Donate to Remove ads

Got a credit card? use our Credit Card & Finance Calculators

Thanks to johnstevens77,Bhoddhisatva,scotia,Anonymous,Cornytiv34, for Donating to support the site

serving a section 21

Covering Market, Trends, and Practical (but see LEMON-AID for Building & DIY)
Arborbridge
The full Lemon
Posts: 10378
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 9:33 am
Has thanked: 3605 times
Been thanked: 5234 times

serving a section 21

#198110

Postby Arborbridge » February 1st, 2019, 9:48 am

My last day for serving a section 21 giving two month's notice for the end of my tenants fixed term is February 4th (the rent is due on 5th February). That would give notice to leave on April 4th.

If I should miss that deadline, what is the next date I can ask him to leave?

As I understand it, the answer is May 4th, but I read somewhere that the rules had been changed regarding "rent days", so that I would not have to delay by a whole month by missing the deadline by a number of days. e.g., could I issue on Feb 10th giving two months until April 10th? when rent day is due Feb 5th
Arb.

GoSeigen
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 4351
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 11:14 pm
Has thanked: 1590 times
Been thanked: 1581 times

Re: serving a section 21

#198160

Postby GoSeigen » February 1st, 2019, 1:12 pm

Arborbridge wrote:My last day for serving a section 21 giving two month's notice for the end of my tenants fixed term is February 4th (the rent is due on 5th February). That would give notice to leave on April 4th.

If I should miss that deadline, what is the next date I can ask him to leave?

As I understand it, the answer is May 4th, but I read somewhere that the rules had been changed regarding "rent days", so that I would not have to delay by a whole month by missing the deadline by a number of days. e.g., could I issue on Feb 10th giving two months until April 10th? when rent day is due Feb 5th
Arb.


You can't ask him to leave. Please don't think about it in those terms. You can only give notice that you require possession, and it must be in the correct form. I'm sure you understand that, but you'd be surprised how many landlords break the law by writing to tenants and saying "you need to be out by the 25th".

Having got that out the way, I agree you can give notice for any day (but IANAL). If it doesn't land on a rent day, then do your tenants the courtesy of explaining in your cover letter what will happen to the rent they have paid in advance. e.g. "I undertake to repay the unused rent for the part month by bank transfer immediately on transfer of possession. Your deposit will be subject to the usual checks etc." This will show a bit of consideration of your tenant's position and remove one potential obstacle to their co-operation.

Finally, don't forget to dot the i's and cross the t's by sending them a copy of the EPC and/or How to Rent booklet if you haven't done so already.

GS

Arborbridge
The full Lemon
Posts: 10378
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 9:33 am
Has thanked: 3605 times
Been thanked: 5234 times

Re: serving a section 21

#198171

Postby Arborbridge » February 1st, 2019, 1:47 pm

Thanks for the advice and time taken to provide a clear explanation.
Things have moved on a little since I posted, and my letting agent is able to a Section 21 in due time. I trust them to do it correctly since they have been acting for me for many years - I expect they are more competent than I am, anyway! And if they don't - then it's just another piece in the jigsaw puzzle of experience.

It's extraordinary what bad press landlords get, but most of us are justing trying to be fair and do things correctly. The law seems to lean towards the tenant which is only correct since in general they have the "weakest shoulders" - but my goodness, some of them know how to play the system and landlords get no sympathy.


Arb.

Lootman
The full Lemon
Posts: 18685
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 3:58 pm
Has thanked: 628 times
Been thanked: 6564 times

Re: serving a section 21

#198176

Postby Lootman » February 1st, 2019, 1:58 pm

Arborbridge wrote:
GoSeigen wrote:You can't ask him to leave. Please don't think about it in those terms. You can only give notice that you require possession, and it must be in the correct form. I'm sure you understand that, but you'd be surprised how many landlords break the law by writing to tenants and saying "you need to be out by the 25th".

It's extraordinary what bad press landlords get, but most of us are justing trying to be fair and do things correctly. The law seems to lean towards the tenant which is only correct since in general they have the "weakest shoulders" - but my goodness, some of them know how to play the system and landlords get no sympathy.

The laws have been getting worse for landlords, and the regulatory climate was one of the reasons I got rid of my BTL's between 2003 and 2010. The tax changes just made things worse.

Although GS is technically correct that you can't just ask a tenant to leave, in practice most tenants will agree to leave if you ask them and give them a reason (e.g. you want your mother-in-law to move in or you want to sell the property with vcant possession).

