Bastard Landlords Part II

[rich p]

I work as a 'fixer' for a couple of landlords ( female as it happens, but landlady sounds like Annie Walker in Corrie). As soons as the tenants phone up they get me to go round pronto in case the fault develops into anything worse.
In consequence the tenants are happy, more likely to report a leak before and a civil relationship is created. It's not difficult and it works both ways.

Mind you TC, the last time I was a tenant, sitting with my back to the tumble dryer in the laundrette was the only time I was warm in winter.

 

[XmisterIS]

2 months deposit? **** off. Seriously. That's a recipe to get ripped off. It's the spoor of the dodgy landlord - and any sensible tenant (the one's you're trying to attract!) will be going elsewhere. Especially if you're going to be insisting on a six month contract. Of course, if you're going to supply references as to your good conduct with former tenants, proof of payment on the property's mortgage, and legal guarantees over its continued payment (after all, I wouldn't want to be made homeless because you couldn't pay the mortgage), then maybe we could talk... And if you don't like that... well, the fact that you can insist that those be the hoops your prospective tenants have to jump through - at their own expense - illustrates neatly just how one sided tenancy in this country is.

It's funny you should say that; whenever my parents rented, they would always put in the advert that they had all the certificates for all the things you were talking about. And when I was a tenant I always made sure they were in place. I was happy to pay 2 months deposit up front; which seems to have been the norm for me as a tenant. I always got most of it back again; even if I did have to get nasty! Which I did on one occasion - landlord tried to rip me off, wouldn't answer letters, laughed and put the phone down on me, until I threatened to go to small claims with my tenancy agreement and receipt for the deposit and photographs of the property when I moved in and moved out. (I used to keep ALL paperwork neatly filled away as a tenant). He paid up within two days, I don't think he was expecting me to to quite so on the ball. In property, as in other things, I am a firm believer in "caveat emptor". And you have to get up pretty early in the a.m. to pull a fast one on XmisterIS! Once bitten, twice shy ... I got ripped off only a few times when I was very young very gullible. Nowadays, anyone who tries to rip me off is in for a rough ride.

The 'No DSS' rule is very simple. If the government/local councils paid up, directly to the landlord, on time and the right amount, then hundreds of thousands of additional properties would be available. They don't, they never have and probably never will. Most Landlords try DSS tenants once and then promise never again. Hence the reason most Agents wont even let them in the door, as they have no property to let to them.
Local councils are now trying to offer landlords fixed five year tenancies at above market rates to any landlord prepared to deal with them, however once bitten twice shy, so they can offer all they want but there are few takers

Quite so. I don't think it's right to "force" anyone to rent to anyone they don't want to if there is a good reason for not wanting to rent to those people (i.e. they are unlikely to cough up the rent). My parents never actually said "No DSS", but it was covered by asking for references and proof of income. It was at that point that the shady people slipped away silently and never returned the forms. I would be more than happy to take on any tenant if the council was paying though!

 

[Gromit]

One of the houses we rented as a student belonged two a couple who were nice enough. We had to write an essay stating why we wonted to rent the house.

We paid our rent on time and kept the house clean and tidy. It did not stop them drive by spying, constantly phoning to tell us we hadn't secured the patio doors properly when open. They even telephoned on the day of our graduation to complain about unauthorised people being present in the house without a tenant being present. These people were our parents, we had popped out to get our robes.

They were a bit too hands on.

I find myself of the school of people who believe that no one should be allowed to own more houses than they can possibly live in. One house per family or person. If your single and meet someone, get married what ever you should be prepared to sell a house. Demand for houses seems to be outstripping supply these days, for both people wanting to buy or rent a property. That is why some landlords seem to get away with treating tenants like scum because they know with the lack of social housing out there they are unable to get anything else.

The government has shot themselves in the foot by selling off this countries social housing as it was a big income stream.

 

[theclaud]

just as most landlords aren't of the type TC has had...

Actually lots of them are, but they are disproportionately represented in the HMO game. But the premise of this thread and its predecessor is that (except in the case of extraordinary individuals bucking the trend) when it comes down to security of tenure and the ability to enforce your rights, the character of one's landlord is, in the final analysis, neither here or there. Actually I'd much rather rent from a complete bastard who hated me but was unable to throw me out at short notice, steal my money or refuse to fix things properly, than a nice chap who turfed me out feeling slightly guilty and was very conscientious about fixing things but made a complete hash of everything he touched, and weakly allowed agents to attempt to steal my money on his behalf. I'm not interested in personalities here - I'm interested in power.

