Rental agreement expired person wants a letter of eviction

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

    #16
    Originally posted by AndrewDod View Post
    However it remains the fact that receiving something under contract (a home) and not paying for that something as contracted is a "crime" - it is a form of theft pure and simple. The fact that a procedure has to be followed to deal with this "crime" does not make it any less of a crime, but that is the impression that is being given - and that is totally wrong as a matter of policy. "It is MY RIGHT not to pay rent and to force this process through the courts instead of taking one of the other reasonable options -- because that is what the council is telling me I have to do" - I have to continue to commit a crime and to damage my reputation and to deprive others of money if I am to be enabled to receive one of those possible reliefs (but strangely not other reliefs such as relocation expenses)
    I think that you are also conflating two different things.

    The local authority (and probably Shelter) are advising people to stay until evicted.
    They're not telling them to stop paying rent (if the tenant is on housing benefit it continues to be paid).

    Tenants might take the opportunity not to pay rent, but it isn't an inevitable result of the advice (wrongly) given by the council or shelter.
    How "inevitable" it might be in real life I'll leave to our respective levels of cynicism and personal experience.
    When I post, I am expressing an opinion - feel free to disagree, I have been wrong before.
    Please don't act on my suggestions without checking with a grown-up (ideally some kind of expert).

    Comment


      #17
      JPKEATES - Thanks for providing that comprehensive info, which I was unaware of. I contacted my local authority with regard to this to find out what their position is on the matter, and got the following response. It all sounds quite reasonable to me, and appears to comply with the guidance/ order above.

      It appears - at this LA at least, that as soon as a S21 is served, extra points are allocated. Unfortunately, this still doesn't guarantee a property for the tenant - which is likely to be because there is someone else in a worse position than them, in a more dire need of rehousing, that has more points and will beat them to available properties. Also, it seems that the tenant in question may choose not to accept properties offered to them, in the hope that they will be offered another more appealing property in the future.

      We have insecurity points (30) if a private tenant has been served with a valid section 21 notice and we are satisfied that the landlord intends to act on it (i.e. it wasn’t just one given at the start of the tenancy as some landlords do) and that it isn’t the tenants fault (as sometimes landlords will use S21 rather than S8 as it is easier but actually it is because there are a lot of rent arrears etc). We do not award points when a tenancy is ending if no notice has been served as they will continue to have tenancy rights as a periodic tenant if no new tenancy agreement is made and so they won’t be threatened with homelessness.

      The process is that the tenants bring in the notice and their tenancy agreement and usually myself or XXXXXX will have a look through it to check if it is valid and then make an appointment for the tenant to come in and we go through the possession process and their housing options with them, we also speak to the landlord to see if we can prevent at this stage or negotiate longer etc if appropriate and then usually award the extra points. After the notice expires we then sort of keep an eye on the situation as I find most landlords won’t go for possession as long as the tenant is actively looking to move.
      Once it starts going through possession proceedings we’ll usually look at making a homeless decision and if they are full duty (basically families) they will get 50 points (instead of the 30) Non-priority (no children or health issues) they still get 30 points . If they still aren’t rehoused and it gets to bailiff stage we would look at temporary accommodation for them if needed.

      Generally I find if they come in early enough (ASAP when notice is expired) and bid flexibly they will get somewhere others go to stay with family once notice expires and get lodger/overcrowding points instead. Very few end up going to possession and needing a decision/temp accommodation. Usually this is only when they are very specific about what/where they bid or they come in to us late on in the process.

      It is also worth noting that as insecurity points are a type of ‘homeless’ points they override some other types of points including overcrowding time on list and disrepair so occasionally we will not award the insecurity points as they are better off with the ones they already have.

      Hope that helps. If you have anyone who has been served notice please encourage then to get in touch with us ASAP as the extra time really helps!

      Comment


        #18
        Originally posted by Trawler View Post
        JPKEATES - Thanks for providing this comprehensive info, which I was unaware of. I contacted my local authority with regard to this to find out what their position is on the matter, and got the following response. It all sounds quite reasonable to me
        Sorry but it does not sound at all reasonable to me. Of course if they were reasonable they would be using their own resources to achieve their little score - not using both resources of landlord and tenant to force both parties into court proceedings (and since I would not knowingly house any tenant who had ever been in legal proceedings with a L they are causing massive reputational damage to T as well).

        It is about as reasonable as me me instructing you to donate money to a charity of my choice.

        If one wishes to run a system of tax-payer funded housing on the basis of points then that logically should be on the basis of inability to fund ones own housing, not on the basis of how much pain and loss one has caused to others.

        Comment


          #19
          Originally posted by Trawler View Post
          JPKEATES - Thanks for providing this comprehensive info, which I was unaware of. I contacted my local authority with regard to this to find out what their position is on the matter, and got the following response. It all sounds quite reasonable to me, and appears to comply with the guidance/ order above.
          Thanks for posting that, it's a useful insight into the process.

          I'm not sure what else the local authority can do, given that they've got reduced and ever reducing housing stock of their own and less and less money to help people in need.
          There are really only two possibilities: the tenant has done something stupid, are victims of their own actions and liable for the consequences, or they're just unfortunate and it's unfair that they should be blamed for their situation.
          I've met very few people who want to be poor and homeless.

          If you're unable to handle the issues that arise when "life" happens to a tenant, either financially or emotionally, being a landlord is probably not a great choice.
          It happens a lot and is going to happen more and more in future (I have a firm no housing benefit rule, but have tenants who've lost their job or been abandoned by their partner who are now on benefits).
          Dealing with the chancers who try and game the system or people who make poor choices is a different kettle of chips.
          When I post, I am expressing an opinion - feel free to disagree, I have been wrong before.
          Please don't act on my suggestions without checking with a grown-up (ideally some kind of expert).

          Comment


            #20
            Originally posted by Trawler View Post
            JPKEATES - Thanks for providing this comprehensive info, which I was unaware of. I contacted my local authority with regard to this to find out what their position is on the matter, and got the following response. It all sounds quite reasonable to me, and appears to comply with the guidance/ order above.

            It appears - at this LA at least, that as soon as a S21 is served, extra points are allocated. ...
            As each council has it's own "allocation policy" your council's policy may well be - probably isn't - different for s21s served
            I am legally unqualified: If you need to rely on advice check it with a suitable authority - eg a solicitor specialising in landlord/tenant law...

            Comment


              #21
              I would also say that I come across a lot of tenants who actually WANT their LL to serve a S21 notice, purely to raise their chances of getting a council property. To that end, they fail to pay rent, cause a nuisance, damage the property, harass the LL, etc etc. and pretty much do whatever it takes to get the LL to serve a S21 Notice. Yes, I'm aware a S8 may also be a consideration in these circumstances, and would not get the tenant any extra points - most landlords do not pursue that route, and instead serve a S21 as they are more familiar with them, and it's easier. Half the time they do it wrong too, causing themselves even more problems.

              Comment


                #22
                Telling the local authority the background means the tenant is doing all that for nothing.
                That way no one wins.
                When I post, I am expressing an opinion - feel free to disagree, I have been wrong before.
                Please don't act on my suggestions without checking with a grown-up (ideally some kind of expert).

                Comment

                Latest Activity

                Collapse

                Working...
                X