Putting a charge on a guarantors property?
Discussion
fergywales said:
Not seen utilities companies issuing SDs, do you mean threats to disconnect supply under Rights of Entry (Gas and Electricity Boards) Act 1954?
What do you refer to regarding HMRC? Taxation enforcement is a whole different kettle of fish, and the circumstances and definition of the debtor (personal or business) is important in the actions available.
The companies energy companies sell debts to make all manner of threats to get payment. Not SDs as far as I am aware.What do you refer to regarding HMRC? Taxation enforcement is a whole different kettle of fish, and the circumstances and definition of the debtor (personal or business) is important in the actions available.
There's been a bit in the news about HMRC reaching a time to pay agreement with people and then sending letters threatening bailiffs and removal of possessions (even though there has been no breach of the agreement).
Thanks for the replies everyone-some interesting stuff there.
I let through an agent and they handle the tenancy/guarantor agreements.The latest news is that the guarantor has upped his offer to £20 per month.I was seeking £40 per month but the message coming to me from the posts here is that I should take the £20 per month and be a little more switched on in future.
I let through an agent and they handle the tenancy/guarantor agreements.The latest news is that the guarantor has upped his offer to £20 per month.I was seeking £40 per month but the message coming to me from the posts here is that I should take the £20 per month and be a little more switched on in future.
MarsellusWallace said:
Thanks for the replies everyone-some interesting stuff there.
I let through an agent and they handle the tenancy/guarantor agreements.The latest news is that the guarantor has upped his offer to £20 per month.I was seeking £40 per month but the message coming to me from the posts here is that I should take the £20 per month and be a little more switched on in future.
If you have ceased to use said agent (which I'd advise, as they seem incompetent) I would have a very strong conversation with them regarding liability. They have a duty towards you as a client they provide a service for to ensure that the agreements they use to let your properties are of adequate protection against loss.I let through an agent and they handle the tenancy/guarantor agreements.The latest news is that the guarantor has upped his offer to £20 per month.I was seeking £40 per month but the message coming to me from the posts here is that I should take the £20 per month and be a little more switched on in future.
I don't normally advocate the use of local press to air dirty laundry, but, on this occasion, it wouldn't hurt to intimate that you'll happily chat with the local paper, which their other clients would read presumably, and have them advertise the agent's failings. The potential impact to their business may get them to accept some liability and might get you a percentage of the debt back.
fergywales said:
MarsellusWallace said:
Thanks for the replies everyone-some interesting stuff there.
I let through an agent and they handle the tenancy/guarantor agreements.The latest news is that the guarantor has upped his offer to £20 per month.I was seeking £40 per month but the message coming to me from the posts here is that I should take the £20 per month and be a little more switched on in future.
If you have ceased to use said agent (which I'd advise, as they seem incompetent) I would have a very strong conversation with them regarding liability. They have a duty towards you as a client they provide a service for to ensure that the agreements they use to let your properties are of adequate protection against loss.I let through an agent and they handle the tenancy/guarantor agreements.The latest news is that the guarantor has upped his offer to £20 per month.I was seeking £40 per month but the message coming to me from the posts here is that I should take the £20 per month and be a little more switched on in future.
I don't normally advocate the use of local press to air dirty laundry, but, on this occasion, it wouldn't hurt to intimate that you'll happily chat with the local paper, which their other clients would read presumably, and have them advertise the agent's failings. The potential impact to their business may get them to accept some liability and might get you a percentage of the debt back.
The court hearing was today,the other side did not turn up so the judge had no resistance to upping the amount to be paid to me to £40 per week.Whether I will actually end up being paid it or not is another matter.....
MarsellusWallace said:
To be fair to the agent I am usually happy with them...
Not knocking your choice or teaching you how to suck eggs, but right now, it is a landlords market, agents are fighting hand over fist for contracts. Don't settle for average. I've got a BTL that attracts 'that' sort of tenant. Doesn't stop me requiring 2 months rent as deposit, credit referenced guarantors and Section 21(1)B notice on day of moving in. It takes longer to get a tenant, but has (touch wood) helped avoid major issues so far.
no comment said:
.... I've got a BTL that attracts 'that' sort of tenant. Doesn't stop me requiring 2 months rent as deposit, credit referenced guarantors and Section 21(1)B notice on day of moving in.
It takes longer to get a tenant, but has (touch wood) helped avoid major issues so far.
Don't want to pooh-pooh your theory, but what you're saying doesn't make any sense to me. You appear to be deliberately creating the biggest issue of all, unless the bottom line isn't the most important thing.It takes longer to get a tenant, but has (touch wood) helped avoid major issues so far.
The last thing the BTLs that attract 'that' sort of tenant need are a whole panoply of theoretical safeguards. (Almost all of them can be made to fall apart anyway).
What those tenancies need above all is the right version of 'that' sort of tenant. Then neither are the safeguards needed, nor does it 'take longer to get a tenant'. In fact, if you get it REALLY right it'll be 10-15-20 years till you need to think about any other tenant. Of course, this requires the ability to manage 'that' sort of tenancy. And that's certainly nothing whatsoever to do with artificial safeguards.
I mean, what do you do when your tenant from whom you're withholding the 2 months deposit removes and sells your white goods, boiler and shower to get the deposit back, and tells you, and the police, that someone broke in and stole them? Go to the guarantor? Who tells you they're unemployed, on the sick, and unable to meet the guarantee? So you take it to court. Where the only thing you're 'guaranteed' is that ANYTHING can happen. And the other thing you're 'guaranteed' is that the respondent you're pursuing has legal aid, and quite possibly the type of social law centre lawyer who'll make sure you never ever ever try using court to pursue (read 'persecute') an 'assisted' person again!
Been there, seen that, read the book, worn the t-shirt. A complete waste of time and effort. Trust me.
groak said:
no comment said:
.... I've got a BTL that attracts 'that' sort of tenant. Doesn't stop me requiring 2 months rent as deposit, credit referenced guarantors and Section 21(1)B notice on day of moving in.
It takes longer to get a tenant, but has (touch wood) helped avoid major issues so far.
Don't want to pooh-pooh your theory, but what you're saying doesn't make any sense to me. You appear to be deliberately creating the biggest issue of all, unless the bottom line isn't the most important thing.It takes longer to get a tenant, but has (touch wood) helped avoid major issues so far.
The last thing the BTLs that attract 'that' sort of tenant need are a whole panoply of theoretical safeguards. (Almost all of them can be made to fall apart anyway).
What those tenancies need above all is the right version of 'that' sort of tenant. Then neither are the safeguards needed, nor does it 'take longer to get a tenant'. In fact, if you get it REALLY right it'll be 10-15-20 years till you need to think about any other tenant. Of course, this requires the ability to manage 'that' sort of tenancy. And that's certainly nothing whatsoever to do with artificial safeguards.
I mean, what do you do when your tenant from whom you're withholding the 2 months deposit removes and sells your white goods, boiler and shower to get the deposit back, and tells you, and the police, that someone broke in and stole them? Go to the guarantor? Who tells you they're unemployed, on the sick, and unable to meet the guarantee? So you take it to court. Where the only thing you're 'guaranteed' is that ANYTHING can happen. And the other thing you're 'guaranteed' is that the respondent you're pursuing has legal aid, and quite possibly the type of social law centre lawyer who'll make sure you never ever ever try using court to pursue (read 'persecute') an 'assisted' person again!
Been there, seen that, read the book, worn the t-shirt. A complete waste of time and effort. Trust me.
As for selling white goods, boiler, shower (difficult, it is plumbed into the wall, not some cheapo Mira electric unit), it is called Landlords contents and rental income insurance. Costs £116 for the year, and guarantees upto £5k (of which there is maybe £1500 of assets in the property) and the rent if unpaid for upto 6 months. As for the guarantor all of a sudden becoming unable to meet their obligatons. You get their consent, at time of signing a Deed of Guarantee, that every 6 months they will be credit referenced and that, should circumstances have changed so that, in the opinion of the landlord, they would not be deemed financially capable of guaranteeing the tenant, the tenancy may be brought to an end by way of notice.
Community Law Solicitors dealing with housing are, in my experience and from speaking with others that have come up against them, some of the most useless members of the profession. Luckily, in my position, I'd call in a favour and send in a Pitbull in a mini-skirt if needed to go to court.
I know you do this for a living (amongst other things), however, others have other ways of skinning a cat. This is my way, and I'm pretty happy with it. Ultimately, my understanding of how to hold the upper hand gives me the advantage to use what you perceive as 'theoretical safeguards' to satisfy my risk-to-reward ratio that I'm happy to rent the property at. Nothing is fool proof, but crossing the t's and dotting the i's helps, if you know your way around.
no comment said:
groak said:
no comment said:
.... I've got a BTL that attracts 'that' sort of tenant. Doesn't stop me requiring 2 months rent as deposit, credit referenced guarantors and Section 21(1)B notice on day of moving in.
It takes longer to get a tenant, but has (touch wood) helped avoid major issues so far.
Don't want to pooh-pooh your theory, but what you're saying doesn't make any sense to me. You appear to be deliberately creating the biggest issue of all, unless the bottom line isn't the most important thing.It takes longer to get a tenant, but has (touch wood) helped avoid major issues so far.
The last thing the BTLs that attract 'that' sort of tenant need are a whole panoply of theoretical safeguards. (Almost all of them can be made to fall apart anyway).
What those tenancies need above all is the right version of 'that' sort of tenant. Then neither are the safeguards needed, nor does it 'take longer to get a tenant'. In fact, if you get it REALLY right it'll be 10-15-20 years till you need to think about any other tenant. Of course, this requires the ability to manage 'that' sort of tenancy. And that's certainly nothing whatsoever to do with artificial safeguards.
I mean, what do you do when your tenant from whom you're withholding the 2 months deposit removes and sells your white goods, boiler and shower to get the deposit back, and tells you, and the police, that someone broke in and stole them? Go to the guarantor? Who tells you they're unemployed, on the sick, and unable to meet the guarantee? So you take it to court. Where the only thing you're 'guaranteed' is that ANYTHING can happen. And the other thing you're 'guaranteed' is that the respondent you're pursuing has legal aid, and quite possibly the type of social law centre lawyer who'll make sure you never ever ever try using court to pursue (read 'persecute') an 'assisted' person again!
Been there, seen that, read the book, worn the t-shirt. A complete waste of time and effort. Trust me.
As for selling white goods, boiler, shower (difficult, it is plumbed into the wall, not some cheapo Mira electric unit), it is called Landlords contents and rental income insurance. Costs £116 for the year, and guarantees upto £5k (of which there is maybe £1500 of assets in the property) and the rent if unpaid for upto 6 months. As for the guarantor all of a sudden becoming unable to meet their obligatons. You get their consent, at time of signing a Deed of Guarantee, that every 6 months they will be credit referenced and that, should circumstances have changed so that, in the opinion of the landlord, they would not be deemed financially capable of guaranteeing the tenant, the tenancy may be brought to an end by way of notice.
Community Law Solicitors dealing with housing are, in my experience and from speaking with others that have come up against them, some of the most useless members of the profession. Luckily, in my position, I'd call in a favour and send in a Pitbull in a mini-skirt if needed to go to court.
I know you do this for a living (amongst other things), however, others have other ways of skinning a cat. This is my way, and I'm pretty happy with it. Ultimately, my understanding of how to hold the upper hand gives me the advantage to use what you perceive as 'theoretical safeguards' to satisfy my risk-to-reward ratio that I'm happy to rent the property at. Nothing is fool proof, but crossing the t's and dotting the i's helps, if you know your way around.
Well it's the sort of property that attracts 'that' sort of tenant. But of course, YOURS has them queuing up. And not the normal 'that' sort of tenant either. No sireee. YOURS are the sort that have 3 months rent (2 deposit and 1 advance) in their pockets! And YOURS are the sort who have property-owning parents keen to act as guarantors for 'that' sort of property. Hey, not just 1 of these ideal tenants.....17 in 24 hours!
Don't talk pish, mate. I put it to ANY landlord of 'that' sort of property....the lower end of the market....have ANY of you EVER had 50 enquiries within 24 hours of marketing, including 17 fresh-faced applicants brandishing 3 months rent accompanied by their respectable property-owning mums and dads just bursting to sign as guarantors for your lower end vacants? The reality is what you said at first. Putting strict and demanding financial criteria obstacles in their path massively lengthens the time till you'll fill a flat that attracts 'that' sort of tenant. And the longer the void the lower your bottom line. And THAT is the 'most important thing'. Not only is your empty period lengthened, but your CT obligation increases as well. (erm, remember you've got contents you insure, so it's 90% of the normal rate for 'unoccupied/furnished'. So occupancy is king. And certainly not occupancy by well-padded fresh faced guarantor-bearing citizens. They don't stay long (if at all) in 'that' sort of property. And then you're back to 'taking longer to get a tenant' again.
The next mistake is the 'landlords rent and contents insurance'. £116 a year you say. The question to ask here is, 'is it cost effective'? And if it is, then how are the companies who sell it making any money? The rent insurance will only apply if the tenants pass the company's criteria checklist (which should, and does, thin down your prospects list even further). And contents? lol! Real world please. Suppose it actually happens. Does a cheque appear next day? Nope. First thing you need is a crime reference number. And that requires a copper. And of course the copper will be well aware the tenant nicked the stuff even if they can't prove it. So start praying the company doesn't scrutinise the crime ref. Coz if they do, and get a whiff of 'tenant did it', your claim's in the bin. Meanwhile, until the claim's settled, you've an empty flat to furnish - or leave void. Want to lose some cashflow? Or some rent? O and you do, of course, have the receipts for the furniture you're claiming on? etc etc etc. And what does a claim do to next years premium? And anyway, how many of your well-referred well checked deposit bearing and guaranteed tenants ever even require a claim? And if they don't, is this contents insurance really worth the money?
Last week I had a bare boards robbery. It's a weird one, because it wasn't the tenant. And it's the first one I've had for, o, must be 5 years anyway. I'm not sure of the EXACT number, but, having disposed of a fair number until it all stopped for sales I'm probably renting just north of 200 residentials just now. I guess if I was to indulge in the madness of contents insurance I'd be looking at about 20 large a year. And I doubt end-to-end I'd be claiming even £1kpa. So given a claims level of about a grand a year, I ask myself would it be very sensible to pay 20k a year to insure contents? Hmmmm....let me think about it. erm, no! It would be bonkers.
Contents and (for a different reason) rent insurance really are not cost effective insurances. They are 'bottom-line-munchers'. Another reason why is that no-one who has the faintest idea of what they're doing pays £1500 to furnish a, say, 2 bed flat of 'that' type. Boilers and showers are fixtures and fittings covered by BI anyway, the three basic white goods cost £300 total, and the rest possibly another £300 or maybe even £450 for a 2 bed. So whoever's doing your furnishings is taking you for a mug.
Of course the properties that attract 'that' kind of tenant don't require advertising in the first place. Advertising costs money, brings unknown prospects to the door, and means that the agent really doesn't have 'tenants waiting' (aka a prospects list). Sorry about this, but the art of getting the very best of 'that' kind of tenant isn't learned in letting school. It's about word-of-mouth and street references. Who's looking for a flat who is a known face that people you know can assure you is reliable and who fits the property profile, NOT some financial criteria checklist? Not generally some smart young working couple from a property owning guarantor family (who, truth to tell, really won't be interested in a property that attracts 'that' sort of tenant anyway). More likely some 35 year old on permanent benefits who's from the area, loves the flat, will co-operate to get the claim sorted, gets the 'golden ticket' (entitlement to rent direct to agent), and whose family have lived in the area for years. Probably very little or no deposit. And treated decently and helped occasionally, gets you a minimum 10 stretch without a rent break, plus a street reputation as a decent landlord. You'll get regular referrals of similar as well if you do it right. And you'll probably never need to advertise anything again.
I'd guess your experience (and that of your associates) of 'Law Centre' lawyers is pretty limited. Useless? O you mean they lose in court? They may do. Sometimes. If they can find someone stupid enough to actually ENTER court against them. I take it you've zero court experience, lawyer or not. Let me enlighten you. When a landlord even engages a solicitor who is either 100% greed driven or is stupid enough to start legal acrimony with a DSS tenant, at SOME point a big round penny drops. In Marsellus' case he's dropped a grand. By some miracle, an agent's got someone to agree (not that that may amount to much) to pay £20 a month. No court is going to award him any more than that from an 'assisted person'. And no lawyer's going to do it for nothing. So financially speaking he can really only lose by progressing legally. And probably take an age staggering slowly towards that loss.
Of course in your case you can fortunately get a 'miniskirted pitbull' to run riot in court and all for nothing! lol! I take it you either watch a lot of TV or suffer from an overactive imagination. I can just picture your miniskirted pitbull in the local housing court. lol! Showing a bit of thigh to the 70 year old dyspeptic beery faced lady magistrate I presume, who glares at her as though she's come to a black tie dinner dressed in a shellsuit! Whilst the court officials suppress their sniggers and the neds and antisocials on the witness and next case and visitor galleries snigger a lot more openly as they speculate on your 'pitbull' being passed around like a ragdoll on a rapists wing!! Our local Law Centre guy's a prominent local socialist. He doesn't even WANT to win. He wants you to run up a fee if you're stupid enough to enter court knowing it's going to cost more than you'll ever recoup! They LOVE you. Son, they're Legal Aid milkmen. They're on a payday WHATEVER happens here. And their client's paying heehaw. And if he REALLY wants to torture you, he'll get the case put back. Maybe a couple of times. Your 'miniskirted pitbull' will be in and out of court like a fiddler's elbow. Until, of course, Mr Law Centre knows the hearing's to be in front of one of his sympathetic chums. Then you'll find out how the Birmingham 3 felt! Of course you can always go to the appeal court which will doubtless overturn the earlier ruling. O and let me guess....you'll 'pull a favour' and get a senior counsel in hot pants to run riot in front of m'luds in joint session!
I don't 'do this for a living'. I did for many years. Now I own and direct a large inner city agency whose personnel 'do this for a living'. They are BRILLIANT at letting. All grades, but especially lower end stuff. Very few can come even close to them in one respect, which is producing the best YoY bottom line for owners. And in another respect, no-one can touch them, which is in resolving problem scenarios.
The letting style you outline neither is nor ever will be their MO. That's because it doesn't lead to the 'best bottom line', and it certainly doesn't lead to speedy and effective problem resolution. In fact it achieves the opposite, and draws out dramas until they become sometimes very serious crises. The art of managing properties which attract 'that' kind of tenant has nothing to do with 'holding the upper hand' or 'risk-to-reward ratios'.
We are very aware of the income stream generation that supplying landlords with all manner of bulls
t insurances and safeguards and who-knows-what cost centres can create for agencies. But we have to balance that against the advantages of marketing real letting agency services to pros who wouldn't dream of ripping themselves off with a tiresome and non-cost effective burden of unnecessary and largely ineffective paper tigers.There aren't really a multiplicity of ways to skin the btl cat. If there were, we'd utilise them. But then, this agency was designed to look after MY properties, and MY interests. Most agencies are designed to look after the agent's. There's a very big difference.
Gassing Station | Business | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff