Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Check The House Is Not For Sale Before Signing A Rental Agreement


  • Please log in to reply
19 replies to this topic

#1 jimmyhill

jimmyhill

    HPC Newbie

  • New Members
  • Pip
  • 26 posts

Posted 09 March 2012 - 09:02 PM

Me and my partner have been looking to move for a few weeks and we are finding a large number of the properties to rent are houses that have failed to sell and so the option is rent or default on the mortgage etc.

Whats surprising is how many of these houses we found are still advertised for sale whilst being up for rent and when you ask the letting agents ( wjo also happen to be the selling agents ) they deny this .

My guess was that the owners are hedging their bets but what stops them from keeping the property online for sale after you sign a 6 month rental ?

and then forcing viewings etc ?

If your looking to rent then check the sellers section of a site and you maybe surprised to see the house for rents also still for sale.

Feels a bit like tenants are just being used more and more by home owners.

Has anyone else encountered this ?

#2 Ames

Ames

    HPC Poster

  • New Members
  • PipPip
  • 91 posts

Posted 09 March 2012 - 09:58 PM

Yes. Partner and 2 toddlers kicked out after 11 months of what we thought was a long term let. House has had two goes at selling since but not successful. Now happy in a house with much reduced rent. Bas***ds :-P

#3 jimmyhill

jimmyhill

    HPC Newbie

  • New Members
  • Pip
  • 26 posts

Posted 09 March 2012 - 10:24 PM

Yes. Partner and 2 toddlers kicked out after 11 months of what we thought was a long term let. House has had two goes at selling since but not successful. Now happy in a house with much reduced rent. Bas***ds :-P


sorry to hear that on one level but good you found another place.

I get the feeling we are seeing a new shift both in a moral sense and also in a house market sense.I was told by 3 different letting agents that they are overrun by people looking to let their homes as they wont sell and the people are facing bankrupcy and losing the house unless they rent it .

The big problem is the price they need to rent at to meet the repayments is just not a price they will achieve in rents often and so theres a really
messed up vicious circle kicking in here.

I am reading this as an indication the housing market is close to collapse as most of the properties for rent are so over valued they wont rent them out.

#4 jimmyhill

jimmyhill

    HPC Newbie

  • New Members
  • Pip
  • 26 posts

Posted 11 March 2012 - 12:38 AM

Just to say ive taken it upon myself to do some research into this and started searching for properties for rent and if i can find them for sale.

Right now ive search about 50 properties and about 70% are for sale also , some with the same agent who is trying to let and some for sale with one agent and for let with another.

Ive phoned about 10 agents renting and 1 out of the 10 have said the properties for sale until rented , the rest have said ' long term rent 100% .No mention it was for sale when i asked was it for sale previously , just a ' its long term let ' .

Whats funny is about 40% of those properties both for sale and rent still have for sale signs in the image used to try and rent them.....nice..

If your an Ea wake up and move the for sale signs or take new images if your hoping to decieve people into letting longterm on a let thats not that at all.

The interesting thing is that many of those for sale and rent at the same time are using different images for both ads , not sure if thats due to different agents but it helps conceal the fact they are advertising rental property for sale at the same time.

This is happening in the penzance to truro area or south west and all over.I am pretty convinced were seeing the first signs of a desperate attempt to find a way to pay the mortgage here as it feels desperate.

I also found this via some private advertised property.

We just spoke to an owner that said the property 'was for sale ' but they decided to let for a long term as she said ' the markets gone strange down here ' and in her words as long as you want the place is yours for let ...we specifically asked if the the house was for sale still and she said no and so i went online to search the for sale section in that area and boom.........there it is..... its still online for sale.

Theres major cracks appearing in peoples thinking , desperation seems common.Ea's letting are playing the ' we have loads of interest ' when you try and lower the price and then guess what , the house stays on the market for rent for weeks and weeks.


We have one Huge Lie going on down here

whether your renting or buying tread carefully.

Please pass this information on as i think people need to know about this stuff as its both an indication of where the house market is here in the southwest but also highlights just how much people are prepared to Use tenants now to prop up Their investments.

None of it will work , a crash is imminant here.

#5 cybernoid

cybernoid

    HPC Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,570 posts

Posted 15 March 2012 - 06:50 PM

+ millions

DO NOT RENT FROM THESE PEOPLE!

Reluctant landlords will not know your rights or their responsibilities, they will be a colossal pain in the ass throughout. And the EAs are no better, you won't be surprised to hear. I've had EAs letting themselves in whilst I was out without asking my permission at all in order to do viewings for buyers. The 'owner's obvious preference is to sell, that's why they tried that first. And they won't let the rights of a tenant get in the way of that, nor will an EA if they sniff a sales commission.

These are the landlords who won't understand it is your home, who will keep their belongings locked up in the loft/garage/wherever, who won't do any maintenance because as far as their concerned it will sell any minute now so what's the point.

You really should check the property is not also for sale. Often the rental listing is almost identical to the for sale one, if the listing has measurements, a plan, photos with owners belongings, etc, DONT RENT IT. It's not really available for rent, it is for sale, and they want someone to give them free money in the meantime whilst they mess you about in ways you never even knew existed.

