KenjiOgiwara Posted July 30, 2020 Share Posted July 30, 2020 Just now, snowychap said: Just so I get this straight, you're claiming that smart people go around announcing that law-breaking is perfectly fine to do and that the problems are not getting away with it/getting caught and allowing morals to intervene, are you? No cause if I was in this pickle I wouldn't adress it on VT first. It's not about me, however much you try and angle the discussion that way. Not sure what's so hard to understand here. Sometimes breakkng the law is perfectly fine and the scenario pitched here is one of them. You disagree, fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Demitri_C Posted July 30, 2020 Share Posted July 30, 2020 29 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said: If someone is in financial difficulty because of care costs or other issues, then what will mostly be best for them is realising the value of the property, rather than using it as a potentially unreliable income stream for the future. Property is an asset, and using assets as income has the risk that the value of the assets* will decrease. That's no less true of property than it is of dividends. Simply, if people are choosing to use property as an income stream rather than selling it, then their financial situation must not be *that* desperate. *EDIT: meant to add, 'and/or the return available' Problem there is what happens when all your aale money goes? Or lets the property isnt worth enough then who pays for their care? I dont agree with your there not that desperate part. What about those who have disabilities? They have no option. I think its easy for us to say sell the property but we dont know everyones circumstances. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted July 30, 2020 Share Posted July 30, 2020 (edited) 30 minutes ago, Demitri_C said: Its not incorrect It is incorrect as I have more than once quoted to you your exact words. 30 minutes ago, Demitri_C said: I have followed ALL correct procedures snowy as because of covid 19 i cant apply for a eviction warrant from the high court until the 23 august. Exactly, you (or rather your missus ) have followed all of the correct procedures so far, i.e. up to now. The process is not yet complete. There are other parts in the process to go. You again appear to have failed to understand the point. Results occur at the end of the process. One of those potential results is possession being regained by the landlord. The process can end at any time but it may have to run its full course and there are many steps beyond those which you've so far been able to make, i.e. issuing a S21 notice. You asked why the court would issue an eviction notice if they weren't 'trepassing', I answered if the law said that possession should be returned to the landlord/owner (and all procedures had been followed). I was simply answering why the court issues a possession order or then an eviction notice. The two things - why a court would act in a particular way and where you are in the process so far (i.e. you haven't been able to ask the court to issue a possession order) are two separate topics. The former is a hypothetical, universal matter and the latter is specific and particular to your situation. Edited July 30, 2020 by snowychap *-al Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted July 30, 2020 Share Posted July 30, 2020 9 minutes ago, KenjiOgiwara said: No cause if I was in this pickle I wouldn't adress it on VT first. So, it wouldn't be smart to declare that law-breaking is fine and that it's only getting caught or having morals that is the problem but it's smart to believe that (as long as you don't declare it to be so)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trekka Posted July 30, 2020 VT Supporter Share Posted July 30, 2020 9 minutes ago, KenjiOgiwara said: No cause if I was in this pickle I wouldn't adress it on VT first. It's not about me, however much you try and angle the discussion that way. Not sure what's so hard to understand here. Sometimes breakkng the law is perfectly fine and the scenario pitched here is one of them. You disagree, fine. I would love to see that as an argument in court. I don't agree (which is fine). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted July 30, 2020 Share Posted July 30, 2020 5 minutes ago, trekka said: I would love to see that as an argument in court. They'd have to catch him first. