Our landlords not supposed to be renting his house out

Our landlords not supposed to be renting his house out

Author
Discussion

Black_S3

2,667 posts

187 months

Thursday 12th May 2016
quotequote all
ATG said:
They are working for the landlord. They aren't working for the tenant.
Not quite, They must all be registered with an approved redress scheme:

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2007/17/conten...

All the redress schemes cover it off EG:

https://www.tpos.co.uk/images/documents/rules-code...


4d You must advise a potential client of the need to obtain any
necessary consent (for example from joint owners, mortgage
lender or someone holding a legal charge against the property,
Code of Practice for Residential Lettings Agents – page 3 of 10
superior landlord (*) and/or freeholder etc) prior to formal
creation of a tenancy; inspect the necessary consents; advise
of the need for the client to assess relevant buildings and
contents insurance

Edited by Black_S3 on Thursday 12th May 13:28

Petrol Only

1,592 posts

174 months

Thursday 12th May 2016
quotequote all
ATG said:
They are working for the landlord. They aren't working for the tenant.
Working for themselves in my experience on both sides of the fence.

Rude-boy

22,227 posts

232 months

Thursday 12th May 2016
quotequote all
As said by others it will take the Woolwich longer to find their arse with both hands get you out legally than a few months even if they were to start it tomorrow.

Would suggest that you keep powder dry and push on on your purchase. If there are issues with that then you may have to deal with further but if none then focus on that and keep an eye out for any further paperwork.

Once you are ready to serve your notice that you are quiting (assuming that you are on hold over) then you might like to let the lender know the date upon which the property will be vacant...


Buzz84

1,138 posts

148 months

Thursday 12th May 2016
quotequote all
TooMany2cvs said:
You cannot be just kicked out without a court granting possession - and you'll have plenty of warning of that.
obviouslt its a TV program and doesnt show the whole story or it may not be appicable to every situation but when watching "Can't pay, We'll take it away" it follows high court enforcement officers and they are able to evict people straight away without any notice.
in those cases the landlords have got the county court judgement in their favour, and get it upgraded at the high court so they get their property back immediately

  • (which I think is disgusting, the county courty could have already judged in their favor. the high court should not get involved unless they breach the county courts rulling)

Black_S3

2,667 posts

187 months

Thursday 12th May 2016
quotequote all
You can potentially claim any move costs from your landlord because of this:

Examples from a tenancy agreement:

8(b) All consents necessary to let the Property to the Tenant have been obtained from any

Superior Landlords, mortgagees, insurance companies and others.

And:

7(g) To repay to the Tenant any reasonable costs incurred by the Tenant to remedy the failure

of the Landlord to comply with his statutory obligations as stated in the Tenancy

Agreement.

TooMany2cvs

29,008 posts

125 months

Thursday 12th May 2016
quotequote all
Buzz84 said:
obviouslt its a TV program and doesnt show the whole story...
That's an understatement.

sidekickdmr

5,065 posts

205 months

Thursday 12th May 2016
quotequote all
Buzz84 said:
obviouslt its a TV program and doesnt show the whole story or it may not be appicable to every situation but when watching "Can't pay, We'll take it away" it follows high court enforcement officers and they are able to evict people straight away without any notice.
in those cases the landlords have got the county court judgement in their favour, and get it upgraded at the high court so they get their property back immediately

  • (which I think is disgusting, the county courty could have already judged in their favor. the high court should not get involved unless they breach the county courts rulling)
In the example you gave, you would be aware its going to court, and then be aware its going to the high court, so that is your notice, its not as if they are going to turn up out the blue and check the OP out.

hairykrishna

Original Poster:

13,159 posts

202 months

Thursday 12th May 2016
quotequote all
Rude-boy said:
Would suggest that you keep powder dry and push on on your purchase. If there are issues with that then you may have to deal with further but if none then focus on that and keep an eye out for any further paperwork.
That is essentially our plan.

Good to hear from people that nothing is likely to happen quickly!

Rtype

366 posts

104 months

Thursday 12th May 2016
quotequote all
Slightly off topic but I couldn't see it had been covered here as yet (unless it was the 3 missed payments but that wouldn't suggest non-btl).

How would a big national bank / building society actually identify this / prevent this from happening? I presume a lot of people do this?

Rangeroverover

1,522 posts

110 months

Saturday 14th May 2016
quotequote all
They can look at electoral roll and have access to insurance data, also write to the occupier to double check.......did you respond to the occupier letter

hairykrishna

Original Poster:

13,159 posts

202 months

Saturday 14th May 2016
quotequote all
Rangeroverover said:
did you respond to the occupier letter
We phoned up Woolwich but they basically wouldn't talk to us as we're not the customer.

98elise

26,376 posts

160 months

Saturday 14th May 2016
quotequote all
Buzz84 said:
TooMany2cvs said:
You cannot be just kicked out without a court granting possession - and you'll have plenty of warning of that.
obviouslt its a TV program and doesnt show the whole story or it may not be appicable to every situation but when watching "Can't pay, We'll take it away" it follows high court enforcement officers and they are able to evict people straight away without any notice.
in those cases the landlords have got the county court judgement in their favour, and get it upgraded at the high court so they get their property back immediately

  • (which I think is disgusting, the county courty could have already judged in their favor. the high court should not get involved unless they breach the county courts rulling)
When somone is not paying the rent why shouldn't they be out of the house as soon as possible? The tenancy is already over (which they ignore) , the courts have told them they must leave (which they ignore), then they wait for the eviction.