DO NOT RENT THESE.

#6 jimmyhill

jimmyhill

    HPC Newbie

  • New Members
  • Pip
  • 26 posts

Posted 15 March 2012 - 07:39 PM

DO NOT RENT THESE.
[/quote]

i totally agree , i signed a 6 month contract from a guy a while back and then when the house sold in 1 month on the cheap he tried to get me out with pressure ( no cash offer ) and just acted like a a facist.

Home owners and estate agents will always want it their way , what benefits them is god and the entire lot of them seem to view tenants as lower forms of life.Its surprising how bads its now got in that department.

I spoke to an agent today who said not they have so many houses that wont sell for over 3 years that they are recommending all owners rent
until they can afford to keep the house empty but she admitted most of her clients with houses for sale are close to bankrupcy and its a last straw
for most.

This is in the southwest and i'm not sure if its spread to the rest of the uk but the idea that its all well in cornwall is very wrong, its very very messy on the street.

I just watched a freind knock 40,000 off a 170,000 cottage and one thats not been for sale for long and got it.

Seller sare hyper paranoid down here they will never sell as there is a crash in the air and a sense of denial like that of Tony Blair in the glory years
shortly before he retired to Isreal

#7 The Ayatollah Buggeri

The Ayatollah Buggeri

    HPC Guru

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,475 posts
  • Location:Redlands, CA, USA (expat - formerly Yorkshire)

Posted 16 March 2012 - 05:24 PM

My guess was that the owners are hedging their bets but what stops them from keeping the property online for sale after you sign a 6 month rental ? and then forcing viewings etc ?


They can't do that. Under an AST you have the right to 'quiet enjoyment' of the property, and while it remains in force even the LL himself is not allowed to enter the place except to carry out emergency repairs.

#8 zebbedee

zebbedee

    HPC Veteran

  • New Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,604 posts

Posted 16 March 2012 - 08:09 PM

They can't do that. Under an AST you have the right to 'quiet enjoyment' of the property, and while it remains in force even the LL himself is not allowed to enter the place except to carry out emergency repairs.

Not even then, but if you prevent them carrying out essential repairs could find yourself liable for the cost of putting right any damage that results. Its thier property, but its your home and only you and a judge can say who enters.
As I wandered in the darkness a voice came unto me, it said "smile, be happy, things could get worse". So I smiled and was happy and behold, things did get worse.

"Credit is indeed vital to an economy, but it does not constitute an economy within itself. ... When businesses borrow to fund capital investments, the extra cash flows that result are used to repay the loans. When individuals borrow to spend, loans can only be repaid out of reduced future consumption."-Peter Schiff, Jan 19 2009; <a href="http://www.321gold.c...iff011909.html" My link

"The bold effort the present bank had made to control the government... are but premonitions of the fate that await the American people should they be deluded into a perpetuation of this institution or the establishment of another like it."-Andrew Jackson on the Second Bank of the United States

"The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money."-Margaret Thatcher

"If tyranny and oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy. Of all the enemies to public liberty, war is perhaps the most to be dreaded because it comprises and develops the germ of every other. War is the parent of armies; from these proceed debts and taxes; and armies, and debts, and taxes are the known instruments for bringing the many under the domination of the few. The loss of liberty at home is to be charged to the provisions against danger, real or imagined, from abroad." - James Madison

"Faced with the choice between changing one's mind and proving that there is no need to do so, almost everyone gets busy on the proof."
John Kenneth Galbraith

#9 The Ayatollah Buggeri

The Ayatollah Buggeri

    HPC Guru

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,475 posts
  • Location:Redlands, CA, USA (expat - formerly Yorkshire)

Posted 16 March 2012 - 09:36 PM

In relation to the OP's original point, what is the legal situation if an LL actually sells a place while a tenant is in residence and with an AST still in force and with a significant length of time left to run? Can the new owners evict the tenant and then the tenant has to sue the LL and former owner for breach of contract, or does the AST take precedence and the new owners can't evict until it expires?

#10 7 Year Itch

7 Year Itch

    My member's title is Rodney.

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,297 posts

Posted 16 March 2012 - 10:28 PM

In relation to the OP's original point, what is the legal situation if an LL actually sells a place while a tenant is in residence and with an AST still in force and with a significant length of time left to run? Can the new owners evict the tenant and then the tenant has to sue the LL and former owner for breach of contract, or does the AST take precedence and the new owners can't evict until it expires?

I wouldn't expect a bank to extend a residential mortgage with sitting tenants...

Do they?

There is no ladder.

JY


No need to sell up, the next phase of the economics cycle is going to be very positive for anyone that owns property.

All I'm sayings is, don't listen to the property bears people, they are wrong.


#11 zebbedee

zebbedee

    HPC Veteran

  • New Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,604 posts

Posted 16 March 2012 - 11:30 PM

In relation to the OP's original point, what is the legal situation if an LL actually sells a place while a tenant is in residence and with an AST still in force and with a significant length of time left to run? Can the new owners evict the tenant and then the tenant has to sue the LL and former owner for breach of contract, or does the AST take precedence and the new owners can't evict until it expires?

If the LL has a genuine BtL mortgage then the agreement passes to the new owners, if the LL has decieved them as to there being a sitting tenant they have to pursue that through the courts. If its a OO mortgage then your new LL could be in the brown with thier mortgage provider if they too have only an OO mortgage, you have a valid AST. This IMO-had it been the LL lender then they can turf you out but not the new ones as they failed to do due diligence but the originals were actively decieved.

Edited by zebbedee, 16 March 2012 - 11:30 PM.

As I wandered in the darkness a voice came unto me, it said "smile, be happy, things could get worse". So I smiled and was happy and behold, things did get worse.

"Credit is indeed vital to an economy, but it does not constitute an economy within itself. ... When businesses borrow to fund capital investments, the extra cash flows that result are used to repay the loans. When individuals borrow to spend, loans can only be repaid out of reduced future consumption."-Peter Schiff, Jan 19 2009; <a href="http://www.321gold.c...iff011909.html" My link

"The bold effort the present bank had made to control the government... are but premonitions of the fate that await the American people should they be deluded into a perpetuation of this institution or the establishment of another like it."-Andrew Jackson on the Second Bank of the United States

"The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money."-Margaret Thatcher

"If tyranny and oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy. Of all the enemies to public liberty, war is perhaps the most to be dreaded because it comprises and develops the germ of every other. War is the parent of armies; from these proceed debts and taxes; and armies, and debts, and taxes are the known instruments for bringing the many under the domination of the few. The loss of liberty at home is to be charged to the provisions against danger, real or imagined, from abroad." - James Madison

"Faced with the choice between changing one's mind and proving that there is no need to do so, almost everyone gets busy on the proof."
John Kenneth Galbraith

#12 The Ayatollah Buggeri

The Ayatollah Buggeri

    HPC Guru

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,475 posts
  • Location:Redlands, CA, USA (expat - formerly Yorkshire)

Posted 17 March 2012 - 11:32 AM

Thanks.

I'm being totally hypothetical and admit that there are going to be very, very few instances of this actually happening, but what if there are no mortgages involved? In other words, the LL owns the place outright and has a tenant with, say, eight months left to run on the AST. He then sells to an outright cash buyer who does not need to get a mortgage on it. Does the AST trump the buyer's right to occupy his new property immediately?

#13 sleepwello'nights

sleepwello'nights

    HPC Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,123 posts
  • Location:North Hampshire

Posted 17 March 2012 - 12:23 PM

Does the AST trump the buyer's right to occupy his new property immediately?

Yes.
When all's said and done, there's more said than done.

#14 zebbedee

zebbedee

    HPC Veteran

  • New Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,604 posts

Posted 17 March 2012 - 01:15 PM

Thanks.

I'm being totally hypothetical and admit that there are going to be very, very few instances of this actually happening, but what if there are no mortgages involved? In other words, the LL owns the place outright and has a tenant with, say, eight months left to run on the AST. He then sells to an outright cash buyer who does not need to get a mortgage on it. Does the AST trump the buyer's right to occupy his new property immediately?

Yes as above, the new owner failed to do due diligence-his tough, if he was actively decieved (questions asked and answered with lies) he could of course pursue that through the courts against the previous LL.
As I wandered in the darkness a voice came unto me, it said "smile, be happy, things could get worse". So I smiled and was happy and behold, things did get worse.

"Credit is indeed vital to an economy, but it does not constitute an economy within itself. ... When businesses borrow to fund capital investments, the extra cash flows that result are used to repay the loans. When individuals borrow to spend, loans can only be repaid out of reduced future consumption."-Peter Schiff, Jan 19 2009; <a href="http://www.321gold.c...iff011909.html" My link

"The bold effort the present bank had made to control the government... are but premonitions of the fate that await the American people should they be deluded into a perpetuation of this institution or the establishment of another like it."-Andrew Jackson on the Second Bank of the United States

"The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money."-Margaret Thatcher

"If tyranny and oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy. Of all the enemies to public liberty, war is perhaps the most to be dreaded because it comprises and develops the germ of every other. War is the parent of armies; from these proceed debts and taxes; and armies, and debts, and taxes are the known instruments for bringing the many under the domination of the few. The loss of liberty at home is to be charged to the provisions against danger, real or imagined, from abroad." - James Madison

"Faced with the choice between changing one's mind and proving that there is no need to do so, almost everyone gets busy on the proof."
John Kenneth Galbraith

#15 tim123

tim123

    HPC Senior Veteran

  • New Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,739 posts
  • Location:hants

Posted 17 March 2012 - 02:31 PM

In relation to the OP's original point, what is the legal situation if an LL actually sells a place while a tenant is in residence and with an AST still in force and with a significant length of time left to run? Can the new owners evict the tenant and then the tenant has to sue the LL and former owner for breach of contract, or does the AST take precedence and the new owners can't evict until it expires?


the ownere will sell with (or without) vacant posession.

It is for the buyer's solicitor to check this and if he does it wrong the buyer will sue him.

The tenant cannot be removed just because the buyer didn't realise he was there.

tim




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users