Jump to content

Legal question?


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 109
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

To be honest corporal, I'm not even a little bit surprised that you haven't bothered to acquaint yourself with even the basic facts of a situation before spouting off about it. Not doing your research

It isn't a bedroom tax.... it is a reduction in benefits....

When the USA were downgraded, people were horrified and predicted the end of the world as we know it.... the USA actually borrow at a cheaper rate now as an AA1 than they did as a AAA..... things aren

I'd guess that the landlord has every right to sell the property. The buyer just has a sitting tenant on whom he can serve notice to quit or indeed the landlord can serve notice to quit.... Not had to face that one yet.... what's the answer???

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm guessing this is a house and not a business premises.

 

Did they have a lease/tenancy agreement and what terms were they on? (there are differents sorts too). 

 

Maybe the lease/tenancy is passing over to the new owner and an agreement has been made between the seller and buyer that the tenants can stay there... but then again a landlord can take a property back if it's for their own personal use.

 

Lots of info here by the way

 

http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20120919132719/http://www.communities.gov.uk/documents/housing/pdf/138289.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed but the landlord would have had to tell the tenants 'if' any prospective buyers or their surveyors had wanted to have a look around though before buying.

 

It's 24 hours notice I think (or it was anyway)... I guess the buyers mustn't have wanted to in this case unless of course they were let in when the tennants were out.  I doubt any resepctable landlord would do that though.

 

At the end of the day like I have said and also implied Inky (depending on tennancy agreement terms) the landord can pretty much do what they like with their own property. 

 

Plenty of other houses available for them to rent though Obs and if they have been good payers and not defaulted they shouldn't have a problem finding somewhere else to live. 

 

Maybe the housing authorities/council  will help them out too considering their circumstances if they are being 'cut short' and will become homeless as a result :wink:   

Link to post
Share on other sites

He has to give at least 24 hours notice that he wants access to his property, but he doesn't have to tell his tenants why.

 

If it might be on the market for a significant period of time before he finds a buyer then he's not going to want his tenants to move on and leave the place empty any earlier than necessary. He might even find a buyer who's interested in it as a property to rent out - in which case having paying tenants already there would be a positive selling point.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Very true and I'd guess that the new buyer would then have to set up a new tenancy agreement between themselves (in their name) and the existing tenant. 

 

As long as the terms don't change that shouldn't be a problem  for the existing tenant.  If it's on a mont by month or short term lease then it will carry on as normal until the new landlord decides otherwise (just as the old one could have done).

Link to post
Share on other sites

There would have to be a new tenancy agreement signed, but since the buyer would have assumed the rights, responsibilities and liabilities of the property from the original landlord then the new agreement would be at the same rent and for the same remaining duration as the original one the tenants agreed to.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't rent properties out in the first place!, pal of mine had a 'windfall' a few years backand decided to to buy a couple of terraced houses as an investment, he refurbished and let both out to tennants and had nothing but trouble, they have absconded owing rent, trashed the properties and in some instances it's cost more for rent recovery and repairs than the money he is earning from them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

£1 each to the tenants who've allowed them, and the area they're in, to go to wrack and ruin in the first place.

 

Just like Right-to-Buy the tenants will sell on to developers, student landlords and private buyers with the funds to renovate, claim that they've have spent the proceeds and are homeless, and then immediately get given Housing Benefit or another council house.

Link to post
Share on other sites

From what I saw on the news yesterday they are all empty and borded up, one didn't even have a roof and looked like it might have caught fire at some time. 

 

The people who buy them for £1 have to do them up (a builder said it would cost about £25k to renovate one) and they have to get a mortgage to fund the renovation (I think) and live in them themselves for 5 years.

 

.......something like that anyway

Link to post
Share on other sites

The reason that they're being sold off for a song is that they were scheduled for demolition and replacement. Some of the residents moved out expecting to be able to move back into the new houses - their former properties are empty, boarded up, and vandalised and these are to be sold to private developers. But the reason that the redevelopment as a whole never went ahead was that other residents refused to move out (since they were council owned properties I'm not sure why they weren't simply evicted and re-housed).

 

It's the residents who refused to move out who are now being offered the chance to buy the houses they live in at knock down prices, and being effectively given a huge windfall at the taxpayers expense.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You clearly now more about it that I do Inky as I only saw the snippet on the news the other day.

 

In that road there were abour 15 boarded up houses that might be going for £1 and they had already had over 200 enquiries about them.

 

Do the residents who you say scuppered the plans have more chance of being successful in the bid that others the?.  Surely as the houses are all boarded up and seem to have been for some time then the people who used to live in them have been moved to new homes elsewhere now so there are no sitting 'tenants'  etc.

 

I thought anyone could buy them as long as they needed a home and couldn't get on the housing ladder but could raise the funds for renovation somehow .

 

Must admit I do see what you are saying and I wonder why the council just don't auction them off and get more for them,

 

Even with the £1 sales plan and the rule that the buyer has to pay for renovation and then live in them fo 5 years it would be easy for a budding property developer to get ownership and cough up the money to do it up with the help of a willing 'volunteer'... maybe a young family member or someone....as an inbetweener and with the promise of somewhere to live for 5 years for free :wink:  

 

Saying that it could be tricky if they ever tried to sell it once the streets regeneration has taken place and house proces increase slightly :wink: 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...