England, as dysfunctional as Ireland in tenancy laws

L

LS400

Registered User
Messages
772
We are not alone in this abuse of power.

Someone mentioned previously on here, about Ireland being a basket case, or words to that effect, regarding tenancy rights here. We share this dysfunctional behavior with our near neighbours.

Letting out property now, seems to come with more concerns than ever before.

I have been lucky in letting property here and England for a good few years, hassle free, but when I encountered a tenancy problem across the pond, I was a little smug thinking, now we will see how the experts handle it.

3 months into a year lease tenancy, the arrears started, but the were clever enough to know when to make a small drip payment which stops any enforcement from me to start proceedings.

Months on, more than £2k spent on legal fees, £4-5k in lost rent and a possession granted, they still remain, (They Have No Fear) until the Bailiffs finally arrive to get them out. Another £350 costs involved there.

When the day finally arrives, they are free to become another LL nightmare. They have got the best part of a years accommodation with me, for free.

So they tell their buddies about how stupid they are to be paying rent when they can frustrate the laws of the land with impunity. Sure they would be mad not to give it a go..

Now I consider myself lucky here, I dont have a loan on that property, but they dont know that, yet what if I were up to my neck in debt, struggling to put food on the table, like so many are, what help do I get. We all know, you are completely on your own, and you take all the risks.

What Law protects me from this theft.

I am at a loss of the best part £7k theft on this property, If I break into a bank, a shop a pub ect and took money like this,

1) They would have to catch me,
2) They would have to prove it was me

While in this case, they shout from the roof top what they have done and move on to the next victim.

I would be locked up, and rightly so. What is the difference between the two. Theft is theft.


If the Government were serious about helping to improve housing crisis in this Country, it would be a start that they come down hard on Bad LL, and get real with over holding tenants and non payers. This could involve attaching a payment order to either party and enforcing it.

You need to remove the incentive to default on your obligations, not encourage it.

I read about a LL that hasn't returned a deposit in years, or engaged with the RTB, or put in a defense, absolute pure madness that this is allowed.

Its not my job to house the nation, but if I take the risks involved, and there are many risks, then there should be more protection for for the likes me.
Not looking for favors, just a level playing field.
 
LS400 said:
Not looking for favors, just a level playing field.
Click to expand...

I don't think any reasonable person could argue with that.

Part of the problem as I see it is that the rental sector should offer a viable competitive alternative to the property ownership sector.
As it is the two sectors are too entangled with each other with too many small LL's banking on their tenants to pay the cost of their mortgage over 25/30yrs in the hope that it supplement their pensions.
 
does entering into a long term lease with the local authority not provide an attractive option to those who are very concerned about potential abuses by tenants ? , i.e withholding of rent or mistreating the property

i know you receive a 20% discount but id have thought the guarantee of payment and not having to deal direct with tenants , coupled with the likelyhood of a lender feeling more secure doing business with someeone who effectively had a state tenant ( local authority ) , would easily balance it in this direction ? , would this be a silver bullet solution to landlord woes ? , yield would be lower but in the likes of germany , yields are nothing special but there is no messing about when it comes to deadbeat tenants being indulged long term ?
 
TheBigShort said:
I don't think any reasonable person could argue with that.

Part of the problem as I see it is that the rental sector should offer a viable competitive alternative to the property ownership sector.
As it is the two sectors are too entangled with each other with too many small LL's banking on their tenants to pay the cost of their mortgage over 25/30yrs in the hope that it supplement their pensions.
Click to expand...

Basically don't it run as a business. But as a public service, with the costs borne by some mystery benefactor.
 
AlbacoreA said:
Basically don't it run as a business. But as a public service
Click to expand...

Ideally the concept of providing homes should be a public service as it benefits everyone in a multitude of ways to have everyone provided with housing.

If people want to engage in a private rental sector business they are of course free to do so.
But I would suggest that before entering that market, they should do their homework and make a business plan as to how they plan to operate the letting, contingency for non-payment of rent, falling rental prices, keeping the property up to standard etc.
Without it, banks should not be lending to people for the purposes of entering the private rental sector.
 
You could say the same of the tenant.

Before renting they should have to provide something similar to a business plan showing their finances and guarantees and have a truly massive deposit to cover any issues.
 
Yes because its paid in arrears. Though you could choose to offset that by asking for an extra months rent up front.
Of course these are the tenants least likely to be able to afford that. So that's a problem.

If the authorities choose to fix both these issues and gave some protection above that offered by private tenants then they might attract more to it. That they don't suggests they aren't really that interested in addressing the problems in this sector.
 
galway_blow_in said:
. in the likes of germany , yields are nothing special but there is no messing about when it comes to deadbeat tenants being indulged long term ?
Click to expand...

Germany has similar problems of shortages and rent caps not working.

