Landlords who hate Landlords

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

    Landlords who hate Landlords

    Am I the only one who has noticed the increasing number of landlords here who seem to dislike other landlords? You know, the ones who seem happiest when advising tenants how to screw over their landlord.

    You know who you are...

    FFS guys, tenants have plenty of places to seek support without giving them naughty ideas here.

    By the way, if anyone was about to bring up this post of mine, I was being sarcastic :

    Originally posted by JK0 View Post
    Do let us know how you get on with sueing for non deposit protection of a periodic tenancy, won't you Tradingup.

    #2
    On the other hand it is teaching the bad landlord a hard lesson, therefore pushing them out of landlord-ing or into better habits to the benefit of tenants and the sector in general.
    Based on the information posted, I offer my thoughts.Any action you then take is your liability. While commending individual effort, there is no substitute for a thorough review of documents and facts by paid for professional advisers.

    Comment


      #3
      Originally posted by leaseholdanswers View Post
      On the other hand it is teaching the bad landlord a hard lesson, therefore pushing them out of landlord-ing or into better habits to the benefit of tenants and the sector in general.
      Thanks LHA.

      I don't think I'm even talking about bad landlords. I'm talking about those of us who for one reason or another have fallen foul of the regulations, and find that tenants have a way of screwing a large amount of money out of us in view of that.

      eg: People trying to pick holes in S21 notices,
      People claiming cash for non deposit protection of a periodic tenancy.

      I won't even mention people trying to duck out of paying leasehold service charges on some technicality.

      Comment


        #4
        I'm sure the judges are as peeved with the number of S21 failures as the landlords are. To have an entire case dismissed on a technicality is an expensive business and benefits no-one in the long run. However, it's the law, and until the law is amended we are stuck with it.
        I know that not all landlords consider themselves to be running a business, but unless they start behaving like a business, they will fail. A good business manager generally knows the regulations governing their product. In the course of a tenancy, of which you will be paid for providing a service (house and maintenance, etc) you only have to get a few key bits of paperwork right.
        1. Get your tenancy right, first time, and uphold your end of the agreement.
        2. Ensure your deposit and inventory is right, first time. It's ridiculously easy to secure the deposit and provide the relevant documents to the tenant. It's unforgivable (in terms of customer service) to not do this straight away and failure to do so is rightly punished. No-one is that busy they can't do this simple task. If you can't, you shouldn't be in the business.
        3. S21 notices are the shortest of any of these pieces of paper and yet are the most neglected. People get so hung up on the dates, but not hung up enough to continually get it wrong, then get angry or baffled when the judge throws it out. Every other post on this forum relates to disappointment with S21's in some way.
        JKO, I appreciate that tenants 'screw' landlords with these 'loopholes' but unfortunately some landlords leave themselves open to it by not completing some basic administrative tasks. If they behaved in a business-like manner, they would fair better. Bottom line is, if you have a good tenant with no repair issues, you only have to complete 3 bits of paper for the duration of the tenancy (ex gas service etc). Easy money.
        I may be a housing professional but my views, thoughts, opinions, advice, criticisms or otherwise on this board are mine and are not representative of my company, colleagues, managers. I am here as an independent human being who simply wants to learn new stuff, share ideas and interact with like minded people.

        Comment


          #5
          To me it is simple. Anyone, landlord or tenant, good or bad, has the right to know the law.

          Comment


            #6
            Originally posted by Lawcruncher View Post
            To me it is simple. Anyone, landlord or tenant, good or bad, has the right to know the law.
            Even when the law is abused? Ambulance chasing periodic P.I and precautionary section 21's for example.

            Personally, I'm with JKO but more philosophical about it, as per LHA;

            therefore pushing them out of landlord-ing
            The less competition the better
            -although I wouldn't go so far as advising the screwing myself.

            Comment


              #7
              As the Judge said "we should not disregard non compliance as a technicality- if i notice does not have the requisite number of days, it does not comply".

              As JKO ask, yes some landlords are just a bit "MSE" and like to pile in/on.
              Based on the information posted, I offer my thoughts.Any action you then take is your liability. While commending individual effort, there is no substitute for a thorough review of documents and facts by paid for professional advisers.

