[Fergus Wilson] BANS single mothers, battered wives, plumbers and families with children...

Covering Market, Trends, and Practical (but see LEMON-AID for Building & DIY)
Calcaria
Posts: 22
Joined: November 7th, 2016, 5:21 pm

[Fergus Wilson] BANS single mothers, battered wives, plumbers and families with children...

Postby Calcaria » January 6th, 2017, 7:30 pm

THE MAIL

Defiant property tycoon, 69, BANS single mothers, battered wives, plumbers and families with children from becoming tenants
. Fergus Wilson, a landlord, defended a document posted online which exposed his criteria for potential tenants
. His exhaustive list bars battered wives, plumbers or low income earners from becoming tenants
. Mr Wilson said: 'We have said nothing against lesbians and homosexuals or coloureds. As long as they can pay the rent'

By Belinda Robinson For Mail Online
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... nants.html

Calcaria
Posts: 22
Joined: November 7th, 2016, 5:21 pm

Re: [Fergus Wilson] BANS single mothers, battered wives, plumbers and families with children...

Postby Calcaria » January 6th, 2017, 7:37 pm

KENT LIVE

Fergus Wilson defends letting criteria policy
by Aidan Barlow
http://www.kentonline.co.uk/ashford/new ... es-118464/

Controversial property tycoon Fergus Wilson has banned 'single mums' and 'battered wives' as tenants
By LMacDougall
Read more at http://www.kentlive.news/a-controversia ... T6JdAyZ.99

AleisterCrowley
Lemon Slice
Posts: 407
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 11:35 am

Re: [Fergus Wilson] BANS single mothers, battered wives, plumbers and families with children...

Postby AleisterCrowley » January 6th, 2017, 7:43 pm

As a single adult that's me barred then.
Some of the wealthiest people I know are single (not suggesting there's a causal link, oh no)
He really is a bit of an twit - but probably doing it on purpose...

Lootman
Lemon Slice
Posts: 570
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 3:58 pm

Re: [Fergus Wilson] BANS single mothers, battered wives, plumbers and families with children...

Postby Lootman » January 6th, 2017, 7:55 pm

This is interesting to me because, at least in the heyday of my landlording days, I also had such a list.

I was never in his league, of course. A total of 15 housing units and, over the years, about 100 tenants. But it was enough activity to warrant such a list, and I'm passing on the principles to my children who are all keen to be landlords, despite this government's best efforts.

Mostly my list is different. I did not take people on welfare and required them to be employed, although I made an exception once. Others on my list:

1) No smokers.
2) No lawyers
3) Nobody who was politically active. I was targeting left-wingers there as they typically hate landlords for ideological reasons, but having a fascist activist is hardly better.
4) No pets unless they were restricted to a cage or tank
5) A distinct preference for non-unionised private sector workers. I had a local government union official once and she was a nightmare
6) Nobody morbidly obese - too much wear and tear.

I actually really liked having foreign tenants, so there was some reverse discrimination going on there.

All that said, I mostly relied on my instincts. The difference between a good tenant and a bad tenant is huge for a small landlord who only has a few. If I had thousands of tenants like Fergus then the risk of a single bad tenant is mitigated. For a small LL, it's critical.

gryffron
2 Lemon pips
Posts: 219
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 10:00 am

Re: [Fergus Wilson] BANS single mothers, battered wives, plumbers and families with children...

Postby gryffron » January 7th, 2017, 4:45 pm

Calcaria wrote:BANS single mothers, battered wives, plumbers and families with children from becoming tenants


So basically that is just "children" then. Why didn't he just say that? It would be far less controversial. And legal? Or are single fathers with children ok?

What's wrong with plumbers?

gryff

Lootman
Lemon Slice
Posts: 570
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 3:58 pm

Re: [Fergus Wilson] BANS single mothers, battered wives, plumbers and families with children...

Postby Lootman » January 7th, 2017, 5:02 pm

gryffron wrote:
Calcaria wrote:BANS single mothers, battered wives, plumbers and families with children from becoming tenants

So basically that is just "children" then. Why didn't he just say that? It would be far less controversial. And legal? Or are single fathers with children ok?

What's wrong with plumbers?

Neither battered wives nor plumbers imply children. 25% of the victims of domestic violence are men - I wonder if they were allowed?

I can only guess the problem with plumbers might be their temptation to do some home repairs that later become a problem. But then you could say the same about electricians, carpenters and any other trade. Or are plumbers tempted to store rusting old water heaters and tanks in the house or garden?

My prohibition against lawyers is a better exclusion.

Clitheroekid
Lemon Slice
Posts: 259
Joined: November 6th, 2016, 9:58 pm

Re: [Fergus Wilson] BANS single mothers, battered wives, plumbers and families with children...

Postby Clitheroekid » January 7th, 2017, 8:31 pm

Lootman wrote:
gryffron wrote:What's wrong with plumbers?

From the article:
He's even banned plumbers from renting out his properties as he believes they overcharge him while carrying out simple repairs and adding extra jobs to the list.


My prohibition against lawyers is a better exclusion.

Is that because they're more likely to recognise an illegal eviction when they see it?! ;)

Lootman
Lemon Slice
Posts: 570
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 3:58 pm

Re: [Fergus Wilson] BANS single mothers, battered wives, plumbers and families with children...

Postby Lootman » January 7th, 2017, 9:29 pm

Clitheroekid wrote:
Lootman wrote:
gryffron wrote:What's wrong with plumbers?

From the article:
He's even banned plumbers from renting out his properties as he believes they overcharge him while carrying out simple repairs and adding extra jobs to the list.

Well, OK, plumbers can and do overcharge, but Fergus can surely find a plumber he likes to be his plumber. And not allow a plumber who is also his tenant to do any work. Their tendency to over-charge is not relevant to their suitability as a tenant, so it's pure prejudice rather than a rational business decision.

Clitheroekid wrote:
My prohibition against lawyers is a better exclusion.

Is that because they're more likely to recognise an illegal eviction when they see it?! ;)

OK, well first off I understand that you are a lawyer and no insult is intended. My wife's brother is a divorce lawyer and, at least as long as his sister and I stay married, we will continue to be friends.

But yes, in any LL-TT relationship there is a possibility of a legal conflict. And if that happens then I do not want to be up against someone who has an advantage over me. Not only will their knowledge of the law and civil procedures be superior, but they can represent themselves at no cost. In my experience it is often the cost of litigation that deters tenants from pursuing cases.

As it happens, I have been involved in a couple of illegal eviction cases. I won one and lost one.


Return to “Property Investment Discussions”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest