No Fault Evictions

[monster]

So, when you rent a car and red-line it till the oil rings are shot and there is smoke pouring out the back and smoke a load of fags so it stinks and drop your milkshake over the seats and grind takeaway into the carpet. You can then just take it back to the rental place and it's all on them right?

Socialists don't tend to care much for the property of others.

 

[monster]

.....because a home is a fundamental necessity of life, unlike all the other things in your list, which can be terminated and alternatives found quite easily.

Then maybe you should show a bit more respect to those of us who actually provide homes for others to live in.

 

[monster]

Title of thread is "no fault evictions". One thing at a time!

The majority of tenants who are evicted via a Section 21 'no fault' eviction are actually in reality "at fault", its just easier for a Landlord to use a Section 21 than a Section 8 notice.

So when you hear all these statistics bandied around about tenants being evicted through no fault of their own you can take those stats with a pinch of salt - all they are doing is looking at the number of people evicted with a Section 21 notice - the majoity of which will be actually at fault!

Landlords do not evict good tenants for no reason - the only reason a landlord would do this is if they need to sell the property for whatever reason (and government is giving us lots of very good reasons at the moment).

Oh and the line you hear from Shelter/ Citizens Advice and other far left pressure groups that landlords evict tenants so they can charge more rent from the next tenant is absolute rubbish - I have never known a landlord do that, we know good tenants are quite hard to come by, why risk the next ones being bad tenants. If we have good tenants we go out of our way to keep them and receiving a lower rent is worth it to have a good tenant, that is certainly my position.

 

[John Brown]

You have to ask yourself then; how is it that millions of households (including mine) have air dried their clothes for generations with no damp and mould problem, no tumble driers, no PVUs, no need of advice from a landlord?
The answer is surely that your flats are badly designed, inadequate. not fit for purpose.
Not your tenants' fault.
Not your fault either unless you designed them, but now your problem as the owner, looking for a profit.
PS obvious solution would be for you to provide the PVUs, extra heating bills and running costs FOC.

Which would, in some cases, means running at a loss.
The flat my wife and I rent out is fairly modern, has double glazing, centralised extraction, good insulation, but still had some mould issues this past winter. I know it's not a unique situation, as the agents who handle the letting are very familiar with the problem. Cooking without pan lids, drying clothes on radiators, closing trickle vents etc. a lot of which is driven by rising energy costs.
We are also looking to get out of the game, better to have the money earning a steady interest rate. Biggest nightmare, however, is the "property management" company, who seem to be able to charge whatever they like and are largely unaccountable. Total ripoff, in my opinion.

 

[Jacob]

Then maybe you should show a bit more respect to those of us who actually provide homes for others to live in.

You don't "provide" them unless you build them - you buy existing homes.

 

[monster]

You don't "provide" them unless you build them - you buy existing homes.

If you were paying attention then you would have learnt that I own 6 rental properties, 2 of which I bought and renovated and 4 of which I built in their totality myself.

But even those who buy to rent are still providing a home to those who need or have to rent as they own that property, it is their house.

I find it ironic when busy bodies like yourself and Shelter (who provide actual shelter to no one), go on to righteously lecture those of us who do actually provide homes for others.

 

[Jacob]

I doubt he would be allowed to rent his house out if it has single glazed windows as it wouldn't achieve an EPC of 'C' or above.

Our Chapel conversion got a "C" EPC. Large areas of single glazing but with condensation catching channels, which got used a few days every winter.
I've got photos of icicles on the end of the 10mm drain pipes through the bottom rails outside. Masses of insulation all round to get the "C" rating.
As mentioned - condensation on windows (even if DG) can turn them into de-humidifiers if the water can drain off. Place was dry as a bone.
We also dried clothes inside and had re-circulating extractor over the cooker. So no mechanical ventilation at all - instead had "Passivent" ventilation to the two bathrooms; vents operated by humidity reacting gadget - to insulated 4" pipe up to the roof ridge. Highly effective - single glazed bathroom steamy after a shower even on a winters day would be dry in 20 minutes or less. Continuous passive ventilation to the whole building by air drawn through - the vents close down if low humidity, but never quite to zero
Condensation indicates design or other failure but can be easy to correct.

 

[Jacob]

If you were paying attention then you would have learnt that I own rental properties, 2 of which I bought and renovated and 4 of which I built in their totality myself.

Apologies then: well done! Most BTL landlords are just buying a free ride.

 

[monster]

Apologies then: well done! Most BTL landlords are just buying a free ride.

But its not a free ride - there is a lot of hard work, risk and responsibility involved! Providing homes for others is not a task that should be take lightly! - maybe you should try it some time then you may actually understand what we are talking about!

 

[Billy_wizz]

It's not true.
Amazing how many people routinely chip in with dubious arguments in favour of the mega rich hanging on to their ill-gotten gains! Sad really.

I'd be curious to know how you think the UK government are going to tax multiple businesses over multiple countries to make the truly rich pay what you think they should!

 

[Jacob]

But its not a free ride - there is a lot of hard work, risk and responsibility involved! Providing homes for others is not a task that should be take lightly!

Agree

- maybe you should try it some time then you may actually understand what we are talking about!

Not a career I particularly fancy - I'd rather leave it to the specialists, though the unearned and undeserved capital gains are very tempting!
I have enough trouble keeping this place going I'd be carp as a landlord.

 

[Jacob]

I'd be curious to know how you think the UK government are going to tax multiple businesses over multiple countries to make the truly rich pay what you think they should!