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Demitri_C Posted July 30, 2020 Share Posted July 30, 2020 6 minutes ago, snowychap said: It is incorrect as I have more than once quoted to you your exact words. Exactly, you (or rather your missus ) have followed alll of the correct procedures so far, i.e. up to now. The process is not yet complete. There are other parts in the process to go. You again appear to have failed to understand the point. Results occur at the end of the process. One of those potential results is possession being regained by the landlord. The process can end at any time but it may have to run its full course and there are many steps beyond those which you've so far been able to make, i.e. issuing a S21 notice. You asked why the court would issue an eviction notice if they weren't 'trepassing', I answered if the law said that possession should be returned to the landlord/owner (and all procedures had been followed). I was simply answering why the court issues a possession order or then an eviction notice. The two things - why a court would act in a particular way and where you are in the process so far (i.e. you haven't been able to ask the court to issue a possession order) are two separate topics. The former is a hypothetic, universal matter and the latter is specific and particular to your situation. This post i can respect. I know i keep saying me its my missus place Yeah i am aware there is other places we can go but what my initial point was thats all can do right now. We have done ghe correct process but because of covid 19 the tenant can take advantage of the situation knowing we cant do anything and the big loser will be my missus who potentially could lose a sale now. Yeah i hear what your saying in your final paragraphs in your post but its frustrating and a unfair process. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Demitri_C Posted July 30, 2020 Share Posted July 30, 2020 7 minutes ago, trekka said: I would love to see that as an argument in court. I don't agree (which is fine). It wont stand which is obvious but they really gonna try take him to court over something like that? They stand to gain nothing and a poor reference. Well one good thing out of this i have read is if you pay the £600 odd to get the eviction writ you can claim that off the tenant from their deposit. Something i will definintely be advising my missus to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted July 30, 2020 Moderator Share Posted July 30, 2020 11 minutes ago, trekka said: I would love to see that as an argument in court. I don't agree (which is fine). It's often used, or regularly used. Particularly by Greenpeace type alleged trespassers - "yes, but preventing a greater harm". Happily often they win via that defence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted July 30, 2020 Share Posted July 30, 2020 21 minutes ago, Demitri_C said: Problem there is what happens when all your aale money goes? Or lets the property isnt worth enough then who pays for their care? I dont agree with your there not that desperate part. What about those who have disabilities? They have no option. I think its easy for us to say sell the property but we dont know everyones circumstances. Well, if you haven't got enough money to pay for care, then you have to enter the social care sector. I don't understand the point about 'those who have disabilities' - who are you talking about, specifically? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Demitri_C Posted July 30, 2020 Share Posted July 30, 2020 10 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said: Well, if you haven't got enough money to pay for care, then you have to enter the social care sector. I don't understand the point about 'those who have disabilities' - who are you talking about, specifically? Have you seen the mess of the social Care sector? I dont blame people for mot wanting to go down that route. People who are uanable to work for health reasons, elderly. Also the same disabilities that people cant work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted July 30, 2020 Share Posted July 30, 2020 44 minutes ago, KenjiOgiwara said: No cause if I was in this pickle I wouldn't adress it on VT first. It's not about me, however much you try and angle the discussion that way. Not sure what's so hard to understand here. Sometimes breakkng the law is perfectly fine and the scenario pitched here is one of them. You disagree, fine. I’m sure it’s not deliberate but a lot of what you’ve written today makes you look like a real pice of shit. You don’t know half the story, you certainly don’t know the tennant’s side of the story and you’ve gone for kicking people out illegally. Not cool. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted July 30, 2020 Moderator Share Posted July 30, 2020 You want to be a private landlord, don’t complain when the downside of your investment happens. It’s like a taxi driver complaining that a drunk person threw up in their taxi. You let the drunk person in and took the gamble , you have to deal with the downside of that 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KenjiOgiwara Posted July 30, 2020 Share Posted July 30, 2020 6 minutes ago, chrisp65 said: I’m sure it’s not deliberate but a lot of what you’ve written today makes you look like a real pice of shit. You don’t know half the story, you certainly don’t know the tennant’s side of the story and you’ve gone for kicking people out illegally. Not cool. There's always mitigating factors. I do however not see a problem with what was said based on the case pitched by Dem. You personal feelings on it isn't of my interest. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Demitri_C Posted July 30, 2020 Share Posted July 30, 2020 (edited) 49 minutes ago, chrisp65 said: I’m sure it’s not deliberate but a lot of what you’ve written today makes you look like a real pice of shit. You don’t know half the story, you certainly don’t know the tennant’s side of the story and you’ve gone for kicking people out illegally. Not cool. Calling someone a horrible piece of shit is not cool either chris. You cant sit there slating him then you call someone a piece of shit. Thats not cool either Edited July 30, 2020 by Demitri_C Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Demitri_C Posted July 30, 2020 Share Posted July 30, 2020 41 minutes ago, bickster said: You want to be a private landlord, don’t complain when the downside of your investment happens. It’s like a taxi driver complaining that a drunk person threw up in their taxi. You let the drunk person in and took the gamble , you have to deal with the downside of that Big difference between a 2k cab that can be cleaned to someone ruining a house sale for hundreds of thousands of pounds Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted July 30, 2020 Share Posted July 30, 2020 (edited) 1 hour ago, Demitri_C said: Have you seen the mess of the social Care sector? I dont blame people for mot wanting to go down that route. People who are uanable to work for health reasons, elderly. Also the same disabilities that people cant work. Private care is not a human right. You can either afford it or you can't. If you want it, but are having problems affording it, and are in a position of being a landlord with one property which is your only income, you have to decide whether to sell that property or keep it and use it as an ongoing income stream, with the risks that entails (tenant non-payment, damage to property, inability to find a tenant, rising interest rates, unfavourable regulatory changes). Those things might not happen, but they also might, and that is a risk that landlords wholly reliant on rental income choose to take. They should go into that with their eyes open, and if they get burned, I'm not going to have much sympathy. People who do nothing other than extract rent are a drag on the economy, at the end of the day. EDIT: To be honest, @bickster has already put this in simpler terms. Edited July 30, 2020 by HanoiVillan 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted July 30, 2020 Share Posted July 30, 2020 5 hours ago, KenjiOgiwara said: I'd just hire a company to evict then, and rather deal with the consequences. 4 hours ago, KenjiOgiwara said: I'd just fabricate bullshit right and west and make it unlivable for them. They would leave soon enough. 4 hours ago, KenjiOgiwara said: I'd do anything to **** them over The only way to deal with parasites is to make sure they understand you're not someone they want to leech off of. 24 minutes ago, Demitri_C said: Calling someone a horrible piece of shit is not cool either chris. You cant sit there slating him then you call someone a piece of shit. Thats not cool either You’re right Dem, it’s not cool. I am not always cool. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Demitri_C Posted July 30, 2020 Share Posted July 30, 2020 7 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said: Private care is not a human right. You can either afford it or you can't. If you want it, but are having problems affording it, and are in a position of being a landlord with one property which is your only income, you have to decide whether to sell that property or keep it and use it as an ongoing income stream, with the risks that entails (tenant non-payment, damage to property, inability to find a tenant, rising interest rates, unfavourable regulatory changes). Those things might not happen, but they also might, and that is a risk that landlords wholly reliant on rental income choose to take. They should go into that with their eyes open, and if they get burned, I'm not going to have much sympathy. People who do nothing other than extract rent are a drag on the economy, at the end of the day. EDIT: To be honest, @bickster has already put this in simpler terms. So then we shouldnt have sympathy for taxi drivers or resturants then who choose to run off and not pay either becausethata the careerpath they take? Lets not have any sympathy for any of them either. Lets just excuse terrible morals of people. Sorry i cant agree with that but thats just me mate. No one is asking for sympathy just saying that tenants are not as innocent as peolle make out. With the social aspect. So a relative gets dementia they need to go in a home (not sure if you have seen how ridiculously expensive this is) you sell the house run out of money then what? Or do you keep it rented privately or to the council whoever and that pays for their care and its basically no profit to the owner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Demitri_C Posted July 30, 2020 Share Posted July 30, 2020 1 minute ago, chrisp65 said: You’re right Dem, it’s not cool. I am not always cool. Your a decent guy chris you can express your point without that comment thats all im saying. It makes your point look hypocritical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts