Tag Archives: Landlord Rights

03Feb 2011

Property Landlord advice: Rent Increase time of the year.

⋅ Leave a Comment

By Steve Roulstone

If being involved in the rental market for over ten years has taught me anything when it comes to increasing rent for a sitting Tenant, then it is that thoughts turn to the subject in the spring, more than at any other time of the year. So much so that it is the time of the year, that as an agency we review all of our rents on behalf of our Landlords so that we can actually advise our Landlords with knowledge of having done the work before we get asked.

Important procedure.

But it is not just a matter of advising the Tenant and awaiting the increased rent to arrive. Far from it! There are several considerations, not least of which, that rent can only be increased once in any one year and perhaps more importantly, rent should be increased by issuing the correct notice, in line with the requirements of the Housing Act 1988.

Once per year.

This sensible rule ensures that Tenants, who are outside of any fixed period as stated in their Tenancy Agreement, know exactly how long they have between rent increases. An increase raised through agreements or renewals, can be the best way to achieve an increase, as the Tenant knows again that the period is fixed and therefore so is the rent for the same period. This also means that after any fixed period and for example after the traditional initial six month period rent can be increased, but only once per year. Now I have had many conversations with Landlords about the impact of increasing rents within the first year of a Tenancy and any such request has be to handled with care to avoid the Tenant immediately giving notice to leave.  

Correct Section notice

Again, by using the prescribed documentation, you can ensure that the procedure is dealt with in accordance with the Housing Act that introduced the legislation, allowing increases to be served whilst Tenants are outside of any fixed period agreement. (Periodic) This ensures that there can be no argument about the legality of the new rent. Also, I cannot write about rent increases without stating that any increase should consider the Tenant, the property and what it would rent for if empty at that time and the market and current financial situation. Then and only then can the increase be justified if the Tenant does question the increase, and yes, it is right and proper that it can be.

Investment requirement.

It is part of the market in the same way that investments can go up or down, that Rent Increases are part of owning a rental property. There have been occasions, most noticeably when property could not sell, that rents have gone in the opposite direction, as Tenants, realising that there were many properties available at the time, made offers to Landlords who needed a Tenant in their property rather than waiting another month for the full asking price. After all, in the lettings market you cannot recover rent for the period property sits empty, but that is not the case now and it has been well documented that rents will increase this year. For Letting Agencies, now is the traditional time to carry out the preparation and be ready to carry out the role on behalf of our Landlords, most importantly, correctly and professionally!

24Jan 2011

Property Landlord advice: Frozen pipes, whose responsibility?

⋅ 3 Comments

By Mike Edwards

Property Landlord advice: Frozen pipes, whose responsibility?

Doubtless we will suffer another bout of cold weather before this winter is finished, and indeed even as I write this the temperatures are dropping fast at night and hard frosts are a regular feature again.

So problems with frozen pipes and lack of water supply have in some areas created unprecedented calls for help (witness Northern Ireland’s woes in December) all of this has raised several important questions for Landlords.

Who arranges and pays for the Contractor?

Maintaining the supply of Water is the Landlord’s responsibility under section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, so he should shoulder it all, including arranging contractors. The only possible exception might be tenant negligence but there is a court case where it was held that a tenant is not required to insulate pipes, just live in the property reasonably. If there is a power cut or as was the case during December the conditions are simply exceptional, this will not be the tenant’s problem.

What happens if the tenant says “We have no running water at all” (as opposed to no heating) and tries to go for temporary absence at the Landlord’s expense or possibly early release from the agreement with no penalty. There are no easy answers and it all depends very much on circumstances.

Pipes outside which are badly designed or poorly insulated (including roofs) have to be considered by the landlord. Be careful also with self condensing boilers where the small bore evaporation pipe is external to the property there have been a lot of problems with these freezing this winter. Yes they can be defrosted with a hair dryer in about five minutes but is it reasonable to expect the tenant to go out into a blizzard armed only with a hair dryer more than once in a winter?

Council viewpoint

But what happens if the Landlord has in effect done all they can and are as much a victim of extreme conditions as the tenant – except they are not living in the property of course!! Well courtesy of the current fitness standards as dictated by HHSRS a property with no water supply for whatever reason would be condemned as not fit for human habitation by almost any Council or Court.

If the tenant considers it necessary, they could speak to the local council who will then make a decision and if they consider them homeless, have the obligation to re-house them. Let the Council decide for you – but again beware as If faced with such an obligation and related costs the Council would almost certainly send in the Environmental Health inspectors to conduct an HHSRS examination of the entire property.

Who can claim and for what?

So the system is frozen and a leak expected, if a contractor is called in can any costs be claimed? Well not by the tenant as it would be under the buildings cover but not by the Landlord either as the only insurable peril is any subsequent leak and damage.

If there is subsequent damage, the word reasonable will keep cropping up. Did the landlord act reasonably and did the tenant act reasonably? If the answer to both is “yes” then in response to the original question it will be a landlord problem to solve

The other issue to be wary of especially with tenants trying to thaw out frozen pipes in an inappropriate manner is when pipes are known to be frozen making sure that the damage is strictly minimized. Otherwise in any subsequent damage claim the insurance may be able to wriggle if they say you did not take enough care to control damage during the defrosting of the pipes especially if a professional plumber was not involved.

To minimize the problem

The best advise has got to be take advise, especially from professionals who know the law and what would happen in these circumstances, bur remember, quick action and cooperation should always be looked for before freezing problems get out of hand!

05Nov 2010

Rental Issues: Good Landlord Tenant relationships.

⋅ 6 Comments

By Steve Roulstone

 

I have just rented a property for the first time, mainly because it has made sense for me to accept an offer from a third party to rent my own home for several years and the offer was too good to miss! But whilst that is the reason why I have rented, I wanted to comment on the relationship I have developed with my new Landlord and how trust and good relationships can still matter.

Lesson to be learnt.

I am dealing directly with my Landlord rather than through an agent and it has enabled me to get across our wishes in relation to the property so much easier than what I know would have happened if I had been operating through a Managing Agent. I know because I know how I would have reacted if I had been that agent and this is the lesson for us all – too many times we forget to look behind the request at the individual and are too scared to advice anything but caution in relating Tenant requests to our Landlords.

Improvements to the Property.

Of course, I am in a position where the last thing I would want is negative press about my dealings as a Tenant in my home town, no that would be just too embarrassing, and I feel that my Landlord knows this, and this has helped her to trust that we will indeed improve her property with our wishes, it also enabled me to negotiate a long term agreement as well, which was exactly what we wanted. But it is the fact that so many people do have good intentions which we as agents may be losing by taking a defensive line instead of putting more work in too finding ground and grounds upon which a Tenant could be allowed to put their own stamp on property they wish to call home, especially if it encourages them to stay longer. It has been a long term belief of mine that we should do everything to encourage Tenants to stay as long as possible on behalf of the Landlord anyway, less footfall, less movement in and out, is bound to be in your Landlords interest in looking after any property in our charge.

Keeping the Tenant happy – as well!

Of course I am not suggesting we throw caution to the wind and allow Tenants what they want when they want (we have to stay within a legal framework at all times) but rather that we should try that little bit harder to recognise good intention and look closely at what Tenants are proposing, especially if the property will benefit and therefore our Landlord also, in the long run. There is nothing like experiencing matters at first hand to remind us that in keeping our duty of responsibility to our Landlords, ‘No’ is not always the best answer and not always in the best interest of all concerned. We should always keep in mind that a happy Tenant looks after a house and pays the rent. I do not know about you, but as a Landlord as well, these are the very things I want from and for my Tenants!!

03Nov 2010

Property Landlord Advice: Are Building Societies qualified?

⋅ Leave a Comment

By Steve Roulstone

It has come to my attention on two or three occasions lately that Building Societies are being particularly harsh in withholding permission when mortgagees apply to rent their property. For so many owners, renting has become the vehicle that has allowed them to move on with their lives, especially in a flat sales market and we as a National Company, have seen a vast increase in Landlords because of this trend over the last two years.

Permission Withheld!

