Unconscious humour from posters

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

  • jta
    started a topic Unconscious humour from posters

    Unconscious humour from posters

    It seems to me there is a lot of unconscious humour here, the latest one for me is...........

    Hi. The S.21 is not valid for a number of reasons. I would be willing to sign a new AST with the prospective buyer. I suppose they are just an unknown quandary at the moment.
    Of course I know what he means but his brain seems to be running faster than his typing

    Can I suggest that we post them here when we spot them.

  • Wainwright
    replied
    [QUOTE=In terms of damage, say for example they breAk down the walls, cut the joists to the first floor , rip sealing down , etc etc, can the police Assist with this.... [/QUOTE]

    I'd imagine chances of them being found alive under all that rubble are fairly slim, anyway so it's all academic!

    Leave a comment:


  • JK0
    replied

    I own a block of flats with DSS tenants. Police knocked down wrong flat door and then sent bill
    Wasn't this problem self inflicted?

    Leave a comment:


  • JK0
    replied
    I am suing former doggy landlord
    Did you not smell a rat when there were paw prints on the tenancy agreement instead of signatures?

    Leave a comment:


  • KeepTheFaith
    replied
    If Mrs T is claiming any benefits, having Mr T live with her might affect her claim.
    I pity the fool that would mess with Mr T! 🙂

    Leave a comment:


  • JK0
    replied
    Pleased to hear it. Even if he is awkward old beggar.

    Leave a comment:


  • JK0
    replied
    https://forums.landlordzone.co.uk/fo...mage-and-evict

    I guess it's not so wise to let with 'LetWise'

    Leave a comment:


  • nukecad
    replied
    ... unable to have a movable joist ...
    That doesn't sound like a good idea anyway.

    Leave a comment:


  • JK0
    replied
    Notice under Section 21 for pre 201 tenancies
    Your tenants must be very old.

    Leave a comment:


  • MdeB
    replied
    Originally posted by areynolds View Post
    Letting Agent Termination Without a Contract
    So, you want them taken out but don't want to pay for it?

    Leave a comment:


  • JK0
    replied
    Originally posted by nukecad View Post

    Freeloaders don't usually pay for anything.
    That's the point of calling freeholders 'freeloaders', isn't it?

    Leave a comment:


  • alice123
    replied
    son buying a house (bless) found one on the cheap saying 50percent ownership - 'oooh does that mean there are other people walking about in the house as you only buy the half ??'

    Leave a comment:


  • nukecad
    replied
    This has been recommended by a surveyor and freeloader to pay.
    Freeloaders don't usually pay for anything.

    Leave a comment:


  • jpkeates
    replied
    Originally posted by JK0 View Post
    Yeah. Tenant claimed not to have received prescribed information, a couple of years ago. Don't you remember?
    I don't remember, but I'm sure it happened.

    So the landlord gives evidence that it was

    Interestingly, the only person I (vauguely) know who's involved in no win no fee claims tells me that they don't take no PI claims any more - the level of proof, on the balance of probabilities, tends to favour the landlord in most cases.

    Leave a comment:


  • JK0
    replied
    Originally posted by jpkeates View Post
    If someone receives a letter claiming vast amounts and can simply respond with the evidence that the regulations were satisfied, the claim will just go into the bin.

    I have never seen a post on this or other forums from a landlord being pursued by a no win no fee operation who had actually protected the deposit and the tenant was making something up.
    Has anyone else?
    Yeah. Tenant claimed not to have received prescribed information, a couple of years ago. Don't you remember?

    Leave a comment:

Latest Activity

Collapse

Working...
X