              Comment


                #8
                All the law there is to know is to be found in books which are freely available. In practice what you may need to know may not be readily discoverable. The job of the lawyer is to tell the client what the books say. That amounts to no more than telling the client what he could have discovered for himself if he knew where to look and had the relevant expertise to interpret it. If asked by a client what the law it is the duty of the lawyer to tell the client what it is. This is an essential function of a lawyer in any society where the rule of law is to prevail.

                Comment


                  #9
                  Originally posted by Lawcruncher View Post
                  All the law there is to know is to be found in books which are freely available. .
                  Though most good bookshops prefer that you pay.....
                  Based on the information posted, I offer my thoughts.Any action you then take is your liability. While commending individual effort, there is no substitute for a thorough review of documents and facts by paid for professional advisers.

                  Comment


                    #10
                    You can find legislation easily enough.
                    Current and relevant case law tends to be harder to find -
                    as is a view of what a court might do in real life, given this situation.

                    Fewer landlords would mean higher prices (unless remaining landlords have currently unused capacity to grow their portfolio to take up the slack), which seems unlikely.
                    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


                      #11
                      Originally posted by leaseholdanswers View Post
                      As the Judge said "we should not disregard non compliance as a technicality- if i notice does not have the requisite number of days, it does not comply".
                      But IHMO, the recently established need for re-serving a tenant with an identical copy of the original PI, eg when an existing tenancy goes periodic, is nothing if not a technicality...

                      Comment


                        #12
                        Landlords should probably stop whining.

                        I think there are too many accidental and have-a-go Landlords who get into trouble. I know, I'm one. I thought my entire career would be in IT - what I enjoy, plenty of money, just a bit of hard work attached to it. Now I do IT and a bit of the Landlord stuff. I like the Landlord stuff a lot 'cos I'm lazy and it's really easy money, until things go wrong (broken appliance, deposit not protected, blah-blah)... I want to get better at it, so I'm spending time here, learning and making sure I put my own effort in to do things right. I don't want to expose myself (oo'er) any more than I have to. I don't relish the idea of someone successfully suing for up to 3x the deposit on a technicality... but if a Tenant asks for advice here and the Landlord in question has clearly not complied, what do we as a forum really do? Ignore the question being asked by the aggrieved Tenant? I doubt it. I've said several times that deposit protection is not hard - but plenty seem to get caught-out by it. That truly is their own fault. There's no-one else to blame. I like to think it's a fair forum where things are handled appropriately. I also like to think it's a forum that would bring me back down to earth if I ever get 'up there' where I think that it's really us-vs-them and me being a Landlord means that I'm somehow better than a Tenant (my customer)... I've just used my hard-earned in a different way, to get a bit of property to let out and keep something modest myself, instead of what a lot of people do.

                        [large wall of text intentional, so no-one can be bothered to read my drivel]

                        Comment


                          #13
                          Originally posted by Darth Wookie View Post
                          JKO, I appreciate that tenants 'screw' landlords with these 'loopholes' but unfortunately some landlords leave themselves open to it by not completing some basic administrative tasks. If they behaved in a business-like manner, they would fair better. Bottom line is, if you have a good tenant with no repair issues, you only have to complete 3 bits of paper for the duration of the tenancy (ex gas service etc). Easy money.
                          Originally posted by Hippogriff View Post
                          I've said several times that deposit protection is not hard - but plenty seem to get caught-out by it. That truly is their own fault.
                          I have the deleted the reply I was going to give to these statements, in view of not wanting to cut any more landlords' throats. I'll give you a one word reply: 'Superstrike.' The consequenses of that are certainly not landlords' own fault.

                          Comment


                            #14
                            Remember... I'm new, but I still like the forum.

                            Comment


                              #15
                              Originally posted by Hippogriff View Post
                              Remember... I'm new, but I still like the forum.
                              Then you really need to read up on the consequences of Superstrike, my friend.

                              Comment

                              Latest Activity

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X