But now it seems societies are withholding permission in some very strange situations and it would seem, with little thought to the reasons why and the consequences of their actions. The main target for their refusal would appear to be a Company let, which is where I cannot understand there stance, especially when the Company on at least two occasions has been HMCR the agency who look after accommodation for our forces personnel. Although in favour of the Societies, it would help if HMCR did not insist on a release clause for any immediate change of circumstances!!

Strange reasoning.

But the case I will concentrate on is one where permission was refused without taking any of the facts in to account and on appeal, the Landlord was told that not only would they not discuss the issue, take the individual circumstances in too account or consider the Company or the experience of the owner (Even though the amount left on the mortgage was small and represented less than 15% of the value of the house)  but that to tell the owner why permission had been refused would in their words ‘encourage the owner to commit fraud by allowing him to then state that the new conditions had been met, even if they had not’ To state that I was flabbergasted when I heard what was said would be missing how I actually felt by a short space trip!!

Human rights.

Now forgive me for raising this issue as Human Rights, but the last time I checked, in this Country you were indeed innocent until proven guilty and to make such a statement flies in the face of this fact with such impunity that it cannot be ignored. The last thing I would recommend would be for an owner to go against the wishes of their Mortgage Company and I believe in this case a re-mortgage is taking place with a Company who know and approve the situation (and I am made to believe at a cheaper rate to boot!) but come on Building Societies, the recent problems have not been caused by your paying customers, and to act it such an arbitrary way towards us is not acceptable. The least you could and should do is give individual consideration to each scenario and stop acting like some medieval Baron running your own court as both Judge and Jury!

Consequences

We are told that it is not in their interest to have houses re-possessed but really, what is happening if permission is not given or individual circumstances heard as against this blanket decision approach, is people who need to move to gain employment, are being forced to accept lower prices for property where if in negative equity, the effects could damage people’s lives for years to come, if not indefinitely! Not to forget that when statements like that repeated above are made, and such blanket policies are enforced, they merely prove themselves to be ignorant of how the rental market works and therefore unqualified to make decisions that have such an impact on our lives.

10Sep 2010

Rental Issues: Local Councils promote breaking the Law?

⋅ 5 Comments

By Steve Roulstone

I believe that Local Councils, in delaying the time frame of having to find a home for Tenants that have failed to pay their rent and face eviction, by advising that they do not leave the property until they receive an eviction notice, are encouraging people to break the law and I do not believe this is the role they should be playing. 

Landlord and Tenant Rights.

Ok, let’s look at the reasons behind the scenario. If a Tenant is either unable or simply fails to pay the rent, the Landlord is of course entitled to take action and as Agent of the Landlord  it is our responsibility to take the best action on his behalf, which must include giving notice to quit the property. We use the notices within the Housing Act 1988 and by issuing such notice we are operating within the law.

Tenant reaction.

 Now if the Tenant has nowhere to move too, they need the support of the local Council to find somewhere to live. I have always believed that the service exists for exactly these circumstances. But this is where the problem lies. More and more there reaction is too advice the Tenant to stay exactly where they are until they receive an eviction notice and this is where ‘Breaking the Law’ enters in to the equation.

The implications of such advice.

So what happens if they stay in the property, don’t forget, failing to pay the rent! We are forced to take the Tenant to court and get the very eviction notice that the Council demand. Then and only then will they assist the Tenant in being re-housed. The Courts of course will not issue the notice unless we can prove that the Tenant has broken the agreement and should indeed leave. In fact, under some circumstances, the Courts do not even have an option and must issue an eviction notice, as it is mandatory within the Housing Act.

On the Record!

So now we have the rub, Councils by this lack of action, or rather delay of fulfilling their duty, cause the Tenant to be taken to court and in most cases have a court action issued against them. I see this as breaking the law and I do not feel it is right to place Tenants in this position in the first place, when the only thing that is achieved is a delay in the Council fulfilling its obligation and everybody else,  suffering the consequences:

Landlord, because they do not receive rent for a property for which they will more than likely have a mortgage to pay.

Tenant, because in my experience, they just want the Council to give them somewhere to live, but are forced to accept the route through lack of choice.

Agent, because they are unable to provide the service they are charged with, take on extra work which they have no control over and are the only sounding board for both parties.