That aside, they do somethings better, and they are stricter with the rules and enforcing them. There is a slightly different mindset in that renting is more long term and normalized. Its not treated like temporary housing. So places are generally rented unfurnished and when you get the places its painted white walls. When you hand the place back you have to get it painted. So there's no scope for breakages, damaged walls etc. They also have a longer deposit I think its 3 months rent.

I don't know their system that well. So I'm open to correction on it.
 
AlbacoreA said:
Germany has similar problems of shortages and rent caps not working.

That aside, they do somethings better, and they are stricter with the rules and enforcing them. There is a slightly different mindset in that renting is more long term and normalized. Its not treated like temporary housing. So places are generally rented unfurnished and when you get the places its painted white walls. When you hand the place back you have to get it painted. So there's no scope for breakages, damaged walls etc. They also have a longer deposit I think its 3 months rent.

I don't know their system that well. So I'm open to correction on it.
Click to expand...

i know long term rentals are the norm in germany , thats why i thought letting to the local authority might be comparable in this regard ?

i was unaware that letting to the local authority offered less protection than letting in the private market
 
AlbacoreA said:
Yes because its paid in arrears. Though you could choose to offset that by asking for an extra months rent up front.
Of course these are the tenants least likely to be able to afford that. So that's a problem.

If the authorities choose to fix both these issues and gave some protection above that offered by private tenants then they might attract more to it. That they don't suggests they aren't really that interested in addressing the problems in this sector.
Click to expand...
Or they are getting the supply and don't need to do any more,
 
AlbacoreA said:
Germany has similar problems of shortages and rent caps not working.

That aside, they do somethings better, and they are stricter with the rules and enforcing them. There is a slightly different mindset in that renting is more long term and normalized. Its not treated like temporary housing. So places are generally rented unfurnished and when you get the places its painted white walls. When you hand the place back you have to get it painted. So there's no scope for breakages, damaged walls etc. They also have a longer deposit I think its 3 months rent.

I don't know their system that well. So I'm open to correction on it.
Click to expand...
In some areas in germany you have to leave it ready for painting all holes drilled in walls while renting have to be filled all walls sanded along with any damage and as you said unfurnished for the most part,
 
Last edited:
AlbacoreA said:
Before renting they should have to provide something similar to a business plan showing their finances and guarantees and have a truly massive deposit to cover any issues.
Click to expand...

You could try that, but I would suspect that would exclude a large proportion of tenants who are renting on the basis that they cant afford a home of their own.
Defeats the purpose of being a LL in the first place for many.
 
TheBigShort said:
You could try that, but I would suspect that would exclude a large proportion of tenants who are renting on the basis that they cant afford a home of their own.
Defeats the purpose of being a LL in the first place for many.
Click to expand...
the big problem we have people buying property and letting it out as part of there pension , they would be better off contributing to a pension,
 
RETIRED2017 said:
the big problem we have people buying property and letting it out as part of there pension , they would be better off contributing to a pension,
Click to expand...

Its a good point. Too many people depending on others to pay off their mortgage.
We should move away from the concept of 'landlord', instead move to a property management concept.
Prospective 'landlords', instead of taking out a mortgage, take out a leasehold on property. This could be for periods of 50 or 100yrs. They can then get on with providing decent accommadation at competitive prices.
In return, the laws are tightened to ensure respect of property, rental payments etc.
 
AlbacoreA said:
Yes because its paid in arrears. Though you could choose to offset that by asking for an extra months rent up front.
Of course these are the tenants least likely to be able to afford that. So that's a problem.

If the authorities choose to fix both these issues and gave some protection above that offered by private tenants then they might attract more to it. That they don't suggests they aren't really that interested in addressing the problems in this sector.
Click to expand...

One reason, among many, we have the present housing shortage is that local authorities are no longer building council houses. This is because councils were unable to manage their properties. Many local authorities have arrears rates over 30%. And significant voids due to properties not being in a state fit to be let.

LAs are not looking to give protection to private landlords. They are more interested in avoiding the issues of being a landlord than taking responsibility for them.
 
cremeegg said:
LAs are not looking to give protection to private landlords. They are more interested in avoiding the issues of being a landlord than taking responsibility for them.
Click to expand...

Indeed, that is why we should move to a property management system. Council, or developer build houses that are designated as letting properties. Propestive 'landlords' can take out leasehold on property and become property managers. The leasehold could be over 50 or 100yrs and the business acts as a going concern.
Rents could drop dramatically with 'landlords' competiting to attract tenants with quality accommodation.
A real competitive alternative to the mortgage/ownership market.
 
TheBigShort said:
Rents could drop dramatically with 'landlords' competiting to attract tenants with quality accommodation.
Click to expand...

How would rents drop dramatically, would the council lease the properties to these "property managers" at a subsidised rate.

Would these property managers be able to evict non-payers promptly.

Would these property managers be able to get deposits from tenants that would cover all possible damages, or be indemnified by the council, or have meaningful recourse to the courts.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top