Some tenants might dig their heels in and require a formal approach but in the 33 years I was a landlord that never happened. Whenever I asked them, they moved out. The key is picking decent tenants in the first place. I like to think I developed an eye for tenants who would be trouble, and I never had to evict for cause. Nor was any rent ever missed. In fact two of my former tenants I now count as friends.

Perhaps GS had different experiences?

GoSeigen
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 4351
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 11:14 pm
Has thanked: 1590 times
Been thanked: 1581 times

Re: serving a section 21

#198189

Postby GoSeigen » February 1st, 2019, 3:07 pm

Arborbridge wrote:Thanks for the advice and time taken to provide a clear explanation.
Things have moved on a little since I posted, and my letting agent is able to a Section 21 in due time. I trust them to do it correctly since they have been acting for me for many years - I expect they are more competent than I am, anyway! And if they don't - then it's just another piece in the jigsaw puzzle of experience.

It's extraordinary what bad press landlords get, but most of us are justing trying to be fair and do things correctly. The law seems to lean towards the tenant which is only correct since in general they have the "weakest shoulders" - but my goodness, some of them know how to play the system and landlords get no sympathy.


A lot of them are useless and/or idiots and/or clueless quite apart from criminally breaking the law in many cases, and the letting agency business is structurally abusive.

But don't let that stop you excusing their bad behaviour because they of course are superior to feckless tenants!


GS
[My wife's cousin takes a delight in doing nothing by the book, partly because "I can't be bovvered, man" and partly "To teach them a lesson. Why should I give them proper notice bloody benefit scroungers..." and spends the rest of the time complaining that the court process is taking forever because magistrates keep kicking out his applications.]

Arborbridge
The full Lemon
Posts: 10378
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 9:33 am
Has thanked: 3605 times
Been thanked: 5234 times

Re: serving a section 21

#198190

Postby Arborbridge » February 1st, 2019, 3:09 pm

Lootman wrote:
Although GS is technically correct that you can't just ask a tenant to leave, in practice most tenants will agree to leave if you ask them and give them a reason (e.g. you want your mother-in-law to move in or you want to sell the property with vcant possession).

Some tenants might dig their heels in and require a formal approach but in the 33 years I was a landlord that never happened. Whenever I asked them, they moved out. The key is picking decent tenants in the first place. I like to think I developed an eye for tenants who would be trouble, and I never had to evict for cause. Nor was any rent ever missed. In fact two of my former tenants I now count as friends.

Perhaps GS had different experiences?


I've never had troubles that I couldn't resolve with a little discussion. In this case, I'm happy with the tenant except that he has been getting behind with the rent. However, he seems to be like a pine tree - if you blow harder he bends then bounces back. Very pleasant and polite but I'm always having to force the pace to get the rent, even when it's two months in arrears. So now, I've decided I can't be bothered with him anymore - either we have a new contract and he pays six months up front (BTW he claims to have enough money in the bank) or I proceed with the notice. Issuing the section 21 is only to make it clear where I stand.

Arb.

Arborbridge
The full Lemon
Posts: 10378
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 9:33 am
Has thanked: 3605 times
Been thanked: 5234 times

Re: serving a section 21

#198191

Postby Arborbridge » February 1st, 2019, 3:12 pm

GoSeigen wrote:A lot of them are useless and/or idiots and/or clueless quite apart from criminally breaking the law in many cases, and the letting agency business is structurally abusive.

But don't let that stop you excusing their bad behaviour because they of course are superior to feckless tenants!


GS
[My wife's cousin takes a delight in doing nothing by the book, partly because "I can't be bovvered, man" and partly "To teach them a lesson. Why should I give them proper notice bloody benefit scroungers..." and spends the rest of the time complaining that the court process is taking forever because magistrates keep kicking out his applications.]


I'm giving my letting agent the benefit of any doubt. They seem to know what they are doing and unless proved otherwise, I think they will. I've used them for 10 years or so, and in that time I haven't had any howlers.

GoSeigen
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 4351
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 11:14 pm
Has thanked: 1590 times
Been thanked: 1581 times

Re: serving a section 21

#198211

Postby GoSeigen » February 1st, 2019, 4:34 pm

Lootman wrote:
Arborbridge wrote:
GoSeigen wrote:You can't ask him to leave. Please don't think about it in those terms. You can only give notice that you require possession, and it must be in the correct form. I'm sure you understand that, but you'd be surprised how many landlords break the law by writing to tenants and saying "you need to be out by the 25th".

It's extraordinary what bad press landlords get, but most of us are justing trying to be fair and do things correctly. The law seems to lean towards the tenant which is only correct since in general they have the "weakest shoulders" - but my goodness, some of them know how to play the system and landlords get no sympathy.

The laws have been getting worse for landlords, and the regulatory climate was one of the reasons I got rid of my BTL's between 2003 and 2010. The tax changes just made things worse.

Although GS is technically correct that you can't just ask a tenant to leave, in practice most tenants will agree to leave if you ask them and give them a reason (e.g. you want your mother-in-law to move in or you want to sell the property with vcant possession).

Some tenants might dig their heels in and require a formal approach but in the 33 years I was a landlord that never happened. Whenever I asked them, they moved out. The key is picking decent tenants in the first place. I like to think I developed an eye for tenants who would be trouble, and I never had to evict for cause. Nor was any rent ever missed. In fact two of my former tenants I now count as friends.

Perhaps GS had different experiences?


Yes, I've been a tenant for a long time having been a home owner and landlord before. I gave up the landlord gig when graffiti started appearing regularly on the property's boundaries.

Clearly this is moving slightly off the OP's topic, for which apologies, but I think the landlord tenant balance is about right now. Of course, many tenants would like better protections and I think they will get them, and many landlords regret the trend of weakening their powers, which unfortunately I see continuing. The passing to the Tenant Fees bill is a very welcome change for the entire industry. Certain landlords do take the mick, while as always there are problem tenants but for now I think the situation is fair.

My reply to the OP has no agenda beyond helping him gain possession when he wishes. My view is that the Landlord-Tenant relationship is optimal if both parties are aware of their several rights and obligations in law and then work within that framework in a polite and respectful fashion. Now i'm going to address the landlord's rights and obligations (as opposed to the tenant's) because that is the topic of the OP.

Lootman is right that I have had one or two bad experiences, with both landlords and agents. We've had wonderful landlords too, in fact the one that turned sour did so through their naivete and not any ill intent -- they were good friends and good landlords on the whole, if a bit green about the ears.

The problem with many amateur landlords, as our last two were, is that they all too often have only the vaguest recognition that tenancies are governed by Statute in this country. The typical attitude is that the house is theirs absolutely, often their most treasured asset, while the tenant has in their minds the status of an invited guest, and one who might be a nuisance at that, not paying bills, ruining the precious property or annoying the neighbours. The relationship therefore needs to be regulated by a contract which tells the tenant what they can and can't do, what they must pay and allows them in return to stay for a fixed period or until told to leave.

That's pretty much how our last two landlords saw it. The problem is this bears little relationship to what the law says, much to their surprise and bewilderment when pointed out. The effect of the law is as follows: first, a tenancy is not merely a contractual matter but has a similar effect and status in property law as other transactions like purchase of freehold etc. Not only that, there is a large chunk of law dealing specifically with residential tenancies of the type we are discussing, where the property is rented for the purpose of being the main residence of the tenant. The law treats this with great seriousness: it recognises that stripped of that property the family may be homeless and therefore creates specific protections of this status. At the same time it recognises the need for the landlord to choose his tenants, be paid his rent and regain possession.

Some amateur landlords are ignorant of this. They believe the tenancy is a result of their largesse and governed just by the terms as they understand them in the contract. Usually that understanding does NOT extend to reading the law which the contract itself specifically refers to! Here is the underlying cause of tension in ending our last two tenancies: the landlords assumed they can just ask their tenants to leave as per their understanding of the contract. This is not the case. The law says a landlord cannot compel a tenant to leave. The corollary is that the Landlord has no right to remove a tenant or ask them to leave. Only a court can do that. The law is very clear that the Tenant has the right to leave when he wishes to, having given appropriate notice, but the landlord can only gain possession after application to the court and execution of a court order.

Having recognised these legal actualities, a landlord should recognise that he cannot simply ask tenants to leave. Well he can do that but the tenant has every right to refuse or not give any answer at all and stay in the property. Lootman is right that usually tenants leave when asked. That is not in dispute. But the assumption by (some amateur) landlords that they have to do so -- and addressing tenants in such terms -- is IMO not only rude but also damaging to the landlord's own interests when a conflict arises. In the worst case this could be seen as a breach of Protection from Eviction law which is a criminal offence.

