Question for the legal / renting brains here.
 

Short version:
Friend letted his house via whitegates agencey to a family who had rent payments paid from the DSS direct to whitegates.
However the change in law has meant that the payments were sent direct to the tennant.
They've since stopped paying and have now lawfully been moved on.

However my friend is now owed 3months rent (£1500) and in the wake of the family leaving they've left an estimated £2000 worth of damage.
The bond was only £500 which clearly wont cover the above, what I want to know is what is the best way for him to get all of/the most back from either whitegates or the tennant.

Re: Question for the legal / renting brains here.
 

surely criminal damage should cover it, but as they were paying via DSS, even if they are found guilty, told to pay damages, chances are your mate will get £5 a week for the rest of his life.

is a cr4p situation tho, really hate it when people cant be trusted with money that isnt even theirs to use.

Re: Question for the legal / renting brains here.
 

so use a solicitor to pursue them through the courts?

Does no liability fall on whitegates to resolve damage/missed payments?

Oh his insruance is for buildings, it doesnt cover contents.
An inventory was completed as were 2 inspections by whitegates during her tenancy.

Re: Question for the legal / renting brains here.
 

Could the family be sold to a cambodian sweatshop?

Re: Question for the legal / renting brains here.
 

Your mate needs to have a lok at the agency agreement - what did it say about what the agent would do? And about their performance on collecting arrears? How did the family leave - evicted or voluntarily, did nobody explain the accelerated procedure and its pitfalls? And was the s21 notice served at the start of the tenancy or only when the possession action started? If the latter, then there will have been a built in 2 month delay, if the former then time runs from the date of service so you don't have to wait 2 months at the end.

As for the tenant, if they're DSS funded then likely they have no money anyway, so query whether worth pursuing. The Court issue fee to recover £3,500 is £108, £100 on line. Then if they defend there's the £100 Allocation Questionnaire fee too, so even if s/he does all the work without a lawyer, it will require at least an extra £200 throwing at it.

£500 deposit is a joke...

Re: Question for the legal / renting brains here.
 

pretty average bond amount that round these parts. The bond/deposit is usually a months rent in advance and a bond of an equivalent amount isn't it?. or so it was when I rented (which is rather a long time ago)

Tiz why when I chat about selling this house and moving on, and the subject of 'possibly renting it out' comes into conversation ..its not going to happen....too much risk, even if its a nice rose tinted idea to some.

Re: Question for the legal / renting brains here.
 

I'm not surprised so many landlords ads specify "no DSS"

Whose bright idea was it to pay the rent to the tennants not the landlord? Did they not expect it to be immediately spent on booze by a significant minority of feckless morons?

Re: Question for the legal / renting brains here.
 

Ed, as an aside to the main topic, if you let your house, via an agency or any other way, can you legally state "No DSS tenants" or similar? (edit, YC seems to think so...;))

Every time I hear of this kind of thing it's always DSS tenants being problematic, hope the OP gets it sorted but the general way these things go is that it's not financially viable and the scum who've stolen the money and trashed the house get all the defence from the law - just my personal opinion but they ought to be struck off the housing list and left on the street instead of being moved to a new house at the public expense...

Re: Question for the legal / renting brains here.
 

S21 served to tennant when it all went tits up then an abandonment notice was issued when she failed to respond to the letting agent.

Re: Question for the legal / renting brains here.
 

That seems exactly the case, the first month payments were forwarded to the tennant she went off on a bender for a few weeks.
Leaving cats unattended in the house which seem to have caused most the damage/stains.

Re: Question for the legal / renting brains here.
 

Not all DSS tenants are like this, so don't stereotype them.

But yes, you can request pretty much what you want, no DSS, no pets, No smokers, no small children etc

What you can't say is, no polish vodka parties, no Armenian families, or no families wishing to remove skirting boards to provide more space for beds, and no using the loft space to hide illegal tenants for brass on the side ;)

Re: Question for the legal / renting brains here.
 

Not saying it is legal, most of the ones I've seen have been in the little ads in shop, papers etc where the law doesn't really come into it.
Can't say I blame them, but I wouldn't be surprised if there was some damn hippy law to try and tell you who you're allowed to rent your house out to.

Re: Question for the legal / renting brains here.
 

Like I said, a significant minority.

There are lots who are doing their best, but lots more just over the hill from me who I wouldn't trust to walk to the shop for a mars bar.

Re: Question for the legal / renting brains here.
 

Logic my dear, logic

I never said all DSS tenants are problematic

I said pretty much all the problematic tenants I've heard about have been DSS

Innit...

Re: Question for the legal / renting brains here.
 

Theres a house over the road from me which was rented out. Smudge looked at it once, it used to be nice. Then a lass from down the street got evicted from the council, went there with made up references, and pretty much turned it into a sh1thole. Did the same as what she did to the council house, dog and cat crap everywhere, nappies piled upto the rafters and had her sister, fella and kids living there at one point etc( so thats four adults, six kids, three dogs and countless cats in a three bed house). She did a bunk owing over a months rent and damage to the house. They had to gut it and wisely put it up for sale...its still not sold

Re: Question for the legal / renting brains here.
 

Ed,
as she's DSS and like you said she wont have any money, what would happen if the courst catch her and my friend wins. Is it an instant £3500 payout or is it relative to the accused, ie cos she's broke my mate still gets nowt?

Re: Question for the legal / renting brains here.
 

If the DSS are paying her rent can he not go after them? Are they not a kind of guarantor?

Bit of an oversight if not, as the DSS would have no incentive to keep the people they're paying for housing for in check...

Sadly I think I can already guess the answer...:(

Re: Question for the legal / renting brains here.
 

Good question all the same, Ed if you could advise on this too that would be awsome.

I've said similar to my friend, something along the lines of:
If the DSS pay her the rent to pay to you but it never makes it to you is she not in effect stealing from the DSS?

Re: Question for the legal / renting brains here.
 

Sorry to hear about this for your friend. But personally, I think he is really going to struggle to get what is owed to him, as has been said, even if he wins - they will only pay a fraction per month. The agency is only liable for what is in the contract - usually the deposit alone.

Personally, if it was me, I would clean it myself, think about repairs myself - ie instead of replacing with like, downgrade on carpets etc - would be amazed how little you can make somewhere respectable with cleaning alone. Then get it fixed up and re-rented ASAP. This time around to "No DSS".

Re: Question for the legal / renting brains here.
 

not far off the advice I've given him, only I finished with get it on the market and leave it vacent... it'll cost you less.

Im waiting for Ed's view of it though, quite interesting in knowing if Rich (the friend) will be waisting his time/money trying to recover his losses.

Re: Question for the legal / renting brains here.
 

The quote for damage. Was this a guestamation to return to as it was?

Is there any physical damage and to what?

Mate had a similar situation many years ago when he rented a place out privately. He would go round and inspect each month (as she was on DSS), never a problem for two years. Then all of a sudden, next time he went round was greated by a bloke at the door who refused him entry. Said he was renting off the woman. Seems she had a breakdown and moved back to folks, and decided she could make a few bucks renting it on again.

Police were involved, the guy had destroyed the place in about 1 month. Had a builder round and he figured approx 5k of damage. My mate ended up with a pittance being paid each month, but couldn't afford to not be renting it out.

A load of us from Uni went round and over a case of carling gutted the place. We polished and cleaned to within an inch of our lives. Once we then reassesed the damage it took approx £100 in paint, poly filler etc. Couple of carpets were trashed so they came up to reveal a nice old wooden floor. So we borrowed a mates sander and did them.

Because we had got rid of grannies old carpets, repainted in neutral etc and made it more simple and modern....when he came to re-renting went to an agency and they rented out at £80 more than he was getting previously to a proffesional couple. He recouped his costs by time they moved out.

Worth having a look to assess what can be done himself with a group of mates. Amazing how happy people are to help out when mates get into trouble.

Re: Question for the legal / renting brains here.
 

Wow this has moved on a bit.

You have to consider renting a house as a business. You are not a charity. So whilst it might sound harsh, you need to consider tenants as a risk and mitigate accordingly.

First off it is perfectly acceptable to say 'no DSS' 'no children' 'no pets' 'no smokers'. It is not acceptable however to say 'no Gypsies', 'no white/black people', 'no gays', 'single people only' 'nobody over age 50' - all unlawful discrimination and potentially an offence too.

At the start of the tenancy up to you whether to get references. At any level of the market they are easy to fake. Use a proper tenancy agreement. Not sme rubbish drawn up on the back of an envelope, and whatever you do, don't do what one of my former clients did - she felt sorry for the tenant, so allowed her to pay rent in arrear with no deposit. And used a home-drawn tenancy agreement. Had never heard of s8 or s21 Housing Act. She allowed the tenant to run up rent arrears of £3500 before instructing me, that's 7 months rent, and wanted a money judgement, meaning I couldn't use the accelerated procedure. So it took a while to come to court, another 2 months in fact, so more arrears. I got the tenant out, and then client refused to pay me, complaining that I had screwed it up:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes: Some people... sadly it's not uncommon.

Lunch is on the table, be right back, K??

Re: Question for the legal / renting brains here.
 

Not a problem, enjoy your din dins, although I was hoping your post would be all rosey and positive :(

From your experiance and as a ratio what do you give his chances of recovering all his losses, and over what sort of period do you suspect it would take place?

Re: Question for the legal / renting brains here.
 

http://i488.photobucket.com/albums/r...4438363281.jpg


;)

:(



Edit for depth - Chappy on pistonheads a few years back was the victim of an unprovoked assault, needed facial surgery and was scarred. Scum convicted and was ordered to pay damages at a rate of something like £2 per month

I wouldn't expect anything any time soon, hence the :(

Re: Question for the legal / renting brains here.
 