I've been in this situation and you have to wait for ages while your tenant refuses to pay the rent (keeping the HB), then trashes the house, then steals anything thats not nailed down. You then have a house which cannot be let until you've paid for all repairs.

Personanly I think its disgusting that somone can do all that to someone elses property and not have comitted a single offence.



Edited by 98elise on Saturday 14th May 16:20

Du1point8

21,604 posts

191 months

Sunday 15th May 2016
quotequote all
Strange... you don't need a buy to let to rent out a property, I got one with just asking and Im on the same mortgage as before, I explained my situation (secondment out of the country) and that as the mortgage stipulates the property must not be unoccupied for more than XX days, I have to have a tenant, so they agreed and gave me a right to let letter.

TooMany2cvs

29,008 posts

125 months

Sunday 15th May 2016
quotequote all
Du1point8 said:
Strange... you don't need a buy to let to rent out a property, I got one with just asking and Im on the same mortgage as before, I explained my situation (secondment out of the country) and that as the mortgage stipulates the property must not be unoccupied for more than XX days, I have to have a tenant, so they agreed and gave me a right to let letter.
Indeed you don't need a specific BtL mortgage - but you do need (and it sounds like you got) Consent to Let. No CtL on a normal mortgage = naughty, and usually grounds to have the lender ask for their money back, please.

Rude-boy

22,227 posts

232 months

Monday 16th May 2016
quotequote all
TooMany2cvs said:
Du1point8 said:
Strange... you don't need a buy to let to rent out a property, I got one with just asking and Im on the same mortgage as before, I explained my situation (secondment out of the country) and that as the mortgage stipulates the property must not be unoccupied for more than XX days, I have to have a tenant, so they agreed and gave me a right to let letter.
Indeed you don't need a specific BtL mortgage - but you do need (and it sounds like you got) Consent to Let. No CtL on a normal mortgage = naughty, and usually grounds to have the lender ask for their money back, please.
As above.

Most lenders are flexible on quite a few things. Buy a house, 3 years later get a job in UAE that means you will be away for a year, ask for consent to let as you are mid way though a fixed rate deal and they will usually let you have it.

The other one that most people 'forget' is that if you are having major building work done then you should also be getting consent from your lender...

mph1977

12,467 posts

167 months

Monday 16th May 2016
quotequote all
Buzz84 said:
TooMany2cvs said:
You cannot be just kicked out without a court granting possession - and you'll have plenty of warning of that.
obviouslt its a TV program and doesnt show the whole story or it may not be appicable to every situation but when watching "Can't pay, We'll take it away" it follows high court enforcement officers and they are able to evict people straight away without any notice.
in those cases the landlords have got the county court judgement in their favour, and get it upgraded at the high court so they get their property back immediately

  • (which I think is disgusting, the county courty could have already judged in their favor. the high court should not get involved unless they breach the county courts rulling)
the other scenario with Bailiffs / HCEOs turningup to take possession of a house with tenants ' without notice' is where the correspondence is going to the landlord and the landlord doesn;t tell the agent or the tenants ...

hairykrishna

Original Poster:

13,159 posts

202 months

Monday 16th May 2016
quotequote all
Update to this is that the letting agent has finally spoken to the landlord. He apparently had 'forgotten' to tell his mortgage provider that he was renting the house out. He told them (the agent) that he'll phone up and sort it out. The letting agent still seems genuinely bemused that we'd think that the situation was any kind of a problem.

mph1977

12,467 posts

167 months

Monday 16th May 2016
quotequote all
hairykrishna said:
Update to this is that the letting agent has finally spoken to the landlord. He apparently had 'forgotten' to tell his mortgage provider that he was renting the house out. He told them (the agent) that he'll phone up and sort it out. The letting agent still seems genuinely bemused that we'd think that the situation was any kind of a problem.
letting agents are bemused at anything other than 2 things

1. scamming more money out of people
2. poking into people;s private lives with scant regard for quiet enjoyment.

snorky782

1,115 posts

98 months

Monday 16th May 2016
quotequote all
hairykrishna said:
Update to this is that the letting agent has finally spoken to the landlord. He apparently had 'forgotten' to tell his mortgage provider that he was renting the house out. He told them (the agent) that he'll phone up and sort it out. The letting agent still seems genuinely bemused that we'd think that the situation was any kind of a problem.
You're still choosing the route of most panic, over the actual pragmatic position. The lender has written to you to cover themselves, if they apever need to go down the repossession route. It would take them months to get anywhere near this. The letter is part off a process and that's it.

snorky782

1,115 posts

98 months

Monday 16th May 2016
quotequote all
Du1point8 said:
Strange... you don't need a buy to let to rent out a property, I got one with just asking and Im on the same mortgage as before, I explained my situation (secondment out of the country) and that as the mortgage stipulates the property must not be unoccupied for more than XX days, I have to have a tenant, so they agreed and gave me a right to let letter.
Does your mortgage really state that, or is it your home insurance that does? Genuinely interested.