So underlying my comments to the OP were two thoughts: as the Landlord recognise your rights, responsibilities and constraints not only in the contract but also in Law and, within those boundaries, act with respect and kindness to your tenant.

Our last landlords were a couple -- the husband wrote to us one day saying our family had to move out in two months because he had been told to move out by his wife and needed the house. Hours later the wife texted us to ask if her husband had contacted to us and what had he said? Needless to say there was no S.21, let alone the other things they needed to present to the court if we hadn't deigned to meet Mr Divorcee's demand [and I hasten to add we did leave on the date specified, because we were ready, NOT out of any compulsion]!


GS

Arborbridge
The full Lemon
Posts: 10378
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 9:33 am
Has thanked: 3605 times
Been thanked: 5234 times

Re: serving a section 21

#198317

Postby Arborbridge » February 2nd, 2019, 7:55 am

GoSeigen,

Thanks for your lengthy and thoughtful post. I have, I believe always acted in the way you suggest:
"So underlying my comments to the OP were two thoughts: as the Landlord recognise your rights, responsibilities and constraints not only in the contract but also in Law and, within those boundaries, act with respect and kindness to your tenant."

Almost all of my tenants have had an excellent relationship with me, and all have left when they wanted to. You can deduce that from the fact that I'm not too sure about the Section 21 - I've never needed one before. Neither have I had any problem with rent until 2018 and in that year suddenly two are way behind or struggling. I do wonder if this is a sign of the times as regards households finding life hard in general.

I quite like my struggling tenant, and I don't particularly want him to leave. I'm not even sure he needed to fall behind with the rent so consistently and progressively - he just seems a bit "hopeless" at organising himself, but he's a really nice fellow. Part of the problem (if his story is to be believed) is that his sister is sitting on his capital like a dragon on a pile of gold, with the best of motives, safeguarding him. She knows that given unfettered access he would just spend it, I suspect. However, this means that in effect she would rather I lent him the money by being behind with the rent, rather than release his savings - and I'm not clear why I should act as a family bank for them both - especially as she is his Guarantor.

We'll see how it's resolved in due course.

Arb.

GoSeigen
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 4351
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 11:14 pm
Has thanked: 1590 times
Been thanked: 1581 times

Re: serving a section 21

#198325

Postby GoSeigen » February 2nd, 2019, 9:14 am

Arborbridge wrote:GoSeigen,

Thanks for your lengthy and thoughtful post. I have, I believe always acted in the way you suggest:
Arborbridge wrote:GoSeigen,

Thanks for your lengthy and thoughtful post. I have, I believe always acted in the way you suggest:


Just to be clear: I never doubted that, my long post was a personal perspective (responding to Lootman). Regular posters on this bard tend to be more savvy than the average, I'm sure you're one of the good 'uns and agree you are taking the right action with your tenant..

Thanks for your comments.

GS

Arborbridge
The full Lemon
Posts: 10378
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 9:33 am
Has thanked: 3605 times
Been thanked: 5234 times

Re: serving a section 21

#198327

Postby Arborbridge » February 2nd, 2019, 9:19 am

Thanks GS.

modellingman
Lemon Slice
Posts: 614
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 3:46 pm
Has thanked: 595 times
Been thanked: 364 times

Re: serving a section 21

#198439

Postby modellingman » February 2nd, 2019, 6:23 pm

GoSeigen wrote:
You can't ask him to leave. Please don't think about it in those terms. You can only give notice that you require possession, and it must be in the correct form. I'm sure you understand that, but you'd be surprised how many landlords break the law by writing to tenants and saying "you need to be out by the 25th".

Having got that out the way, I agree you can give notice for any day (but IANAL). If it doesn't land on a rent day, then do your tenants the courtesy of explaining in your cover letter what will happen to the rent they have paid in advance. e.g. "I undertake to repay the unused rent for the part month by bank transfer immediately on transfer of possession. Your deposit will be subject to the usual checks etc." This will show a bit of consideration of your tenant's position and remove one potential obstacle to their co-operation.

Finally, don't forget to dot the i's and cross the t's by sending them a copy of the EPC and/or How to Rent booklet if you haven't done so already.

