Rental property being repossessed

pengaffe

Looking for some advice!
We had a knock on the door this morning with a later stating our landlord is due in court for the repossession of the house we are renting. We are looking for advice on a few points:
1- we had not received a new lease in May as expected. Should we demand a back dated lease even if the banks don't have to honour it?
2- what position would the banks need you to be in for you a potential buy out?
3- what are the chances of the bank renting to us instead?
Added info- the chances of him showing up to court in slim as he lives in Brazil at the moment and his ex wife is in Canada! Also we have lived in the house 4 years and never missed a months rent!
TIA

davo10

pengaffe wrote: »

Looking for some advice!
We had a knock on the door this morning with a later stating our landlord is due in court for the repossession of the house we are renting. We are looking for advice on a few points:
1- we had not received a new lease in May as expected. Should we demand a back dated lease even if the banks don't have to honour it?
2- what position would the banks need you to be in for you a potential buy out?
3- what are the chances of the bank renting to us instead?
Added info- the chances of him showing up to court in slim as he lives in Brazil at the moment and his ex wife is in Canada! Also we have lived in the house 4 years and never missed a months rent!
TIA

The chances of you receiving eviction notice is unfortunately high, the bank will not want to be a Landlord and will want to sell with vacant possession.

You have Part 4 tenancy rights rather than a fixed term rental now, so you can be evicted on certain conditions being met, sale of a property is certainly one of them. Also, your 4 year part 4 cycle is over so in the first 6 months of the new cycle the property owner can evict you once a reason is given.

Op, time to start house hunting as soon as possible, the notice will be through your letter box soon.

pengaffe

davo10 wrote: »

The chances of you receiving eviction notice is unfortunately high, the bank will not want to be a Landlord and will want to sell with vacant possession.

You have Part 4 tenancy rights rather than a fixed term rental now, so you can be evicted on certain conditions being met, sale of a property is certainly one of them. Also, your 4 year part 4 cycle is over so in the first 6 months of the new cycle the property owner can evict you once a reason is given.

Op, time to start house hunting as soon as possible, the notice will be through your letter box soon.

So good news all round is what you're saying!! 🀔 Now would be an ideal time for a few more houses to come on the market 🙄

Bandana boy

I had a friend in a similar position and the banks initially let the current agreement stand , this lasted 3 years before they announced their plans to sell on and gave more than required notice(10 months ) for them to leave .

wordofwarning

If this is going to the courts, I would hazard a guess you are living in a property that is classified as a his residence rather than an investment property. With an investment property, the bank gives the documents the bank has to anyone who wants to call themselves a receiver (it is not in anyway regulated) and the house is repossessed and sold. There is no need for the courts to be involved. The courts are involved in a PPR repossession

1) you have part IV rights, so you don't need a lease.

2) the banks will want it on the open market to achieve the best price possible. I imagine the owner will want it sold on the market too, to minimise their residual debt.

3) The bank is in business of giving out loans, taking deposits etc. They have no desire to be a REIT. Depending on the bank, they will likely want the property repoed ASAP and on the market to show their shareholders they are reducing bad debts. I can't see why the bank would want to be a landlord.

The bank is going to look for vacant possession. I would hazard a guess they will have little issue getting the house repossessed. The borrower is not engaging with the banks by the sounds of it. The courts are likely going to allow repossession, as even if he shows up in court, he has no bank protections from the bank calling in the loan ie he needs to reside in the property to have MARP. He has not resided in the property for 4 years. The courts are not going to allow him to keep the property.

My two cent is look for another property. This one will be in the windows of an estate agents soon. Don't pay your last months rent, as the bank has no responsibility to give you your deposit back and the landlord won't either IMO.

pengaffe

The landlord has contacted us and said it will be resolved and gave us his solicitors name and said he will draw up a 3 year lease to offer us protection with the same rent as we are renting at a very cheap price!! Are we being totally naive in trusting him with this? Reason why we bare so cautious to bail and run is our rent is half the going rate of rent anywhere near us now!

davo10

pengaffe wrote: »

The landlord has contacted us and said it will be resolved and gave us his solicitors name and said he will draw up a 3 year lease to offer us protection with the same rent as we are renting at a very cheap price!! Are we being totally naive in trusting him with this? Reason why we bare so cautious to bail and run is our rent is half the going rate of rent anywhere near us now!

That's his parting gift to the bank, a fixed term tenancy. There's no harm in you signing it, the bank will probably try to nullify it but that's their problem.

pengaffe

Also should we continue paying the rent until we get notice of repossession??

davo10

pengaffe wrote: »

Also should we continue paying the rent until we get notice of repossession??

Absolutely, even if you have a term agreement, non payment of rent is grounds for eviction.

The_Conductor

davo10 wrote: »

That's his parting gift to the bank, a fixed term tenancy. There's no harm in you signing it, the bank will probably try to nullify it but that's their problem.

The current landlord most probably no longer has the legal right to enter into agreements regarding the property, and given that it looks like the bank were unaware that the property was let- technically he never had the right to do so....

Offering you a 3 year lease- is quite simply him deliberately trying to cause trouble for the bank- he'll probably try to backdate the 3 year lease- so its not obvious what he has done.

pengaffe

The_Conductor wrote: »

The current landlord most probably no longer has the legal right to enter into agreements regarding the property, and given that it looks like the bank were unaware that the property was let- technically he never had the right to do so....

Offering you a 3 year lease- is quite simply him deliberately trying to cause trouble for the bank- he'll probably try to backdate the 3 year lease- so its not obvious what he has done.

Yeah we are pretty sure that's what he intends to do!! The bank have been aware for over a year that it's a rental property! They know he doesn't reside there as they never send any correspondence to the address!! All such a mess

Holysock

davo10 wrote: »

You have Part 4 tenancy rights rather than a fixed term rental now, so you can be evicted on certain conditions being met, sale of a property is certainly one of them. Also, your 4 year part 4 cycle is over so in the first 6 months of the new cycle the property owner can evict you once a reason is given.

This isn't correct. The law changed in January so that a further part 4 can't be ended unless under the statutory grounds in the first 6 months. Can still use the statutory grounds at any time though e.g. sale. It can be terminated before the new cycle to stop the further part 4 coming into effect still though without a reason

davo10

Holysock wrote: »

This isn't correct. The law changed in January so that a further part 4 can't be ended unless under the statutory grounds in the first 6 months. Can still use the statutory grounds at any time though e.g. sale. It can be terminated before the new cycle to stop the further part 4 coming into effect still though without a reason

That would be the "certain conditions being met" part of the post.

gaius c

pengaffe wrote: »

Yeah we are pretty sure that's what he intends to do!! The bank have been aware for over a year that it's a rental property! They know he doesn't reside there as they never send any correspondence to the address!! All such a mess

It's a contract between you and the landlord. The bank are under no obligation to abide by it. If you go along with this, you are helping cause trouble for the bank, which wouldn't be the best idea.

In practice, banks are being reasonable enough re notice periods for tenants, assuming the loan hasn't been sold on. What's the bank?

pengaffe

gaius c wrote: »

It's a contract between you and the landlord. The bank are under no obligation to abide by it. If you go along with this, you are helping cause trouble for the bank, which wouldn't be the best idea.

In practice, banks are being reasonable enough re notice periods for tenants, assuming the loan hasn't been sold on. What's the bank?

Permanent Tsb!

joxerb

pengaffe wrote: »

Permanent Tsb!

Hi any update?