Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Man of Kent

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Man of Kent

  1. Uh-huh. It's just a bog-standard website privacy policy, totally unfit for purpose IMHO.
  2. At least he's got a privacy policy which was actually drawn up by Solicitors. I know this is true, because it's cut and pasted from this one. He's even forgotten to change the name in one place.
  3. I don't know. But I know a man who does. I just need to order in some more popcorn.
  4. If you fancy a laugh, the new so-called alliance has a new website which is delightfully batshit. https://landlordsalliance.co.uk/
  5. Exactamundo. Effective businesspeople see the value of effective regulation and want it to work properly. That is particularly true in capital-intensive industries where returns are only available in the long-term. Proper regulation prevents there from being a race to the bottom and protects margins, gives investors and customers confidence and protects margins. And it has another benefit: follow the right procedures and you're legally fireproof. If something goes wrong you can point out that you've followed procedure laid down by the authorities. Any decent landlord would welcome it. But BTL has attracted people who think the world owes them a living, who don't see why they should have to work like ordinary people and who are either too lazy or too stupid to run a proper business or hold down a proper job. In my industry we might kill people if we screw up (and sometimes we do) and as a result I can't wipe my bottom without following correct procedure. I've had a couple of decent landlords but I wouldn't give any of them a job.
  6. Yes, exactly. If we couldn't identify this guy we'd be forgiven for thinking he was some kind of poe.
  7. They've taken down quite a few of the critical comments, too. But there are still plenty of them willing to sign up. A fool and his money...
  8. If ever you wanted proof that landlords aren't proper business people, just look at how they're queuing up to give a hundred quid each to Sweeney no questions answered.
  9. Even Fungus the Bogeylord isn't stupid enough to shell out a ton for membership of an organisation that doesn't actually have any members. "CEO" Larry Sweeney doesn't seem to be a man troubled by self-doubt. Here he is, trumpeting his stunning court victory over Liverpool City Council over their selective licensing scheme... well, you have to read the Council's comment to get the full story,
  10. Be fair, he's already got one major achievement: he's made Fergus look sane, rational, and with impeccable business practices.
  11. So the new billboards are still going to claim that all those things are inevitable effects of s.24, but are going to link to a website giving details of various stratagems by which those effects can be avoided. So not inevitable at all. And nowhere does it identify that it is actually an advert for those schemes. *Sharpens pencil*
  12. I have asked them to rule that is is misleading to call it the Tenant Tax, but don't get your hopes up.
  13. Well, I've complained to the ASA (they've a rule that you have to complain ASAP, apparently, so waiting might have given them an excuse not to investigate). The next step is for them to contact the advertiser and ask them to supply all the evidence which they are supposed to already have to substantiate all the claims in their advert. That should be funny enough in itself.
  14. Bizarrely, the MHCLG encourages local authorities to publicise successful prosecutions of landlords, and says that they should make public that a landlord has been given a Banning Order, but we can't look at the database at all. It makes no sense when landlords have all sorts of means of referencing their tenants*, that we can't do the same for them. However the Government is employing salami tactics against landlords, so we'll see what develops in the future. Incidentally, it will be interesting to see how well some of them have GDPR-proofed their businesses.
  15. Local authorities must add every landlord who has been given a Banning Order under the Housing Act 2016, and may add any landlord who has been convicted of an offence that could have led to a Banning Order, if an Order has not been imposed. Banning Order offences are all the usual landlord stuff: unlawful eviction, failure to comply with an Improvement Notice, failing to have a Gas Safety Certificate etc, but also more general offences including harassment, stalking, blackmail and theft.
  16. I did read your post. So we should make her kids live miles away from their friends and family, all of their social support network, because we've decided they're undesirables? In doing so we make them move away from areas of prosperity, meaning they're pretty much condemned to continuing in social exclusion. Perhaps you're right. Perhaps we should have parts of the country which are reserved for poor people and others we feel a bit snobby about. If so, I look forward to you agreeing to be among the first deported to the ghettoes.
  17. That means not housing her kids. We're meant to be a civilised society. We don't deny kids a home because we're judgmental about their mothers. The way to deal with the housing shortage is to build more houses. If you want to take rights away, first destroy sympathy for the victim. Want to restrict internet freedom? Target restrictions on terrorists and paedophiles - who in their right mind would object to that? - and then slowly roll them out to everyone else. Want to destroy public support for benefits and social housing? Bang on about people with big families and no visible means of support, and fill the tv screens with hour after effing hour of poverty porn.
  18. On the blower to a no-win-no-fee solicitor, and idly leafing through holiday brochures. I'd say she should go to the Police but for most housing issues they are about as much use as a porcupine in a condom factory.
  19. Presumably on the basis that the limitation period for breach of contract is 6 years? The landlord can sell the goods having given notice under the Torts (Interference With Goods) Act 1977, but has to pay the tenant the proceeds less the costs of storage etc.
  20. Leaving aside all the stuff about the tenant, I respectfully submit that the answer to the question is "never," or possibly "when they are on fire." A evicts B from her property and B's goods are left behind. A is a bailee and owes B a duty of care. If A's goods are damaged due to B's negligence or deliberate act then B can sue A.
  21. I'm still heartbroken about this, so I may have to cheer myself up by complaining about the spam they've been sending me.
  22. Oh no! All of my comments have mysteriously disappeared! How is Manuel going to know he's written to the wrong person now?
  23. Wait... you mean I can put down a deposit on a house using only inspirational quotes? Why did nobody tell me this before? I'm confused by this one though. Is there some kind of stairlift from the second step up to the crappy bedsits?
  24. To be fair, it's obviously a straightforward typo, and he obviously wanted to involve Alberta LIberal politician and lawyer David Khan in his campaign, My apologies to Miguel Mary Michaelangelo Montezuma and his family for the embarrassment caused.
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.