GS


Quite right. The correct form of a Section 21 notice is now Form 6A. The requirements for notice validity can be gleaned (in part) from the court form that is used under the accelerated procedure for claiming possession (the next stage after a Section 21 notice for regaining possession if the tenant does not voluntarily end the tenancy).

In England, the notice period no longer needs to end at the end of a tenancy period (Section 21 (4ZA) Housing Act 1988). Rent paid for the unused part of a tenancy period should be returned to the tenant (Section 21C).

Arborbridge wrote:In this case, I'm happy with the tenant except that he has been getting behind with the rent. However, he seems to be like a pine tree - if you blow harder he bends then bounces back. Very pleasant and polite but I'm always having to force the pace to get the rent, even when it's two months in arrears. So now, I've decided I can't be bothered with him anymore - either we have a new contract and he pays six months up front (BTW he claims to have enough money in the bank) or I proceed with the notice. Issuing the section 21 is only to make it clear where I stand.


This reads like its a problem of tardy payment rather than one of persistently increasing arrears with no prospect of recovery.

I understand you are annoyed but S21 seems to me (and I've been a landlord for nearly 20 years) quite a drastic response to this situation. The trouble with a S21 notice is that it is a blunt instrument and you need to be prepared for the range of possible consequences. For example, are you prepared for the tenant to turn awkward, such as ceasing all rent payments and sitting tight until the legal process is exhausted. You could be looking at 6-12 months arrears.

A preferable course might be a letter setting out your concerns and expectations and the consequences that might reluctantly follow if there's no improvement on the tenant's part.

If the problem is simply one of the tenant's disorganisation and/or a lack of appreciation that paying rent on time is important, then getting a signed standing order for rent payment (which you send to the tenant's bank) might be an even better solution. Your alternative solution of a six-month tenancy agreement paid up-front might only postpone the matter for a while and, in any event, your sitting tenant is under no obligation to enter into such an agreement with you.

Lootman
The full Lemon
Posts: 18685
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 3:58 pm
Has thanked: 628 times
Been thanked: 6564 times

Re: serving a section 21

#198450

Postby Lootman » February 2nd, 2019, 7:04 pm

modellingman wrote:If the problem is simply one of the tenant's disorganisation and/or a lack of appreciation that paying rent on time is important, then getting a signed standing order for rent payment (which you send to the tenant's bank) might be an even better solution. Your alternative solution of a six-month tenancy agreement paid up-front might only postpone the matter for a while and, in any event, your sitting tenant is under no obligation to enter into such an agreement with you.

I always made payment by standing order a condition of the tenancy, and every tenant paid that way. I never had a problem with late payment or non-payment of rent. There were a couple of times the tenant overdrew their bank account as a result, but that wasn't my problem.

Of course the tenant could have cancelled the standing order after the first month but I would have taken that as a very hostile act.

Incidentally, an alternative to a notice to leave can just be to apply a hefty rent increase. I never tried it myself and realise there might be a claim for a "constructive eviction". But there was one time I applied a 20% rent increase at the end of an AST and the tenant immediately gave notice to leave. Had I wanted him to leave, such a method would have worked.

Arborbridge
The full Lemon
Posts: 10378
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 9:33 am
Has thanked: 3605 times
Been thanked: 5234 times

Re: serving a section 21

#198502

Postby Arborbridge » February 3rd, 2019, 8:05 am

modellingman wrote:
Arborbridge wrote:In this case, I'm happy with the tenant except that he has been getting behind with the rent. However, he seems to be like a pine tree - if you blow harder he bends then bounces back. Very pleasant and polite but I'm always having to force the pace to get the rent, even when it's two months in arrears. So now, I've decided I can't be bothered with him anymore - either we have a new contract and he pays six months up front (BTW he claims to have enough money in the bank) or I proceed with the notice. Issuing the section 21 is only to make it clear where I stand.


This reads like its a problem of tardy payment rather than one of persistently increasing arrears with no prospect of recovery.

I understand you are annoyed but S21 seems to me (and I've been a landlord for nearly 20 years) quite a drastic response to this situation. The trouble with a S21 notice is that it is a blunt instrument and you need to be prepared for the range of possible consequences. For example, are you prepared for the tenant to turn awkward, such as ceasing all rent payments and sitting tight until the legal process is exhausted. You could be looking at 6-12 months arrears.

A preferable course might be a letter setting out your concerns and expectations and the consequences that might reluctantly follow if there's no improvement on the tenant's part.

