Lootman wrote:Arborbridge wrote:GoSeigen wrote:You can't ask him to leave. Please don't think about it in those terms. You can only give notice that you require possession, and it must be in the correct form. I'm sure you understand that, but you'd be surprised how many landlords break the law by writing to tenants and saying "you need to be out by the 25th".
It's extraordinary what bad press landlords get, but most of us are justing trying to be fair and do things correctly. The law seems to lean towards the tenant which is only correct since in general they have the "weakest shoulders" - but my goodness, some of them know how to play the system and landlords get no sympathy.
The laws have been getting worse for landlords, and the regulatory climate was one of the reasons I got rid of my BTL's between 2003 and 2010. The tax changes just made things worse.
Although GS is technically correct that you can't just ask a tenant to leave, in practice most tenants will agree to leave if you ask them and give them a reason (e.g. you want your mother-in-law to move in or you want to sell the property with vcant possession).
Some tenants might dig their heels in and require a formal approach but in the 33 years I was a landlord that never happened. Whenever I asked them, they moved out. The key is picking decent tenants in the first place. I like to think I developed an eye for tenants who would be trouble, and I never had to evict for cause. Nor was any rent ever missed. In fact two of my former tenants I now count as friends.
Perhaps GS had different experiences?
Yes, I've been a tenant for a long time having been a home owner and landlord before. I gave up the landlord gig when graffiti started appearing regularly on the property's boundaries.
Clearly this is moving slightly off the OP's topic, for which apologies, but I think the landlord tenant balance is about right now. Of course, many tenants would like better protections and I think they will get them, and many landlords regret the trend of weakening their powers, which unfortunately I see continuing. The passing to the Tenant Fees bill is a very welcome change for the entire industry. Certain landlords do take the mick, while as always there are problem tenants but for now I think the situation is fair.
My reply to the OP has no agenda beyond helping him gain possession when he wishes. My view is that the Landlord-Tenant relationship is optimal if both parties are aware of their several rights and obligations in law and then work within that framework in a polite and respectful fashion. Now i'm going to address the landlord's rights and obligations (as opposed to the tenant's) because that is the topic of the OP.
Lootman is right that I have had one or two bad experiences, with both landlords and agents. We've had wonderful landlords too, in fact the one that turned sour did so through their naivete and not any ill intent -- they were good friends and good landlords on the whole, if a bit green about the ears.
The problem with many amateur landlords, as our last two were, is that they all too often have only the vaguest recognition that tenancies are governed by Statute in this country. The typical attitude is that the house is theirs absolutely, often their most treasured asset, while the tenant has in their minds the status of an invited guest, and one who might be a nuisance at that, not paying bills, ruining the precious property or annoying the neighbours. The relationship therefore needs to be regulated by a contract which tells the tenant what they can and can't do, what they must pay and allows them in return to stay for a fixed period or until told to leave.
That's pretty much how our last two landlords saw it. The problem is this bears little relationship to what the law says, much to their surprise and bewilderment when pointed out. The effect of the law is as follows: first, a tenancy is not merely a contractual matter but has a similar effect and status in property law as other transactions like purchase of freehold etc. Not only that, there is a large chunk of law dealing specifically with residential tenancies of the type we are discussing, where the property is rented for the purpose of being the main residence of the tenant. The law treats this with great seriousness: it recognises that stripped of that property the family may be homeless and therefore creates specific protections of this status. At the same time it recognises the need for the landlord to choose his tenants, be paid his rent and regain possession.
Some amateur landlords are ignorant of this. They believe the tenancy is a result of their largesse and governed just by the terms
as they understand them in the contract. Usually that understanding does NOT extend to reading the law which the contract itself specifically refers to! Here is the underlying cause of tension in ending our last two tenancies: the landlords assumed they can just ask their tenants to leave as per their understanding of the contract. This is not the case. The law says a landlord cannot compel a tenant to leave. The corollary is that the Landlord has no right to remove a tenant or ask them to leave. Only a court can do that. The law is very clear that the Tenant has the right to leave when he wishes to, having given appropriate notice, but the landlord can only gain possession after application to the court and execution of a court order.
Having recognised these legal actualities, a landlord should recognise that he cannot simply ask tenants to leave. Well he can do that but the tenant has every right to refuse or not give any answer at all and stay in the property. Lootman is right that usually tenants leave when asked. That is not in dispute. But the assumption by (some amateur) landlords that they have to do so -- and addressing tenants in such terms -- is IMO not only rude but also damaging to the landlord's own interests when a conflict arises. In the worst case this could be seen as a breach of Protection from Eviction law which is a criminal offence.
So underlying my comments to the OP were two thoughts: as the Landlord recognise your rights, responsibilities and constraints not only in the contract but also in Law and, within those boundaries, act with respect and kindness to your tenant.
Our last landlords were a couple -- the husband wrote to us one day saying our family had to move out in two months because he had been told to move out by his wife and needed the house. Hours later the wife texted us to ask if her husband had contacted to us and what had he said? Needless to say there was no S.21, let alone the other things they needed to present to the court if we hadn't deigned to meet Mr Divorcee's demand [and I hasten to add we did leave on the date specified, because we were ready, NOT out of any compulsion]!
GS