Exchanged on a property and the Tenant won't leave.....

[randlemarcus]

Sheepshanks said:

batmanreturns said:

Paying 3k was cheaper than not being able to complete with vacant possession, that would have forfeited the deposit of approx 40k and then we are liable for costs for the rest of the chain not being able to complete. So yes, 3k was the cheapest route!

OK, I'm slightly lost with a lot of the comments in this thread, which seem to be from the buyers perspective.

As a seller, why would you forfeit the deposit? Sure, you might have to give it back, but forfeiting implies losing it, which is something that only happens to buyers.

I suspect the word chain has a bearing here, in that the OP had an issue selling, but is also a buyer, and that's where to deposit comes in.

OP, out of evil cynicism, did you try and pursue the blackmail thing with the police?

[Du1point8]

randlemarcus said:

Sheepshanks said:

batmanreturns said:

Paying 3k was cheaper than not being able to complete with vacant possession, that would have forfeited the deposit of approx 40k and then we are liable for costs for the rest of the chain not being able to complete. So yes, 3k was the cheapest route!

OK, I'm slightly lost with a lot of the comments in this thread, which seem to be from the buyers perspective.

As a seller, why would you forfeit the deposit? Sure, you might have to give it back, but forfeiting implies losing it, which is something that only happens to buyers.

I suspect the word chain has a bearing here, in that the OP had an issue selling, but is also a buyer, and that's where to deposit comes in.

OP, out of evil cynicism, did you try and pursue the blackmail thing with the police?

Don't think its classed as blackmail in this situation.

[randlemarcus]

Du1point8 said:

Don't think its classed as blackmail in this situation.

OP seemed to think it was. In this case, I'd call it negotiation, but then I am a nasty cynic.

[Du1point8]

randlemarcus said:

Du1point8 said:

Don't think its classed as blackmail in this situation.

OP seemed to think it was. In this case, I'd call it negotiation, but then I am a nasty cynic.

Thats my thoughts too... I hate people that negotiate like this and its almost blackmail, but then they could just say that they are not moving and the OP gave them incentive to move.

[ali_kat]

PurpleMoonlight said:

Landlords often forget that for the duration of the tenancy the property is the tenants home and they are entitled to peaceful enjoyment of that home without overbearing inspections. Letting agents just want to justify their own existence ....

One inspection every 1/4 is not overbearing, and is done to protect the tenant as well as the Landlord

[blueg33]

98elise said:

VX Foxy said:

blueg33 said:

You try evicting a war veteran with 1 leg, one eye and virtually no income..........

Why would you want to do that?


I'm not saying that it's the case here or with the op but landlords are utter s as well sometimes...
IMO the tenancy laws is this country are ste, in that they offer decent tenants little protection while offering tttish tenants too much protection.

How are decent tenants not protected. Most landlords would welcome decent tenants, otherwise whats the point in being a landlord?

A tenant can get away with murder. I recently had to watch mine loading my posessins (contents) onto their moving van.

3 months later they are still preventing the release of the deposit.

I am not a total bd, We did all we could to protect him. We purchased the house next door to move him into, he agreed to this, when our development was built we had agreed to let him rent a new property if he wanted to, or he could stay in the house we had bought him.

When it came to the moving date, he refused to move and stopped paying rent.

The court found in our favour and we still let him move next door.

[Sir Bagalot]

OP, first of all thank fk completion can now go ahead. £3K is cheap.

Whilst I think your Partner was a numpty for allowing Exchange to happen without the tenant gone it is something the solicitor should have confirmed. It's also something your buyers team should have asked also. Last place I bought was tenanted but S21 served and my solicitor (who was actually a conveyancer) wanted confirmation from vendors team that place was vacant before allowing us to exchange.

Whilst your Partner is 100% to blame for allowing this to happen, you have also paid for professional advice and they have failed to deliver that.

I would certainly complain to senior partner within firm, and if no satisfaction then law society.

[Mobile Chicane]

batmanreturns said:

Ok, quick update. The tenant moved out after blackmailing us for £3000 which now means completion can take place as planned today.

Alternatively, you could look at it from the tenant's point of view, whereby it's compensation for having to pay letting agent fees, deposit and rent in advance on a new property while they don't as yet have their deposit back from you.

