Issuing Notice of Termination - Any advice

[triggs]

Fascinating exchange of ideas in forensic detail.complements to all participants.I have posted this before:Couple in relationship,they need time apart on occasions,no formal separation they have Apt down the road for "own use"which they use occasionally for various reasons.There is specifically no intention to occupy for continuous 12 months or continuous anything.Could this be grounds for Not

 

[bipped]

There is specifically no intention to occupy for continuous 12 months

It’s crazy that an owner should even stress about that requirement. If the termination is valid and legal, that should be the end of it. There’s endless reasons an owner might want their own property back to use whatever way and for however long they see fit. They bought and paid for the property, a right that’s guaranteed.

I know a family with a SN adult child. They terminated a tenancy for family/personal use as they want their child to get used to independent living in future years. The property is only used very occasionally. I don’t see how that could be irregular even if the apartment is only used one weekend a month and the child’s current PPR is the family home. Also, as far as personal use where a renovation is required - an owner might want or need all kinds of work done after a termination that could take many months before the property could be occupied. Again, not the RTBs concern and the owners right to do work on their property as long as it’s within planning rules.

I can’t see any circumstances where the rtb would have a right to police or monitor a private property to determine if someone lives there continuously or not. Surveillance of private property and its owners is for AGS, not the RTB. If the tenants have vacated legally, why would the rtb be involved - their remit only covers properties rented to tenants and the private life of an ex-landlord is none of their business.

Compelling an owner or their family member to live in a previously rented property for 12 months is a massive overreach and bullying by the state and state agencies IMO. Of course, if an owner wants to re-enter the rental market at any future date, then they need to comply with all the relevant rules in place at that point.

 

[JamieB_]

And what makes me laugh is those hoops they make someone jump through actually ensure a property that MIGHT be put back on the market, is not. Its the total opposite of the intention of these silly rules in the first place.