 

[Archie_tect]

.... The government has shot themselves in the foot by selling off this countries social housing as it was a big income stream.

The 'right to buy' legislation was a disaster for the social housing provision, not helped by councils who realised they weren't able to refurbish their housing stock then 'selling' it off the remainder to organisations set up by their own Housing teams as 'not-for-profit' ALMOs to manage. This side-tracked the Councils' funding problems but will cause funding issues in future when gearing becomes an issue andthey can't borrow any money for new housing because the HCA are running the new build programme into the ground... less than a quarter of the funding of 2 years ago. The housing build programme has to be kick-started somehow, but will probably take 2 to 3 years.

 

[wiggydiggy]

Got another little interesting story...

Renting a flat from a student homes specialist when me/housemate were both working and the agency was a little annoyed we didnt want to provide our parents names and addresses. Presumably they have had one too many problems with the kiddies

Oh and they had no idea about protected deposits, the schene started after we moved in but a neighbour who came afterwards told us they paid no deposit at all as the agency couldnt/wouldnt figure out how to do things.

DSS

I wouldnt willingly share my flat block with anyone on DSS and it is advertised as so, if your personal circumstances change then your right to reside should be re-assesed. Ggovernment payment problems aside its the residents themselves who are more likely to be troublesome tenants than someone that is working, someone here may be the exception but in my experience DSS are just not worth renting near.

 

[Wobblers]

From a landlords point of view 'only' two months rent as a deposit is not enough.

As has been stated before you are loaning someone a bit of kit worth quarter of a million quid, on the basis of their good word and a couple of grand up front.
There is a reason why extra guarantors are required. and one needs to ensure that if a payment is missed, the landlord is not out of pocket.

There is currently talk in the EU about standarising the deposit taken across Europe to be the normal average. Given that 3 to 6 months is normal elsewhere I'd guess they will go for 3 months rent as a deposit.

You do realise that tenancy is far more regulated on the continent? Landlords have a considerable number of legal obligations. If they try and weasel their way out of essential maintenance they'll swiftly find themselves explaining themselves to a judge. And there's security of tenure: none of this about being able to give two months notice to quit on a rolling contract. In most cases, the tenant gets to choose when to leave, not the landlord - and it's enshrined in law. Deductions of that deposit must be reasonable - and proven. That's what you want? Fine. Bring it on. That's exactly the sort of thing I'd like to see.

Insurance will protect your investment - and it's even tax deductible! You do have insurance, I trust? Otherwise, perhaps you should sell and allow someone else the opportunity to actually own their own home. Because, when we get right down to it, that's what you're doing - depriving someone else of the security of owning their own home in order that you can speculate on the housing market.

 

[e-rider]

Have you worked out how many months of your rent it would take to buy the property you live in ? (add 30% for the cost of the repayment)

If a landlord bought a house today on a 100% BTL mortgage (which the banks have long since stopped offering) the payback is around 130%, you would expect to break even in about August 2036. How old will you be then ?

yes, about 300 (or 25 years) including all fees and interest.

I dont recall ever having a nice landlord. The ones that have 'sold-up' and kicked me out pissed me off sooooo much and cost me a lot of cash and hassle, children would need new schools, make new friends etc...... these 'bastards' dont give it a second thought!

 

[Brains]

You do realise that tenancy is far more regulated on the continent? Landlords have a considerable number of legal obligations. If they try and weasel their way out of essential maintenance they'll swiftly find themselves explaining themselves to a judge. And there's security of tenure: none of this about being able to give two months notice to quit on a rolling contract. In most cases, the tenant gets to choose when to leave, not the landlord - and it's enshrined in law. Deductions of that deposit must be reasonable - and proven. That's what you want? Fine. Bring it on. That's exactly the sort of thing I'd like to see.

Insurance will protect your investment - and it's even tax deductible! You do have insurance, I trust? Otherwise, perhaps you should sell and allow someone else the opportunity to actually own their own home. Because, when we get right down to it, that's what you're doing - depriving someone else of the security of owning their own home in order that you can speculate on the housing market.