If the problem is simply one of the tenant's disorganisation and/or a lack of appreciation that paying rent on time is important, then getting a signed standing order for rent payment (which you send to the tenant's bank) might be an even better solution. Your alternative solution of a six-month tenancy agreement paid up-front might only postpone the matter for a while and, in any event, your sitting tenant is under no obligation to enter into such an agreement with you.


This reads like its a problem of tardy payment rather than one of persistently increasing arrears with no prospect of recovery.
Well, it was a case of gradually increasing arrears, fluctuating better or worse each month since he missed a complete payment in April. It is a constant trail of texts, promises of payment "next" week which turn out to be a part payment the week after, and so on. He works subcontract for a builder and says that he has irregular income (very much weather dependent and that included being too hot to work as well as too cold), so a standing order probably wouldn't have work - since April he sends payment as and when he gets paid, and it's usually two or three tranches a month.

Thus, I feel the need to end this arrangement because for both parties it's a monthly aggravation.

I am also reluctant to serve a Section 21 as I don't like being this aggressive. I'm beginning to wonder whether the threat of a section 21 would be the logical next step, but quite what to replace it with? Although, as you say, he isn't obliged to accept payment up front, his alternative would be to leave - and in any this arrangement isn't unusual. I've had two other cases in which the tenants have offerred for different reasons to do this.

He has thrown a new complication into the mix, which is that he now says he's been given a job with his BIL which will be at a higher rate and not weather dependant. Whether this will prove any better I don't know: I could give him the benefit of the doubt, but on the other hand, his record of being completely truthful is against him. Yes, if he is correct, a standing order could now work, whereas it would not have done previously. Lootman is correct that he can cancell the standing order, which is what he did last year since in the first year payments were bang on time, and the letting agent would have made him set one up.

The alternative to a new contract, would be to let it roll over to an SPT, ask for a standing order as suggested, and just see how it goes. Somehow, that seems a weak response to a nagging problem and simply asking for more texting and chasing on a monthly basis. The virtue of my 6-month payment idea is, as you point out, that it puts off any point of friction for that longer period and we can both relax about it until then. The mechanism would be that he would pay me up front from the savings his sister is controling on his behalf and he pays his monthly amount back into his savings pot. Then the problem is worked out between him and his sister rather than between him and me - and from what I've gleaned about his sister, that might be quite effective.

I woke up this morning wondering about that S21, and reading your advice I may be minded to abort tomorrow. I can see this might make thinks drag on another month or two before I could pick up the process again, but it could be preferable just to show some teeth at this stage instead of pulling the trigger.

Well, I'm off for a long walk with my walking group today, and that will give a chance for these thoughts to mature. I'd be interested to read and further responses this afternoon.

Thank you so much for the posts so far. This is an unusual situation for me, having been never had the remotest need of using an S21 over the years.



Arb.

Itsallaguess
Lemon Half
Posts: 9129
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 1:16 pm
Has thanked: 4140 times
Been thanked: 10023 times

Re: serving a section 21

#198508

Postby Itsallaguess » February 3rd, 2019, 8:51 am

Arborbridge wrote:
He has thrown a new complication into the mix, which is that he now says he's been given a job with his BIL which will be at a higher rate and not weather dependant.

Whether this will prove any better I don't know: I could give him the benefit of the doubt, but on the other hand, his record of being completely truthful is against him.

Yes, if he is correct, a standing order could now work, whereas it would not have done previously.


I think you're being too kind here Arb. It would have worked previously if he'd carried out better finance-management, even with the job-payment situation he's got now.....

Similar to how HYP-payouts in retirement may be 'lumpy' month to month, that situation is fixed by carrying a 'float' account, into which those lumpy dividends are paid, but which should always float well above the monthly-payout amount.

It sounds like this guy needs to fix his money-management in a similar way, and perhaps raising this with him at the same time as any other 'payment-issue' conversation might trigger a light-bulb moment for him and perhaps help to solve your issue even if his new steadier job doesn't materialise.

Good luck - it sounds like a difficult situation, but it's heart-warming to read that you're trying to work out a solution with him that might still maintain the tenancy.

Reading the mainstream press nowadays tends to pain all landlords in an extremely poor light, but reading TMF and these boards over the years has shown me that this simply isn't the case, and that there are many, many landlords that wish to find solutions to these types of issues that are amicable to all parties involved. Long may that continue....