I'd be curious to know too but it's not my subject, I'd get the experts in.
First thing would be to reverse the cuts made to HMRC and expand operations.
Just one of many sites here: https://taxjustice.uk/
"For more than a decade HMRC has faced year on year cuts to funding at the same time as ongoing internal re-organisations. Together these have led to a situation where HMRC has been variously described as a government department in “crisis” and “not fit for purpose”.
This could apply to almost everything the tories have done since 1979.
With HMRC they've been killing the goose which lays golden eggs! Instead they left a huge t*rd in the nest, called Brexit.

 

[Billy_wizz]

I'd be curious to know too but it's not my subject, I'd get the experts in.
First thing would be to reverse the cuts made to HMRC and expand operations.
Just one of many sites here: https://taxjustice.uk/
"For more than a decade HMRC has faced year on year cuts to funding at the same time as ongoing internal re-organisations. Together these have led to a situation where HMRC has been variously described as a government department in “crisis” and “not fit for purpose”.
This could apply to almost everything the tories have done since 1979.
With HMRC they've been killing the goose which lays golden eggs! Instead they left a huge t*rd in the nest, called Brexit.

So are you saying it's not true that the super rich have money all over the world or are you saying it's not true that the British government can't touch the majority of the money in other countries?

 

[HOJ]

From a different perspective, I'm not a landlord, and would never want to be, having seen what I have, I used to do work for a letting agency (nearly got to be a full time job!) I still work for several landlords directly, in my experience, even the tenants you think will be a good fit and would look after a property, generally aren't and don't.

When I get asked to go and deal with anything, It absolutely stuns me as to the state of the properties, the tenants seem to have a mind set where "its not mine so why should I look after it" they have absolutely no respect, but huge expectations of what the landlord should provide.

Also, two of the landlords I work for have had midnight visits from the police, arrested and taken to the station, only to find out their properties have been raided and Cannabis farms been found, the properties are absolutely trashed and cost multiple thousands to repair..

 

[Jacob]

... the super rich have money all over the world

True

or are you saying it's not true that the British government can't touch the majority of the money in other countries?

Probably not true. London is a major money laundering centre and I expect there is access to all sorts of stuff.
What do you know about it, if anything?

 

[Phil Pascoe]

Name a major world city that isn't a money laundering centre. Just curious.

 

[Blackswanwood]

While this on its own is not a silver bullet solution to the housing shortage it looks to be a good initiative.

https://amp.theguardian.com/busines...ice-sites-to-be-converted-into-social-housing

 

[John Hughes01]

As i pointed out in an earlier posting, the rot set in for private landlords when a silly politition gave DHSS tenants to chance not to pay their due rent thereby tearing up any rights they might have had to remain in your property. If a tenant has no respect for your property in which you have invested capital and regular maintenance costs then why should the landlord cough up money to remedy this abuse. As landlords we have all had the "I know my rights" tenants who demand,not request,immediate repairs for damage they are responsible for and all of this dilutes the pleasure of providing a much-needed service. It is often abused and backed up by silly polititions and Labour will,no doubt, adopt a traditional socialist stance which will not help the housing demise as more of us pack up. I often wonder what our young people will do when they get to ur age and pensions have disappeared. My advice to any youngster is,if they happen to be left a substantial lump of money or even a house they should rent it out rather than blow the money on things that young people do - at that age they are never going to get old! Anyway,what is wrong with is wrong with increasing the number of sheckles you have -- the Bible applauds it.
On a different issue, before they promote even more over population of our little island they should pay attention to surveys showing the groups most likely to have multiple children. We could end up with a massive cultural and intelligence change. I seem to remember a case some years ago where a Rumanian immigrant had supposedly claimed over £2k a year for fourteen kids back in Rumania and our benefits system paid him out - he was building a "mansion" in Rumania with the money!! OK,so this was put out by the press so who knows how genuine was. No wonder we are known as Treasure Island!

 

[GuitardoctorW7]

If you were paying attention then you would have learnt that I own 6 rental properties, 2 of which I bought and renovated and 4 of which I built in their totality myself.

But even those who buy to rent are still providing a home to those who need or have to rent as they own that property, it is their house.

I find it ironic when busy bodies like yourself and Shelter (who provide actual shelter to no one), go on to righteously lecture those of us who do actually provide homes for others.

So let me get this straight, you provide properties for altruistic reasons, not to run as a business for profit?

I joined this Forum as I thought it was a place to share knowledge and experience, I've even paid into it. Much as I enjoy reasoned debate, I'm finding the general tone lately as toxic as any of the main social media platforms. Perhaps that's where we've arrived as a Society now.

 

[NorthernSteve]

This is an interesting thread, I posit the following for consideration.
What is the incentive for landlords to to evict tenants who pay the rent, look after the property they live in and refrain from antisocial behaviour?
If tenant 1 lives in a house for 2 years with no damp issues, tenant 2 has significant damp issues in the following year they live there and tenant 3 experiences no issues with damp in the following 2 years they live there, is it the property or the tenant that is causing the damp?
Is it morally correct for local councils to advise tenants to ignore court instructions (to vacate a rented property) to their detriment leading to them incurring CCJs? When central government advises councils not to do this?
If a tenant tells a landlord that he wants to rent a house for 1 year and then decides he/she wants to stay for longer, is it wrong for the landlord to ask the tenant to stick to the original agreement?
If a person works hard, but can no longer work, sells their big house and buys 2 small houses so 1 can be rented to provide an income now that the owner can no longer work, to find that the tenant is wrecking her house. Is it wrong for her to ask that person to leave? Knowing that the longer the tenant stays there the greater the repair bill will be?
If a person buys a second house in order to provide a pension, instead of putting all their money into 1 house to live in. And the government changes the landscape in such a way that it increases the taxes the landlord pays, makes fiscal policies that lead to significant interest hikes and inflation, to the point the landlord is no longer able to pay their mortgage, is it wrong for that landlord to increase the rent to maintain their previous position?
Just some food for thought.