell.

Homeowners can also do things like having a lodger to mitigate their costs, unlike with renting where subletting in any way is generally prohibited in the tenancy agreement.

Day to day with a mortgage to pay homeowners may not come out much better off than renters. Long term though they have way more options about what to do with the home they live in and the capital it holds.

People need to reduce expectations. AND stop looking backward with rose-colored glasses. Those one-income households people like to reminisce about didn't have 1/4 of the luxuries, choices, etc. that we have now. No one has ever supported a 21st-century lifestyle for three or four people (or more) on one modest income. Ever in the history of humankind.

This part, from another poster, I do agree with. People would need less money if they went back to living how people used to. Part of the reason life expectancy rose, I'm going to guess, is because the average person isn't freezing their tits off in a cold damp house every winter any more without quite enough food to go round (although I realize things are going back that way a bit recently).

Modern life is what it is though. Back then with most in the same boat it wouldn't have mattered too much socially and not affording tech was fine when the country didn't run on it. People today can't just cut their cloth to afford the rent, not when LL are carrying out affordability checks where they require a much higher income than the rent cost.

Someone upthread questioned whether rent that took up 50% of a couple's income was reasonable/sustainable etc. I'm willing to bet that in the past there were a great many people in a situation where the rent took up most of their income leaving little left over for anything else.

Xenia · 05/05/2023 16:21

Blue, most buy to let landlords with a mortgage though are on interest only mortgage borrowig 75% of the property's cost so at end of mortgage term they still owe all the capital so not always quids in....

PrincessofWellies · 05/05/2023 23:53

BlueSkyAndButterflies · 05/05/2023 15:27

Only cheaper in the short term.

Homeowners are quids in long term because at the end of 25yrs payments (or whatever the mortgage term is) they own the property outright, unlike someone renting.

They can sell up and downsize, move to another area of the country or another country altogether, in order to release some capital from their asset, something a tenant can't do because they have no asset to release capital from.

I know some who've downsized from a family home to a single person dwelling, investing the capital released and living off the interest, enabling them to retire early. I know someone who has moved abroad swapping a small 3bed here for a mansion with land in the new country. Options not open to tenants who have nothing to sell.

Homeowners can also do things like having a lodger to mitigate their costs, unlike with renting where subletting in any way is generally prohibited in the tenancy agreement.

Day to day with a mortgage to pay homeowners may not come out much better off than renters. Long term though they have way more options about what to do with the home they live in and the capital it holds.

People need to reduce expectations. AND stop looking backward with rose-colored glasses. Those one-income households people like to reminisce about didn't have 1/4 of the luxuries, choices, etc. that we have now. No one has ever supported a 21st-century lifestyle for three or four people (or more) on one modest income. Ever in the history of humankind.

This part, from another poster, I do agree with. People would need less money if they went back to living how people used to. Part of the reason life expectancy rose, I'm going to guess, is because the average person isn't freezing their tits off in a cold damp house every winter any more without quite enough food to go round (although I realize things are going back that way a bit recently).

Modern life is what it is though. Back then with most in the same boat it wouldn't have mattered too much socially and not affording tech was fine when the country didn't run on it. People today can't just cut their cloth to afford the rent, not when LL are carrying out affordability checks where they require a much higher income than the rent cost.

Someone upthread questioned whether rent that took up 50% of a couple's income was reasonable/sustainable etc. I'm willing to bet that in the past there were a great many people in a situation where the rent took up most of their income leaving little left over for anything else.

You have a simplistic view of investment. Landlords of course are in the business to make money. You talk of capital growth of the property but I can 'earn' £9000 a year stress free just by putting my money in a bank account. Whilst my money is tied in property I can't use that money for anything else. So now interest rates are rising, new legislation being introduced which impacts considerably on profit thanks to this governments inability to enforce the laws we already have, I can get more through other investments which is why most landlords like me are selling off their investments and investing in less risky endeavours.

It's a very sad situation for tenants and it won't be improving any time soon. The sooner this government is out the better. A different one just might have a housing policy that works because this one certainly doesn't.

neilyoungismyhero · 26/05/2023 02:54

Maybe your best bet would be to put the rent up to a more reasonable amount- if you say its low - they may then decide they can get a much better house for that sort of money...and move out themselves. You're still on dodgy ground with the deposit though..

stayathomer · 26/05/2023 03:39

I don’t understand people saying op should use the money she made from their rent- she said it didn’t change and was low and there was a mortgage on the place!

New posts on this thread. Refresh page
Swipe left for the next trending thread