I rented a flat in Germany for a while, and shared another. I'd have no problems operating under their rules as a landlord or as a tenant.
I think this would get rid of many of the more shady landlords and agents and some of the sharp practice in the industry.
However I think many tenants would have serious problems with this regime, as we found for example when the cleaner came in weekly (all flats have cleaners, they are the landlords eyes and ears) We would get calls about the mess the flat was in, shirts not ironed, milk not in the fridge, clothes not folded, top not on toothpaste.

As for insurance, I have building insurance but not rental insurance as the rates are excessive

As for speculation on the housing market, if I sold the houses I'd then have to invest in something else. What would your prefer I invested in, Arms companies, very profitable at the moment ? Oil companies, nice bit of shaleoil in Canada at the moment ? Fruit companies employing workers for a dollar a day ? Clothing companies employing children ?
You have to put your money somewhere, you can no longer leave it in the bank (who will be investing in all the above), at least with housing I'm providing a service, I can touch my investment, and bar mass emigration from the UK, it will have some sort of value.

 

[Brains]

The 'right to buy' legislation was a disaster for the social housing provision, not helped by councils who realised they weren't able to refurbish their housing stock then 'selling' it off the remainder to organisations set up by their own Housing teams as 'not-for-profit' ALMOs to manage. This side-tracked the Councils' funding problems but will cause funding issues in future when gearing becomes an issue andthey can't borrow any money for new housing because the HCA are running the new build programme into the ground... less than a quarter of the funding of 2 years ago. The housing build programme has to be kick-started somehow, but will probably take 2 to 3 years.

I think the idea was right, the method was wrong. There should have been a fundemental requirement that for every property sold, they had to build or buy at least one new one within say 2 years. Then it would have been a brilliant idea as eventually, all the council houses would have been sold and the council would have had the same number of properties and we would have got rid of the ghettos of poverty.

 

[MacB]

As for speculation on the housing market, if I sold the houses I'd then have to invest in something else. What would your prefer I invested in, Arms companies, very profitable at the moment ? Oil companies, nice bit of shaleoil in Canada at the moment ? Fruit companies employing workers for a dollar a day ? Clothing companies employing children ?
You have to put your money somewhere, you can no longer leave it in the bank (who will be investing in all the above), at least with housing I'm providing a service, I can touch my investment, and bar mass emigration from the UK, it will have some sort of value.

Interesting that you see only those alternatives and the thought of small local startups and the like doesn't enter your head. Not that I consider you unusual in that respect but this very attitude is right at the core of economic problems. It's 'rent seeking' activity, using the term in the broader context so please excuse the pun effect it has in this case. Now I'm sure you would reply along the lines of how hard you work etc, but that only means you haven't risen far enough, nor captured enough wealth, to have the hard work all done by others.

Cornering part of a scarce resource, that you don't personally intend to use, and then leveraging it for your own ends isn't actually helping the economy in any way shape or form. I'm afraid that on the economic scales you would count as a drain not a service.

 

[Dan B]

As for speculation on the housing market, if I sold the houses I'd then have to invest in something else.

My god, what a terrible problem to be faced with,

 

[Gromit]

You do realise that some people on DSS have a disability don't you? My friend Sarah will never be able to buy her own place after having an accident last year, renting is her only way of getting a home. I would hope if she ever moves from her current rented place that she would not be discriminated against, because in general it is against the law.

I would hope that a majority of landlords out there would not discriminate against someone who has a disability seeing as some people who have an illness or impairment have to claim DSS or equivalent in order to rent a house.

 

[ttcycle]

You do realise that some people on DSS have a disability don't you? My friend Sarah will never be able to buy her own place after having an accident last year, renting is her only way of getting a home. I would hope if she ever moves from her current rented place that she would not be discriminated against, because in general it is against the law.

I would hope that a majority of landlords out there would not discriminate against someone who has a disability seeing as some people who have an illness or impairment have to claim DSS or equivalent in order to rent a house.

Absolutely. In fact, the request for no DSS is illegal but agents and landlords still do it.

In fact reading some of the comments on here is sad as it just shows how bigoted people can be against those claiming benefits - in a time like now, you'll find it could well be your neighbour or yourself with jobs going down the shitter and no not everyone on benefits are 'scum of the earth'.

Again another issue of power imbalances.

 

[Brains]

The DSS issue as far as landlords and agents are concerned is financial.
The DSS have a long history of being late payers (as anyone on benefits will confirm)