PDA

View Full Version : Proposal to make L liable for acts of T/visitors at property



Paul_f
17-03-2005, 18:28 PM
If you haven't heard there is something on the way that could make all landlords criminals without their having done anything wrong!

Recent legislation in Northern Ireland is going to make all landlords responsible for the behaviour of tenants, [B]their friends, acquaintances, visitors (whether invited or not) who come to or within the "boundary" of the property. The word "boundary" the NI office will not define, as it could be on the road outside the property apparently! This affect ALL landlords, private as well as estate agents and professional portfolio holders.

The proposals would make:-


it an offence for anybody near or in the property to make a persitent nuisance of themselves or causing an affray. (It doesn't have to be the same person each time - read on).
the landlord convicted of a criminal offence!
the landlord an unfit person to manage not only that property but any other property, including any that he owned himself, effectively putting him out of business.


You can see the scenario. Two blokes who are drunk fall onto your tenanted open-plan postage stamp of a front garden at 2 a.m., square up to each other, and the police are called. Neighbours are fed up with this as it happens quite often because it's near a pub and they want action taken. You as landlord find yourself in court with the perpetrators, when at the time of the offence you were tucked up in bed minding you own business. Mr Magistrate says Guilty! Unfit scum! - fined God knows how much and you now see a (much poorer) convicted criminal (and that's just YOU, never mind the actual guilty parties!). Where did you go wrong? You might well ask.


This is so stupidly thought out that it has provoked outrage. What has NI to do with us you may ask? It's part of the UK and it's probably only a matter of time before it's adopted here as the ODPM intends it to be, but a fighting fund in the region of £150,000 has been raised by the NAEA, and others, (ARLA & the RICS were shamed into supporting this) to obtain a judicial revue.

To be fair somebody else did post something about this on the old forum but I've heard today directly from one of the prominent NAEA's Northern Ireland representatives who's heavily involved in opposing this, just what could be coming our way. It ain't pretty!

Jennifer_M
17-03-2005, 19:14 PM
This would be hilarious if it wasn't as serious :eek:

I'm amazed anything like this would go through. How can anyone be held responsible for the actions of another person, especially a stranger.

That said, if you hate your neighbour you could go play with a drum in front of his house every night !
Good chance he'd do the same to you.
In no time everybody will be out of hand and they'll have to forget this non sense.

Andy Parker
17-03-2005, 19:57 PM
According to the home page of this site the legislation was overturned on 11th March.

Paul_f
21-03-2005, 13:44 PM
In that case why was a presentation made to the NAEA on 17 March, and why is it going to go to judicial review? I'm just asking as it would seem a waste of time otherwise.

Andy Parker
07-04-2005, 22:47 PM
Maybe the NAEA are not quite 'with it'.Either that or the link on the Home page provides completely duff information.It is still there dated 14th March so you can read it and make up your own mind.

Paul_f
08-04-2005, 22:55 PM
Andy! I should have posted earlier on this.

The action in NI was indeed quashed but the fighting fund for judicial review is for England & Wales as they are thinking of adopting it here!! You couldn't make it up!

markshoe
07-05-2005, 17:26 PM
the odpm are looking into it according to mike stimpson, who is the president of the nfrl. I was at a meeting in london on monday the 25th of april and this is what we was told by mike. Yes it is crazy , but so is this labour government .To hold a LL responsible for there tenants outside of there property is nuts. but i bet this law will be passed so us LL will be resposible

Paul_f
09-05-2005, 08:12 AM
There is little or no chance of this law getting onto the statute books once it has been to judicial review as the whole system would grind to a halt if it were.


To hold a LL responsible for there tenants outside of there property is nuts.
The possessive "their" is not spelt "there". It's about as bad as seeing "would of" instead of "would have" that I see on the forum.

lawstudent
09-05-2005, 09:15 AM
Yes, markshoe's use of "there" for "their" is appalling. He might also be surprised to know that the first person plural imperfect of the verb to be is not "we was" but "we were". And the preposition "outside" should never followed by "of". He should of been more careful.

dazalock
09-05-2005, 09:24 AM
And I should think any Professor of English could pick holes in one of many posts on this and other boards, including the previous two authors and myself, however, not really the place to kick off a dig at this guy's grammer IMHO. Surely the point in this board is to invite discussion on the subject at hand. Lets try and be a bit more welcomeing to new posters, who's questions and comments are the reason this board is so lively. :)

Energise
09-05-2005, 10:41 AM
There is little or no chance of this law getting onto the statute books once it has been to judicial review as the whole system would grind to a halt if it were.


The possessive "their" is not spelt "there". It's about as bad a seeing "would of" instead of "would have" that I see on the forum.


Maybe this forum needs a proof reader :)

lawstudent
09-05-2005, 10:55 AM
Professor of English, dazalock? Kindergarten teacher more like.

By the way, Energize, Paul f's "about as bad a seeing ... " was obviously due to carelessness, which is a lot less disconcerting than markshoe's and dazalock's errors, which look a little too much like ignorance.

And what is "unwelcomeing", dazalock, about correcting people's errors. Surely everyone here has a thirst for self-improvement, and it will help us all to be more persuasive in our property dealings if we learn how to write more gooder.

:D

Paul_f
09-05-2005, 12:38 PM
And I should think any Professor of English could pick holes in one of many posts on this and other boards, including the previous two authors and myself, however, not really the place to kick off a dig at this guy's grammer (it's 'grammar')IMHO. Surely the point in this board is to invite discussion on the subject at hand. Lets (no apostrophe!) try and be a bit more welcomeing (welcoming!) to new posters, who's (whose!) questions and comments are the reason this board is so lively. :)

It's getting worse! Wot do u fink?

P.S. Try mis-spelling something important contained within a notice to the tenant and expect the judge to uphold it!

P.P.S. My "typo" has now been corrected!

dazalock
09-05-2005, 12:50 PM
It's getting worse! Wot do u fink?

P.S. Try mis-spelling something important contained within a notice to the tenant and expect the judge to uphold it!


BUT this is not a Notice to the tenant and you are not a judge.

You have just made my point Paul.

Andy Parker
09-05-2005, 13:01 PM
Paul_F - You started the scaremongering.Now you say it's not going to happen.Maybe the proceeds of the fighting fund should be donated to the Countryside Alliance or some other worthy cause.You are right to correct the grammar and spelling of other posters - it will dissuade the riff-raff from contributing.

lawstudent - Good luck with your exams.

Paul_f
09-05-2005, 13:02 PM
Eats, shoots & leaves!

I rest my case!

Andy Parker
09-05-2005, 17:52 PM
Paul F - Oi Noi!You have misspelt the word 'misspelling' whilst trying to emphasise the importance of correct spelling.

dazalock
04-08-2005, 15:09 PM
"done that - we charged for advertising costs (about £80) and an admin fee that relates to finding new tenants (about £30). The tenant totally scarpered, leaving furinishings at some damage"

You should start a sentance with a capital letter. :D

MrWoof
04-08-2005, 18:21 PM
I believe there should be a full stop after "admin" as the word has been shortened from "administration". "Totally scarpered", is there such a thing as partially scarpered? I'm going to get a life now, bye bye.