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 actually have sympathy for you and the tenant. You've also only heard the seller's side. I think the seller has been really greedy and selfish and this is their karma. I really feel for you getting caught up in the situation though.

@Plancina there are lots of messages on here. Did you spot the quite important one about your current tenancy?

From what I understand, you do not have to sign a new lease with your current LL - it automatically goes to a 1 month rolling tenancy.

This might give you a bit of wiggle room if you want to stick with the house you've paid for a survey on.

Good idea from PP to ask for a reduction in price to cover any additional costs.

Good luck - sounds really frustrating

The tenant knew when the tenancy ended.

They are there illegally

Wrong I'm afraid- the fixed term ends but not the tenancy. If the tenants remain in the property after the fixed term, they still have a lawful tenancy.
LL needs court order to evict.

The law is there to protect the tenants otherwise every tenant at the end of their FT could be subject to the batshit suggestions in here such as change the locks.

Just because the law doesn't suit the OP is not the tenants' fault.
If vendor was selling as vacant possession then they are at fault and the OP can look at at redress from them.

@LuckyLinky

If the s21 has been issued in March the landlord could change the locks and put their stuff on the curb. They could try and take the landlord to court but good luck to them! What complete and utter arseholes.

No they couldn't. That would be a criminal offence.

@Ringsender2 thanks yes that is actually a huge relief!! We will pursue a rolling contract with current LL.
what a mess this all is. Huge huge thanks to everyone for your advice, I’ve learned a lot in the last 30 mins.

If the s21 has been issued in March the landlord could change the locks and put their stuff on the curb.

Complete bollocks- why do people spout this stuff?

If it really is your dream house, and you're in danger of losing at least £1k could you stay with family and buy it with tenant in situ, they are obviously going to move out if they have their own house to move into. Presumably lockdown slowed down their renovations? Obviously get legal advice first though!

[quote Plancina]@DisobedientHamster they did serve notice on 29 March (my fault for not checking this and putting it in OP, unintentional drip feed caused)[/quote]
Problem is OP, that was after lockdown and the Govt suspended all evictions. Not sure if they're allowed again yet.

Anyhow, the tenant should've been asked to sign a document drawn up by the vendor's solicitor agreeing that as sitting tenants they will leave prior to completion. This is standard. Then there wouldn't been no need to serve a Section 21 notice. You need to find out why that wasn't done, because if the tenant had refused to sign that at the beginning of the process the vendor must've been always aware it was going to be a nightmare to get them to leave.

If vendor was selling as vacant possession then they are at fault and the OP can look at at redress from them.

The OP has indicated that the OPs solicitor knew, so the vendor wasn't keeping it a secret (which they would have had every incentive to do, as people can see from this thread).

Hence my thoughts that the solicitor may have fallen down. Which is ... not impossible (I'll rein my cynicism in here ...). However even if they have, the OP might have a job of work to be compensated for it.

@lyralalala

That's the risk a greedy LL trying to avoid a void period takes when they try and sell before the tenant leaves.

Your solicitor should have warned you much more strongly about the risks

Exactly this. The property shouldn’t have even gone on the market until it was empty. And your solicitor was asleep at the wheel, OP. Blame the right people - and that’s not the tenants.

[quote Plancina]@Ringsender2 thanks yes that is actually a huge relief!! We will pursue a rolling contract with current LL.
what a mess this all is. Huge huge thanks to everyone for your advice, I’ve learned a lot in the last 30 mins. [/quote]
No! Don't agree to a rolling contract with these tenants. They've already proved they are difficult - if you become their landlord you might have issues getting them out yourself. The current Section 21 notice would be void - you'd have to reissue one yourself. Seriously, you could be inheriting a whole load of issues if you go down that route - what about damage to property, end-of-tenancy clean, their deposit etc??

Alsohuman That's incorrect - you can market a property when it's not empty, just as long as you've got your sitting tenant to sign an agreement that they'll leave two weeks prior to completion. It's standard practice in cases like this.

Alsohuman But I agree, it's not the tenants' fault. The vendor and their solicitor and the EA hasn't done due diligence.

I know you can. I said should. It’s unethical and greedy. As we see here.

The posters saying the tenant has done nothing wrong. Do you genuinely think every tenant is evicted at the end of a tenancy? Of course not. Most leave at the end of a tenancy because that's what they agreed. hmm The tenant knew when the tenancy ended. They had seven months notice that it wouldn't be renewed. They are being selfish arses
100% agree with you.

It's a certain type of arsehole who thinks 'yes my tenancy has ended, yes I've had the paperwork, but I don't want to move because it's not convenient for me so I'll sit in the property and you can shell out money on courts and bailiffs'.

Longwhiskers14 I think the OP means a rolling lease with their current landlord so they can stay put whilst the vendor sorts out their awkward tenants.

@Longwhiskers14 I didn’t mean I’d become their landlord just that I’d look into a rolling contract with my own landlord while we see if something can be sorted out

Alsohuman Sorry, see what you mean! It seems unethical and greedy but the landlord is entitled to sell and lots of tenants stay until exchange/completion and move out with no issue. I think in this instance the vendor hasn't been entirely honest with his tenants, otherwise he wouldn't have to issue a Section 21 notice.

That said, the tenants know they don't have a right to stay now and aren't exactly covering themselves in glory by not taking the offer of rental accommodation. What if their building work ends up being four or five months instead of two? Or we go into lockdown again? Is OP meant to live elsewhere and let them live in her house??? (That's not aimed at you AlsoHuman, I'm just asking the questions aloud!)

@Longwhiskers14 Ithink OP means she’ll pursue a rolling contract with her own landlord rather than signing up for another six months

[quote Plancina]@Longwhiskers14 I didn’t mean I’d become their landlord just that I’d look into a rolling contract with my own landlord while we see if something can be sorted out[/quote]
Oh I see. Good. Don't buy the house until they are out!

@Longwhiskers14

Alsohuman Sorry, see what you mean! It seems unethical and greedy but the landlord is entitled to sell and lots of tenants stay until exchange/completion and move out with no issue. I think in this instance the vendor hasn't been entirely honest with his tenants, otherwise he wouldn't have to issue a Section 21 notice.

That said, the tenants know they don't have a right to stay now and aren't exactly covering themselves in glory by not taking the offer of rental accommodation. What if their building work ends up being four or five months instead of two? Or we go into lockdown again? Is OP meant to live elsewhere and let them live in her house??? (That's not aimed at you AlsoHuman, I'm just asking the questions aloud!)

This is what I’m afraid of @Longwhiskers14 -they won’t give any sort of end date for their renovations and it could easily go on to next year or beyond for all I know. I wouldn’t mind waiting if we had a firm date but it seems to me that any date given could later be changed, and leaves us with no certainty.

I can completely see why they don’t want to move twice, I wouldn’t either. It seems that legally they have every right to stay. It’s just really unfortunate for OP that, between her greedy vendor and incompetent solicitor, she’s stuck in the middle of a mess.

I think sue the vendor
or maybe 'Grant Mitchell' the vendor?