Thats what I feared, :(

Re: Question for the legal / renting brains here.
 

Neither the LHA (local housing allowance) or letting agent are liable for your mates losses. If he can find the tenant then he would win a small claims action but like whats been said he would ge a quid a month.
Once a tenant goes 8 weeks in arrears with the rent you can write to the LHA and ask for the rent to be paid direct to you. Too late for your mate now though but something for him to remember in the future.

Re: Question for the legal / renting brains here.
 

Bris is right...

Anyway, when you sign up, make sure it's a proper tenancy agreement and serve a s8 and s21 notice at the same time. It looks a bit odd and it's not exactly in the spirit of the legislation to serve a notice to quit immediately, but it could save 2 months of problems. And take a sensible deposit. If tenants are 2 months in arrear and smash the place up then one month's rent isn't going to repay. And you need to lodge it with the DPS.

I used to advise clients to be firm at the first sign of trouble. It's a business, not a charity, so be tough. 8 weeks in arrear - as bris says, you can ask for the payment to be paid to you. The answer Chris as to why it's paid to the tenant in the first place is Labour social engineering, designed to help people to be responsible with their money:lol: - true!!!!

So you want the tenant out - well two ways... possession alone using the accelerated procedure - this is in Part 55 Civil Procedure Rules, it's surprisingly easy to read for Government stuff - or money judgement and possession. If you do this in one process you can't use the accelerated procedure so risks more arrears building up.

Can always sue after the tenant has left - if you can find them. Difficult to predict chances of success, try to find out if they're employed so you can get an attachment of earnings order. If they paid by cheque and you have a copy of the cheque you can get a garnishee order but if the bank account is overdrawn then that's no good. And whilst sending the bailiff around is fun, they probably haven't got anything of value - second hand furniture is worthless. Think carefull before suing, is it simply good money after bad? If they're unemployed or have no £ then you might get a fiver a month.

I'd be looking at the agency's behaviour and seeing whether they cocked it up. They are mpore likely to be solvent and also they might even have professional indemnity insurance.

I need to put in a disclaimer. I'm not authorised to provide legal advice to the public, and I don't have indemnity insurance. I therefore exclude all liability including in negligence and specifically exclude any duty of care, this stuff is by way of my opinion only. Sorry bout that but I have to do it.

Re: Question for the legal / renting brains here.
 

Totally cool mate, Im reciting this to him so although he knows I've been informed by a legally aquainted friend he doesnt know the exact source so you'll never be held accountable.

He's been out and aquired his own solicitor so we can see where they decide to take proceedings.

I'll let him know about the slim to none chance of recovering costs but most importantly I'll let him know about what you've posted in your first paragraph.

Thanks again everyone, been quite a rapid turn around of very helpful info.

Re: Question for the legal / renting brains here.
 

I know this might get a disapproving tut tut from that overly liberal Ed.

Personal opinion is the scum have all the power. There was a time when you could remind a remiss tenant of their primary responsibilities with a swift kick to the gonads. Now they are allowed to rob you and the law protects them.

I had friends who stupidly let and when they finally got possession they found most furniture/fittings missing. Additionaly before the tenant did a runner, they bought a huge amount of stuff on credit had it delivered through the front door and it left unopened into the van at the back. They did a runner to eastern europe, paid an initial deposit and managed to hang on for about 6 months. Wrecking the place out of spite as they left. Their address was on credit blacklists so they ended up having to refurnish in a hurry paying cash. Down several thousand pounds as well. For them letting was bad bad news

Re: Question for the legal / renting brains here.
 

Tim, I've moved on from there. My turn to be un-PC. Muppet landlords - I have acted for a fair few. They usually want to blame everyone but themselves. It was the tenant's fault. No, it was the DSS's fault. And then the court staff didn't issue a date quickly enough. But my solicitor was too slow. Well excuse me why do you expect the rest of the world to jump, especially when you haven't paid my last invoice?? Why should I work for nothing?? You should have advised me about legal aid. No I shouldn't as we don't have a legal aid franchise. So let me advise you now, you don't get legal aid for repo actions. Your fees are too high. What, £250 to get possession and a money judgement, including the advocacy?

And so it would go on. Can you see why I got so disillusioned.

Some landlords really shouldn't be let out of the box, they have this rose tinted idea that it's a brilliant wheeze. Any other business has to consider a risk management strategy, why not landlords. Some tenants are just diabolical, but you're right Tim - the law protects them and the balance has shifted too far.

Re: Question for the legal / renting brains here.
 

simple get a garenteed rent agreement with a letting agency, and proper landlords insurance, get both checked over by ed for a small fee (BEFORE YOU SIGN OWT), take you reduced monthly income but with far fewer risks
if i get back in to my old job thats what im doing