[CorbynFTW]

Changed the locks? Checked for sabotage?

[Steve H]

What is the best source of general information to read up on on the whole letting process (from the landlords POV)?

I may be buying a BTL quite soon with a sitting tenant who I believe is on a monthly contract at the moment but I've no idea how this all works and obviously need to be doing the right things in the right order!!

[Countdown]

Steve H said:

What is the best source of general information to read up on on the whole letting process (from the landlords POV)?

I may be buying a BTL quite soon with a sitting tenant who I believe is on a monthly contract at the moment but I've no idea how this all works and obviously need to be doing the right things in the right order!!

I find these a good source of help and information

http://www.propertyhawk.co.uk/

Only had to do one eviction so far but found these guys really transparent and helpful

http://www.landlordslawyer.co.uk/

[mk1fan]

Mobile Chicane said:

batmanreturns said:

Ok, quick update. The tenant moved out after blackmailing us for £3000 which now means completion can take place as planned today.

Alternatively, you could look at it from the tenant's point of view, whereby it's compensation for having to pay letting agent fees, deposit and rent in advance on a new property while they don't as yet have their deposit back from you.

Also, in this case the LL was wanting to break the contract they had signed. Blackmail? Not even close.

[Countdown]

Mobile Chicane said:

batmanreturns said:

Ok, quick update. The tenant moved out after blackmailing us for £3000 which now means completion can take place as planned today.

Alternatively, you could look at it from the tenant's point of view, whereby it's compensation for having to pay letting agent fees, deposit and rent in advance on a new property while they don't as yet have their deposit back from you.

Most of those (letting agent fees, deposit and rent in advance on a new property)would be the tenant's normal expenditure. They're not extra costs being incurred. It's a bit like saying the LL should pay his gas/electric/food bills for the next 6th months because he's being asked to move out.

[Pheo]

Countdown said:

Most of those (letting agent fees, deposit and rent in advance on a new property)would be the tenant's normal expenditure. They're not extra costs being incurred. It's a bit like saying the LL should pay his gas/electric/food bills for the next 6th months because he's being asked to move out.

Except the landlord is wanting them out quick and bypassing due process...

[Countdown]

Pheo said:

Except the landlord is wanting them out quick and bypassing due process...

Fair enough. I missed that bit.

[batmanreturns]

The tenant stopped paying the rent when the section 21 was served so as well as 3k we also lost 2 months rent.

[PurpleMoonlight]

Can't you pursue them via the County Court for the outstanding rent?

Doesn't some of the deposit cover the rent arrears?

[ali_kat]

Countdown said:

Mobile Chicane said:

batmanreturns said:

Ok, quick update. The tenant moved out after blackmailing us for £3000 which now means completion can take place as planned today.

Alternatively, you could look at it from the tenant's point of view, whereby it's compensation for having to pay letting agent fees, deposit and rent in advance on a new property while they don't as yet have their deposit back from you.

Most of those (letting agent fees, deposit and rent in advance on a new property)would be the tenant's normal expenditure. They're not extra costs being incurred. It's a bit like saying the LL should pay his gas/electric/food bills for the next 6th months because he's being asked to move out.

Plus usually contracts have a clause in them that basically allow the LL to serve S21 at any point within it.

[randlemarcus]

PurpleMoonlight said:

Can't you pursue them via the County Court for the outstanding rent?

Doesn't some of the deposit cover the rent arrears?

I think, though am willing to be corrected, that you cannot use a TDS protected deposit to reclaim outstanding rent arrears. Doesn't make sense to me as a tenant, but hey.

Will be a lovely surprise for the nice man to have a MoneyClaim drop through his nice new front door for the outstanding rent

[anonymous-user]

Countdown said:

Steve H said:

What is the best source of general information to read up on on the whole letting process (from the landlords POV)?

I may be buying a BTL quite soon with a sitting tenant who I believe is on a monthly contract at the moment but I've no idea how this all works and obviously need to be doing the right things in the right order!!

I find these a good source of help and information

http://www.propertyhawk.co.uk/

Only had to do one eviction so far but found these guys really transparent and helpful

http://www.landlordslawyer.co.uk/

And this:

http://www.landlordzone.co.uk/