Browse All Tribes or choose a Tribe below:
By signing up I agree to Property Tribes Terms and Conditions
Already a PT member? Log In
Sign Up With Facebook, Twitter, or Google
By signing up, I agree to Property Tribes Terms and Conditions
Already a PT member? Log In
Don't have an account? Sign Up
To reset your password just enter the email address you registered with and we'll send you a link to access a new password.
I am a Landlord who has just completed a refurbishment after a particularly troublesome tenant moved out further to my serving a Section 21 and I am about to relet the house. It was my parents property and I do not want to let it for more than a year or two before either selling or moving in myself.Is there any clause I can put in the tenancy agreement so that I can get the house back.I am terrified of this idea a tenant can take over the property for life if the abolition of section 21 ever occurs ie if there are no grounds to evict.It would be worthless to try to sell it with a sitting tenant as the yield is only about 2/3 per cent after costs. Hope this makes sense.
I don't think you need to worry. Selling a property or wanting to move in yourself are legitimate grounds that can be evidenced.See - Government announce dilution of Section 21
Vanessa Warwick Landlord and Co-Founder of PropertyTribes.com **If you have got value from Property Tribes, find out how you can support it in remaining a free to use community resource**
Thank you. I am guessing a new tenancy agreement has to be in place first which are not ready yet? According to the info you supplied it will limit eviction for a minimum 36 months which is a long time if you are semi retired as I am. It has made me seriously wonder if I want to continue now. My last tenant did nothing major wrong ( the house was left very dirty) but he argued it was like that originally and my paid for inventory only stated condition not cleanliness but the psychological games he waged were something else. I could write a book. I doubt I could ever have got him out without section 21. He fabricated all sorts of very convincing lies about my so called trespass/ harassment. All concocted and a web of lies. There is a new breed of tenant who are cunning and without section 21 I would have struggled to get him out. Quote below is from the info I've just read.
Under these new tenancies, annual rent increases should be capped and landlords should be prevented from evicting families for the first three years if the only reason is to sell the property.
Make sure that
a) you move into the property as your principal home for a period of time
b) include in the tenancy agreement that you may want to recover the property under Ground 1 of Section 8 of the Housing Act 1988.
This means that you will be able to recover possession if Section 21 is abolished without any new eviction powers being created.
Thanks I cant really afford to do this at the moment but if I will.arrange to have the clause put in if I decide to go ahead. This is a major showstopper for me. Thank.you.
Sorry, but if you can’t afford to have a clause written into a contract, then you really should not be a landlord, in charge of providing housing. You don’t have the resources.
You should just sell.
I can't afford to live in the property at the moment. Of course I would consider having the clause put in.Thanks for your views on my worthiness to be a landlord. I have been a landlord for 15 years (primarily to pay for my mums care costs) and until this last tenant I had no issue with any tenant apart from one who left it in a dreadful mess ( par for the course).I have just spent thousands on a new kitchen, new boiler, insulation and complete redecoration and new carpets ( tenant burned these).I only put the rent up once in 6 years with my last tenant back to what it was 10 years ago.A lot of the problems which exist now is that people are quick to assume all landlords are scum.unfortunately. I am not that person. In fact I would say that I have made it more desirable than my own accommodation.
Can I also suggest you read replies correctly as I did state I would have the clause put in.
Would be interesting to get some Scotland users on here? They abolished S21 a while back now, wonder how it's working there.I've only had a few terrible tenants and could have used Section 8 (if it was more certain) so I dont see it as a huge issue.Id see it as a non-issue if Section 8 was easier to obtain eviction when a tenant is at fault.
_________________________________________________________________________The above post is not financial advice, its often me rambling - passing time on a coffee break.If you are looking for the Best BTL Mortgage? Call the Specialist Team at Bespoke Finance._________________________________________________________________________
Yes it would be good to get views from Scottish landlords and agree re Section 8.
We are in an era though when Shelter apparently (according to a forum.user) encourages tenants to fabricate mould/condensation issues (for example) and then stay put apparently without paying rent.
Not good unfortunately and I am not sure I have the stomach for it any more. I have encountered a similar situation and without section 21 I would have been in trouble.
Sorry to be negative but I think all these changes are just anti landlord. I have never wanted to use section 21 and only used it when I felt there was no other option. It depends on the fine detail of course but my optimism is fading.
Section 21 has been abused by many landlords, just look on these tribes- how many have issued them to get new tenants in and then put up the rent. Well its over now and the good landlords have nothing to fear. You can still evict but need good cause so whats the problem.