Cheers,

Itsallaguess

JonE
Lemon Slice
Posts: 398
Joined: November 11th, 2016, 11:35 am
Has thanked: 25 times
Been thanked: 97 times

Re: serving a section 21

#198527

Postby JonE » February 3rd, 2019, 10:01 am

Arborbridge wrote:... his sister [...] is his Guarantor.


Congratulations on having a guarantor - and especially if she owns a UK property. Very wise move.

It's about time she became aware of the situation. You have a massive lever right there and it should only require a little (carefully judged) twiddle to achieve a significant result!

Cheers!

AJC5001
Lemon Slice
Posts: 447
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 4:55 pm
Has thanked: 161 times
Been thanked: 158 times

Re: serving a section 21

#198664

Postby AJC5001 » February 3rd, 2019, 9:25 pm

Arborbridge wrote:He has thrown a new complication into the mix, which is that he now says he's been given a job with his BIL which will be at a higher rate and not weather dependant. Whether this will prove any better I don't know: I could give him the benefit of the doubt, but on the other hand, his record of being completely truthful is against him.


Arb.


Have you tried asking the BIL if this is true?

Is the BIL by any chance the spouse of the sister who is the guarantor? If so, does this have any implications?

Adrian

Arborbridge
The full Lemon
Posts: 10378
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 9:33 am
Has thanked: 3605 times
Been thanked: 5234 times

Re: serving a section 21

#198694

Postby Arborbridge » February 4th, 2019, 7:54 am

JonE wrote:
Arborbridge wrote:... his sister [...] is his Guarantor.


Congratulations on having a guarantor - and especially if she owns a UK property. Very wise move.

It's about time she became aware of the situation. You have a massive lever right there and it should only require a little (carefully judged) twiddle to achieve a significant result!

Cheers!



She seems to be aware of the situation, though I haven't been directly in contact. She is "unwilling" to step up to the plate, so although having a guarantor is helpful, it isn't of much immediate use if that person shirks from responsibility. To go further if I needed to recover funds may need further legal action. The only other case in which I had a guarantor - a brother in that case - he just wrote a cheque out when the rent was missed. But in this case, not so - though since the guy has virtually caught up with the rent as of last friday, the heat is off the guanrantor route.

Arb.

Arborbridge
The full Lemon
Posts: 10378
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 9:33 am
Has thanked: 3605 times
Been thanked: 5234 times

Re: serving a section 21

#198695

Postby Arborbridge » February 4th, 2019, 8:01 am

AJC5001 wrote:
Arborbridge wrote:He has thrown a new complication into the mix, which is that he now says he's been given a job with his BIL which will be at a higher rate and not weather dependant. Whether this will prove any better I don't know: I could give him the benefit of the doubt, but on the other hand, his record of being completely truthful is against him.


Arb.


Have you tried asking the BIL if this is true?

Is the BIL by any chance the spouse of the sister who is the guarantor? If so, does this have any implications?

Adrian


Yes, he is. I'm not sure what implications you refer to, but obviously all his and my eggs are in this one basket. It might be perfectly genuine in that the family have decided it's better for him and them to give the guy employment, and that might be indirectly better for me. This is a different sister, incidentally, to the one sitting on his savings, so I feel like I'm caught in negotiations will the whole family, but without direct access to any of them. I have not attempted to contact the guarantor or her husband directly.

Arb.

Arborbridge
The full Lemon
Posts: 10378
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 9:33 am
Has thanked: 3605 times
Been thanked: 5234 times

Re: serving a section 21

#198730

Postby Arborbridge » February 4th, 2019, 10:03 am

"GoSeigen wrote:
You can't ask him to leave. Please don't think about it in those terms."

I wonder what the difference is between a notice saying the landlord is "seeking possession" and asking to leave. I notice on the form 6A, kindly linked modellingman, the form of words is; "You are required to leave the below address after [ ] If you do not leave,
your landlord may apply to the court for an order under section 21(1) or (4) of the Housing Act 1988
requiring you to give up possession. "


I know the law is full of semantics and accuracy, but it seems to me that this indicates that seeking possession results in asking to leave by that date, although enforcing that legally would become a separate operation.

However, for the moment this is on the back burner since I have decided not to serve the S21 this month, which will give me time to write about the contract and for us to come to some agreement. If I lose a month of more, so be it - jaw jaw being better than war war.

Arb.


Return to “Property Investment Discussions”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests