What would you, as a private landlord like from your local council?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • hech123
    replied
    Keep direct payments always or we will all go bust

    Leave a comment:


  • Waverley Borough Council
    replied
    Dear all

    Thank you for all your responses so far. They will be fed back to the Housing team at Waverley.

    I had anticipated much more on things like how to issue a S21, advice on tenants not paying rent, access to free templates for contracts, S21s etc, but it appears that most contributors to this thread are very experienced and knowledgeable landlords - rather than those who come on here and post a specific question.

    So, if I may tap into your expertise and longevity on this site, if we were to develop a service aimed at the less experienced landlord, what would you say are the biggest issues that they ask for help on? (I have already trawled the Forum and picked out more recent FAQs)

    Thank you again your feedback is very much appreciated.

    Leave a comment:


  • josh123
    replied
    Originally posted by boletus View Post
    I would like councils to stop routinely advising tenants to cling on to a property and wait for a possession order on expiry of a section 21 notice.

    It is self defeating in the long run as landlords who are subject to this treatment often refuse to let to DSS (sic) ever again. And they tell anyone who will listen to do likewise.

    It is a short term solution that results in long term problems.

    It is bad for landlords, bad for tenants and bad for councils.

    I would like councils to follow their own guidelines;

    https://www.gov.uk/government/upload...841/152056.pdf

    The Secretary of State considers that where a
    person applies for accommodation or assistance in obtaining accommodation,
    and:
    (a) the person is an assured shorthold tenant who has received proper notice in
    accordance with s.21 of the Housing Act 1988;
    (b) the housing authority is satisfied that the landlord intends to seek possession;
    and
    (c) there would be no defence to an application for a possession order;
    then it is unlikely to be reasonable for the applicant to continue to occupy the
    accommodation beyond the date given in the s.21 notice
    I would like councils to follow their own guidelines;

    This is the point I stressed above, CC's are very happy to issues such guidelines, but never abide to their own standards..!!

    CC's also appear to maintain a 100% interest in the tenant, but very little in the private landlord

    Leave a comment:


  • jjlandlord
    replied
    Wait until they introduce compulsory licensing for all landlords...

    Leave a comment:


  • westminster
    replied
    Originally posted by Waverley Borough Council View Post
    Westminster / all

    The broad aim is to work more closely with private landlords but we need your input to define exactly what that means.
    As a private landlord with non-LHA tenants, and as a landlord who complies with all my repairing and legal obligations, I don't 'work with' the council at all. The council is pretty much irrelevant to my business aside from the council tax for empty properties issue, and even that's a non-issue, as my properties are rarely untenanted for more than a week.

    I repeat, what do *you* think are the potential issues? To say the aim is to 'work more closely with private landlords' tells us almost nothing, not to me anyway, as I've no dealings with the council concerning my tenancies.

    Leave a comment:


  • westminster
    replied
    Originally posted by boletus View Post
    I would like councils to stop routinely advising tenants to cling on to a property and wait for a possession order on expiry of a section 21 notice.

    It is self defeating in the long run as landlords who are subject to this treatment often refuse to let to DSS (sic) ever again. And they tell anyone who will listen to do likewise.
    Good point. We see this time and time again on the forum, tenants being advised to fight undefeatable possession claims to the bitter end.

    Leave a comment:


  • Ricco E
    replied
    Originally posted by MrJohnnyB View Post
    The sense is that as private Landlords, by perception of the average UK Voter, you have amassed a vast wealth and as such you can afford a bit of extra council tax!
    That may be the case. However, taxation on wealth (through earnings and capital gains) is provided for at a national level. I'm not aware of any change in legislation that allows local authorities to single out individuals doing certain jobs to pay more tax.

    I'm aware that central government gave local authority the power to decide their own levels of charges on empty properties. So, the local authority can do what they like. Or can they? Council tax pays for local services of course. It's quite obvious, if you apply logic to the situation, that someone who doesn't live in a property shouldn't pay more than a single person living in a property. It appears that the charge of 100% on empty properties is punitive. As such, it could quite well be challenged in law. I don't have the time or resources myself but I look forward with much anticipation to the first test case.

    Leave a comment:


  • boletus
    replied
    Finally,
    I would very much like the council to provide free beer to landlords in the Shepherd and Flock pub, every Friday night, in an attempt to rebuild some burnt bridges
    - now that you obviously need us a lot more than we need you.

    Leave a comment:


  • boletus
    replied
    I would like to see Waverley council (and all others) apply 3 months class c exemption to empty properties.

    I would also like them to carry out proper checks when a tenant claims this exemption but retains the keys and possession of a property.

    And I would like council officers to be given discretion over raising daft council tax bills for pennies. Common sense should prevail over "computer says no".

    Incidentally, who was it came up with Waverley's policy of 50% discount for 6 months? What experience do they have to make this decision? Did they consider how much time and money is wasted by raising and chasing silly bills for £5? Did they consult landlords associations, local landlords and tenants or did they just pluck a figure at random?

    Leave a comment:


  • jta
    replied
    On an initial application for LHA there is a box to tick to allow landlord to discuss the matter with the council (with my council anyway).

    This appears to be forgotten every time there is a query meaning the landlord has to chase the tenant into giving yet another permission to the council.

    How about a password being issued to the landlord to discuss a claim on first being given permission?

    Leave a comment:


  • boletus
    replied
    I would like councils to stop routinely advising tenants to cling on to a property and wait for a possession order on expiry of a section 21 notice.

    It is self defeating in the long run as landlords who are subject to this treatment often refuse to let to DSS (sic) ever again. And they tell anyone who will listen to do likewise.

    It is a short term solution that results in long term problems.

    It is bad for landlords, bad for tenants and bad for councils.

    I would like councils to follow their own guidelines;

    https://www.gov.uk/government/upload...841/152056.pdf

    The Secretary of State considers that where a
    person applies for accommodation or assistance in obtaining accommodation,
    and:
    (a) the person is an assured shorthold tenant who has received proper notice in
    accordance with s.21 of the Housing Act 1988;
    (b) the housing authority is satisfied that the landlord intends to seek possession;
    and
    (c) there would be no defence to an application for a possession order;
    then it is unlikely to be reasonable for the applicant to continue to occupy the
    accommodation beyond the date given in the s.21 notice

    Leave a comment:


  • Ericthelobster
    replied
    Originally posted by johnboy View Post
    Some councils are charging the full council tax on an empty property with no discount but if a single person lives in the property they get 25% discount. Where is the sense in that. Madness.
    Because (a) empty properties are deemed to be a Bad Thing, and having no discount on CT is perceived to encourage landlords to fill their properties; and (b) the 25% discount was introduced as a specific one-off benefit for single people, it was never intended to be some sort of sliding scale where the amount of CT paid is proportional to the number of occupiers (I think they called that 'Poll Tax', and it didn't go down too well...)

    Leave a comment:


  • Waverley Borough Council
    replied
    Westminster / all

    The broad aim is to work more closely with private landlords but we need your input to define exactly what that means.

    It would be fantastic to get, say, a top ten of burning issues, whilst not ignoring the smaller things.

    Just to add, it doesn't matter whether you have tenants who are in receipt of LHA or not, as long as you are a private residential landlord.
    Last edited by Waverley Borough Council; 07-08-2013, 22:26 PM. Reason: more information

    Leave a comment:


  • josh123
    replied
    I am not looking for a confrontation, I append below my personal view following a very recent experience with my County Council

    I would respectfully request any County Council to practice what you preach legally to private landlords under the Housing Act 2004(housing health and safety hazards), for example my County Council:-

    1) Failures to notify a landlord PRIOR to any form of access a property for such an inspection – Formally notifies landlord after initial visit to property and meeting with tenants
    2) Does NOT undertake a thorough property inspection professionally, from my experience the County Council inspector was not suitably qualified to make such decisions on my property
    3) Make ridiculous recommendations – To be honest I agree with a couple of minor modifications on my property
    4) Request outrageous timescales for the work to be completed and threatens the legal consequences if the work in not commenced

    MY $64M QUESTION TO ANY COUNTY COUNCIL – WHY DO YOU LEGALLY IMPOSE THE HOUSING ACT 2004 WHEN YOU PROVIDE COUNCIL HOUSING WHICH DO NOT MEET SUCH STANDARDS.?

    Finally I close by requesting any County Council provide the tenants with the correct legal advice on the Tenancy Deposit Scheme, for example:-

    1) The correct process legal process
    2) Oblivious implications to landlord(penalty) + tenant(S21)

    I am sure you are fully aware of both the above Tenancy Deposit implications for both T + L from your previous experience on this forum

    Leave a comment:


  • MrJohnnyB
    replied
    Originally posted by johnboy View Post
    I agree.

    Some councils are charging the full council tax on an empty property with no discount but if a single person lives in the property they get 25% discount. Where is the sense in that. Madness.
    The sense is that as private Landlords, by perception of the average UK Voter, you have amassed a vast wealth and as such you can afford a bit of extra council tax!

    Leave a comment:

Latest Activity

Collapse

Working...
X