Vendor’s tenants refusing to leave

[Plancina]

Just posting for a rant/wild hope of any advice. We have been in process of buying a really lovely house that we totally fell in love with and have laid over £1000 for survey fees, solicitor fees and a survey. It was marketed as no chain but has a private tenant in it who was supposed to move out on the 5th July. The tenant is now refusing to leave - they own their own home but it is having work done on it and they aren’t willing to move into alternative rental accommodation until their home is finished. They are ignoring all requests from their landlord to leave and insisting they will stay there until their house is ready, they won’t give a timeline for this.
Our lease is up in two months and we’d have to commit to a 6 month lease at least to stay here. We are so upset and annoyed - can’t believe how selfish these people are being. The vendor is also annoyed as they don’t want to lose the sale and they had promised their son a portion of the proceeds to buy his first home and now he is going to lose that house also.
Our solicitor says it could take a year to evict them.

I presume they stopped paying rent as well

Not if they’ve got a happorth of common sense. In their shoes the last thing I’d do is stop paying the rent.

@Oliversmumsarmy

I wonder with this sort of thing if op had arrived with her stuff and moved in where would the tenants recourse be.

They don’t own the property, there isn’t any contract to say they should be there that op was involved in.

What if op had arrived and found a load of furniture in her new house and the “tenants” weren’t there and op and the removal men cleared the furniture.

What would happen then when the tenants came back and found the locks changed their furniture out on the street and op cooking tea in her kitchen.

OP doesn’t own it. She’s walked away.

@catbellz

Lol at "you could go to prison" but the bloody squatter gets free accommodation, causes no end of financial hardship to a whole chain of people and won't even be liable for anything. Shit end of the stick indeed! And of course I was joking! Would be bloody tempting though

They aren't a squatter they are a legal occupant who hasn't even been served a section 21 notice! They have simply decided to continue the tenancy that already exists and which has not been legally terminated by either party.

[quote Plancina]@SpartacusAutisticus I disagree - the tenant had a one year lease due to end on 5 July, they have no right to be in the house whatsoever, and the landlord told them in January that the house was for sale and that they would not be renewing the lease.[/quote]
You have been spectacularly badly advised if you believed that tenancies just end at the end of a fixed period without the landlord serving notice. The tenant is legally entitled to continue living there until the landlord legally ends the tenancy, which they haven't done.

[quote Plancina]@ComDummings we were told by the agent that the landlord had refused to renew the lease and told the tenants to leave in July and that they had agreed to this. I have just emailed the agent to clarify if they issued an S21 or not.[/quote]
Tenancies continue at the end of a fixed period unless they are terminated by either party. The landlord telling the tenant that they won't renew it is NOT ending a tenancy.

@TheIckabog

Once the lease has expired then they are in the property illegally. I assume they won’t be paying rent to the landlord then?

Can’t he just get a locksmith to change the locks when they are out? Surely the tenants wouldn’t have any legal recourse to counter that considering there is no lease and they shouldn’t be there?

No they are not! Jesus, so much ignorance Once a fixed term tenancy ends, the tenancy becomes a periodic tenancy. This is the law. A tenancy doesn't end unless either party terminates it, and in this case, neither has.

Not if they’ve got a happorth of common sense. In their shoes the last thing I’d do is stop paying the rent

Why. What exactly would happen to them that is different to if they continued to pay rent

Alsohuman I am well aware that op walked away. I was just speculating on what would happen if someone didn’t know the house was being lived in when they had actually bought the property and then on arrival with their furniture just thought the previous owner hadn’t cleared the house in time.

Under the Housing Act 1988, for cases of illegal eviction and of harassment which cause a tenant to leave his or her home, the court
may award damages based on the profit made by a landlord from illegally evicting his or her tenant

But technically the “landlord” didn’t evict them and the new owner hasn’t made any profit from them.

Given how easy it is to disappear where would the recourse come from if the previous owner disappeared or the company that owned the property went into liquidation.

Maybe LL couldn't afford to leave place empty

In that case he shouldn't be in the letting business at all. If you're a landlord, there's always a risk that the property will be empty, or that a tenant will stop paying rent. If you can't afford to take that risk, you need to sell the property.

Why. What exactly would happen to them that is different to if they continued to pay rent

They’d give the landlord grounds for eviction and lose the moral high ground. If they continue to pay rent there are no grounds for eviction.

@GeorgiaGirl52

Can you at least file a suit against the selfish tenants to get back the !000 you spent on lawyers, property inspections, etc.? They deserve to suffer a bit.

Unbelievably idiotic

@Oliversmumsarmy

The tenants moved in to live somewhere temporarily whilst their own home was renovated. It's not their fault we had a pandemic

What has a pandemic got to do with anything.

Their lease ran out on the house on 5th July so they are squatting in a property.

No, the law says that at the end of a fixed term the tenancy becomes periodic. Ie it continues. They are still the legal occupants.

[quote Bells3032]@S0upertrooper it's not quite the same. The tenancy was for a year ending pm July 5th and the op later said the s21 notice was served in March so plenty of time.

People saying that they're not breaking the law until the court enforces it are wrong. They are breaking the law and living there past their tenancy thats why a court can enforce it. You wouldn't say someone stealing something isnt wrong until a court says so. They're stealing their ll sale and the ops time and money. It is theft.

Furthermore they wouldn't be such asses if they'd give a time frame for the works. I am sure their builder can give them ballpark even if they add a few weeks onto it before telling their ll.[/quote]
The tenancy hasn't ended. It has continued as a periodic tenancy.

@Bells3032

The tenancy has expired. They are living there with no tenancy agreement in place. So yes it is not legal to live in someone else's property with no tenancy in place. I cannot move into someone else's home without their consent and leave money on their counter and say that I am living there and paying them and therefore I am living their legitimately.

Not only was the s21 notice issued but the tenancy agreement has ended. They agreed to move out at the date on the tenancy agreement and have not done so. It may be more a civil issue rather than a legal one but it is still the tenants in the wrong here. If they were not in the wrong then the court wouldn't enforce it full stop. The court will enforce it - just it will take forever and cost a fortune.

The ll probably only rented to them cos they said they'd be max a year and would be moving back to their own home.

The tenants are 100% in the wrong

Tenancies don't expire. They become periodic tenancies. You have no clue.

@TheLightSideOfTheMoon

Surely the tenancy is a contract between the tenant and the owner of the property?

The OP hasn't written an agreement so it's moot.

She's the new owner, now. She choses who lives in the property. Tenant can take it up with the person he has the contract with.

If a person buys a property with a tenant in situ the original tenancy agreement continues. Although OP hasn't bought the house.

@Oliversmumsarmy

Isn't the problem that they don't know when they can leave as it depends on the renovations? I suspect they'd love to move out and into their newly renovated home at the earliest possible opportunity, not least so that they can stop paying rent

As there is now no contract then I presume they stopped paying rent as well.

Why do you believe there is no contract? At the end of a fixed term tenancy the tenancy continues as a periodic agreement unless ended by the tenant or a court. The tenants are still the legal occupants.

@Oliversmumsarmy

I wonder with this sort of thing if op had arrived with her stuff and moved in where would the tenants recourse be.

They don’t own the property, there isn’t any contract to say they should be there that op was involved in.

What if op had arrived and found a load of furniture in her new house and the “tenants” weren’t there and op and the removal men cleared the furniture.

What would happen then when the tenants came back and found the locks changed their furniture out on the street and op cooking tea in her kitchen.

They would be entitled to call the police and the new owners could be arrested for trespass and criminal damage

@Oliversmumsarmy

Not if they’ve got a happorth of common sense. In their shoes the last thing I’d do is stop paying the rent

Why. What exactly would happen to them that is different to if they continued to pay rent

Alsohuman I am well aware that op walked away. I was just speculating on what would happen if someone didn’t know the house was being lived in when they had actually bought the property and then on arrival with their furniture just thought the previous owner hadn’t cleared the house in time.

Why would they stop paying rent? They still have a tenancy in place.

How did the viewing go today OP? X

I wonder with this sort of thing if op had arrived with her stuff and moved in where would the tenants recourse be.

If she did it before buying the property, both the owner and the tenant could get her evicted as a trespasser.

If she did it after buying the property, she could be prosecuted and fined substantially, in addition to having a separate civil claim against her for damages. And, of course, the tenant would be allowed back in.

@Oliversmumsarmy

*Under the Housing Act 1988, for cases of illegal eviction and of harassment which cause a tenant to leave his or her home, the court may award damages based on the profit made by a landlord from illegally evicting his or her tenant*

But technically the “landlord” didn’t evict them and the new owner hasn’t made any profit from them.

Given how easy it is to disappear where would the recourse come from if the previous owner disappeared or the company that owned the property went into liquidation.

The new owner would be legally responsible for maintaining the existing tenancy. It doesn't matter that the original agreement was with somebody else. The law couldn't be clearer on this.

Why. What exactly would happen to them that is different to if they continued to pay rent

They would make it much easier to evict them, to say nothing of messing up their credit rating by potentially ending up with a money judgment against them.

CodenameVillanelle

I tip my hat to you, for patience above and beyond the call of fruity ....