And finally the Council? Well they still have to find property for the Tenant at the end of the day, but perhaps they feel they have done their job, because many Tenants do find an alternative rather than by forced to court. But hold on? Is it not the role of Councils to provide accommodation in these circumstances?

I think it is clear that the Tenant is the neediest and in these circumstances and in my opinion, it is they who suffer as the Council try to cut costs!

01Sep 2010

Property Landlord Advice: What should your Letting Agent do for you?

⋅ 2 Comments

By Steve Roulstone

I was talking to a Landlord this week, who again confirmed that some Letting Agents do not provide the services they should in full Management. I wrote only last week about the problems caused by Landlords who self manage not visiting the property during the Tenancy and whilst it is standard practise for our Letting Agency it appears this is not always the case.

Standard practise.

So what should Letting Agents provide for their Landlords in Full Management, the term ‘Full Management’ is of course what most Letting Agents would call their complete service and it is the price of this that we compete with up and down every High Street in the Country. Sometimes Agents provide a varying list of Full Management services, but it is not a situation I am comfortable with. If you are supposed to do a job, then you should offer a service that enables you to do just that, not a service that suggests there are various levels a Landlord can buy in too, because in my eyes, Full Management is Full Management.

Letting Agents list of services.

Of course, every agent should be associated with an Industry Professional body, so you know they work to a standard that is acceptable to the market in the first place. So, for that list of services:

Initial ‘Rentability’ Valuation, Safety and legal advice, Web Marketing and advertising included, Accompanied Viewings, Tenant Referencing, Complete set of Self branded approved agreements, Specialist Landlord Insurance, Standard Landlord Insurances, Tenant contents Insurance, Full check-in facilities (Always at the property), including Inventory and back-up state and condition support, Utility services, Regular property visits and reporting, Monthly Landlord statements, Full Maintenance provision (with Landlord authority) Complete arrears service, Renewal and Rent increase provision, Full check out facilities (Always at the property) and that all important service covering all of those little unexpected eventualities!

This cannot and should not be comprehensive, but could be considered to be a minimum for a Full Management service and that is the point of this piece. However it should not include any services that should be provided by other specialists, you would not ask a Letting Agent to fit a radiator in the same way you would not ask a plumber to find you a Tenant!

Check the Contract

All Letting Agents should provide you with a Landlord contract that summarises the services they include. They are designed to protect both parties and form the basis of the relationship between Agent and Landlord. Either way, what this list will do, is provide a method of checking if the Letting Agent you are talking to, is aware of what looking after Landlords is all about!

20Aug 2010

Property Landlord advice:Teenage Tenancies

⋅ Leave a Comment

By Mike Edwards

 

Changes to the Law

If a tenancy has been granted to a minor then to date it has probably been completed in the tenant’s name with a Guarantor’s Agreement in the background. However all this has now changed and that procedure may not be robust enough to withstand a challenge from the tenant against a section 21 notice issued while they are still under 18. This is courtesy of a recent Appeal Court decision known as The Hammersmith Case

An under age tenant had applied to the council for homelessness assistance when she was 16 and pregnant. The council provided her with temporary accommodation on an AST with standard terms and conditions. When it later received complaints from other residents about her conduct, it served notice to quit, brought a possession claim and obtained a possession order. The Court of Appeal however has allowed the tenant’s appeal and struck out the possession order.

And the result is!

This is because she was not 18 when the tenancy was granted. So the local authority was legally cast in the role of Trustee. However be warned the role would be assumed unwittingly by any Landlord unwittingly accepting the role of being the tenant’s Trustee on the tenancy until the tenant reaches 18 at which time the danger automatically falls away. In effect this decision is saying that ANY Landlord in granting an under 18 tenant an AST is in fact granting it in Trust for them as a Trustee and thus cannot serve notice to evict them as to do so beaches that Trustee status.

Therefore a Landlord cannot terminate such a tenancy or seek possession until the tenant reaches 18. A Landlord wishing to avoid such a result – but wanted to accommodate a minor – must therefore do so by providing them with non-exclusive accommodation because exclusive possession is the necessary hallmark of a tenancy. The way to provide non-exclusive accommodation is of course for the under 18 occupier to be an authorised occupier rather than a tenant.

What we should do

So what has to happen is that the proposed Guarantor actually has to take the tenancy in their name. Clearly this cannot be an AST as the property not only will not be their main or principal residence (which it has to be to be an AST) but they are not even going to be living there. So at Castle Estates we would grant a Common Law Non 88 Act tenancy to the person who was to be guarantor but now becomes the tenant and then let them give permission to nominate the minor as an authorised occupier. Such permission to occupy is not a legal interest in land so not covered by the Law of Property Act 1925..

12Aug 2010

Property Landlord advice: Problem getting your rent?

⋅ Leave a Comment

By Samantha Knight

It is often the case that when a tenant decides not to pay their rent, the creative side of their personality can go into overdrive and what they believe to be a valid unique excuse, is just a story we as agents and landlords have heard oh so many times before.

 And today’s excuse is!

 1)    Banking Error

2)    A death in the family

3)    An illness or accident resulting in hospital treatment

 My advice is not to be afraid to challenge the reason you are given or suggest ways of helping to resolve the situation, there will be occasions where the reason is genuine, but it is only by speaking with your Tenant and through your  experience, that you will be in a position to understand what the real reason for the non-payment is!

 Remember, your tenant has signed a contract which they must honour and excuses do not give them a reason for not making that payment, much the same way as there is no excuse for you as a landlord not to deliver on your repairing obligations.

 But be careful how you proceed.

 But whilst it is the correct procedure to take a tough line on arrears, you have to be careful that you do not cross that fine line between tough arrears action and harassment.  Be sure not to leave yourself open to any such claim, as the courts take a dim view on harassment claims which could be considered as refusing to leave the property when visiting, changing the locks when the tenant is not home, continually visiting or even watching the property and of course abusive communication and physical violence – this list is not exhaustive.

 So can we help you?

 So if you do think your Tenant is not being truthful in what you are being told, how do you proceed? This is of course where Professional Letting Agents can help.

 At what cost?

 I would venture to say that our methods which have been built over years of experience are probably going to produce a scenario which will save you money against having no rent for several months whilst the problem drags on unresolved. So the advice is proceed with strength or turn to that Professional agent, who will probably not only provide a solution but also be the answer for the longer term as well!

30Jul 2010

Landlord Rights: The Power of Ground 1 in an Assured Tenancy

⋅ Leave a Comment

By Mike Edwards

The Problem

There is a serious misunderstanding in some local authority/housing association housing departments when tenants approach them for advice if have been served a section 8 notice not for arrears possession under Ground 1.

This would usually happen on full Assured which are of course less common than Assured Shorthold but which carry the same mandatory possession rights for Landlords. Provided of course the legal paperwork is correct!!

The Misunderstanding

The problem understandably is that the section 21 notice used to terminate an Assured Shorthold on mandatory grounds is far more commonly used and recognised. But a section 8 notice using mandatory Ground 1 (previous or future occupancy by Landlord or spouse) is equally as powerful and also compels a Judge to grant a Possession Order.

This misinformation and confusion is happening a little more frequently as more Landlords quite legitimately use ATs to avoid the rigours of the TDP regime and the uncertain outcome of dispute resolution by scheme adjudicators. If difficulty is encountered take the following steps:-

The Solution

1.         If a section 8 notice is issued to a tenant draw their attention to the two sets of bullet point
             notes. The first in the group foot of page 1 make it clear that if ground 1 is quoted in section 3
            of the notice then it is a mandatory ground and the Judge must grant an order.

2.         The first bullet point then on page 2 immediately under the date in section 5 states how much
            notice is needed – again for ground 1 it is 2 months (as with a section 21 notice)

3.         In reality there is no difference between a s8 ground 1 notice and a s21 notice. Both are
            mandatory and provided the legal paperwork is in order the Judge MUST grant an Order (as
            stated in the notices)

Many local authorities, housing associations and even some solicitors who are not Landlord and Tenant law specialist misunderstand the mandatory power of a Ground 1 section 8 notice. So it is always good advice to use a solicitor who is either recommended or advertises as a specialist in this field. One would hope this would avoid the problem, or of course you could always use Professional Management!