PDA

View Full Version : compulsory deposit scheme - hypothetical avoidance method



hypotheticalmonkey
14-03-2007, 10:03 AM
1. zero deposit. Instead, rent is paid 2 months in advance, so the day the tenant moves in you already have credit for 2 months. Legally not a deposit, so wont have to go in the scheme. Tenancy agreement modified so as not to refer to deposit, but still hold tenant liable for damage, utility bills etc

2. clause in tenancy agreement whereby tenant agrees that deposit will not be held in scheme. Not sure if this is plausible/legally binding.

3. pass on costs of scheme to tenant. probably the most sensible thing to do, although you'll still miss out on the interest you would otherwise earn.

Joannepowell
14-03-2007, 10:17 AM
I must admit I gave this idea some thought but came to the conclusion that the tenant would just avoid paying the last two months rent instead of just one month in the event of wanting to get their money back!

Also, why would you lose out on the interest? You will still have the equivalent deposit amount in your bank account! Unless of course your rent received account doesn't pay interest. :confused:

Kind Regards

J

PaulF
14-03-2007, 10:17 AM
All the avoidance schemes have already been aired!
1. zero deposit. Instead, rent is paid 2 months in advance, so the day the tenant moves in you already have credit for 2 months. Legally not a deposit, so wont have to go in the scheme. Tenancy agreement modified so as not to refer to deposit, but still hold tenant liable for damage, utility bills etc If, as I think you would intend to do, take rent from month two, then this would still constitute a deposit, so you won't get away with this one!

2. clause in tenancy agreement whereby tenant agrees that deposit will not be held in scheme. Not sure if this is plausible/legally binding. Err.....definitely NOT!

3. pass on costs of scheme to tenant. probably the most sensible thing to do, although you'll still miss out on the interest you would otherwise earn. Any interest is negligible and is far outweighed by the costs concerned. you will also not be able to pass on the costs to the tenant as it's already been outlawed, but you could pass them on to the landlord if you are an agent.If you read some of the many articles in the professional magazines you will come across about every variation imaginable.

hypotheticalmonkey
14-03-2007, 10:23 AM
what is to prevent charging an 'administration fee' for a new tenancy - not referenced directly to the deposit scheme, just a general fee.

Joannepowell
14-03-2007, 11:08 AM
Hypo - i currently managed my own lets from start to finish and only charge £40 admim fee (which is less than half the cost of the credit check/rent insurance). I intend to raise my admin fee - even if it's only to cover the full cost of the credit check/insurance.

J

jeffrey
14-03-2007, 11:20 AM
Only guaranteed avoidance method is by switching to Standard Assured Tenancies (losing s.21 availability, though).

hypotheticalmonkey
14-03-2007, 11:21 AM
paul - re "If, as I think you would intend to do, take rent from month two, then this would still constitute a deposit, so you won't get away with this one!" - is the legally correct? if no mention is made of a deposit in the AST, why would this rent cycle be regarded as constituting a deposit? esp if rent payment one (1 month before start) and rent payment 2 (day of start) are paid seperately? thx

Miffy
14-03-2007, 17:25 PM
1. zero deposit. Instead, rent is paid 2 months in advance, so the day the tenant moves in you already have credit for 2 months. Legally not a deposit, so wont have to go in the scheme. Tenancy agreement modified so as not to refer to deposit, but still hold tenant liable for damage, utility bills etc


I would imagine that you could run into trouble with serving a section 8 for non-payment of rent. The tenant would not be 2 months in arrears until an extra month had passed...

lorenzo
14-03-2007, 17:49 PM
All this to save 15 quid after tax?

Miffy
14-03-2007, 18:06 PM
All this to save 15 quid after tax?

In my case, I am somewhat worried that the TDS will be a Tenant's charter to cause damage and get away with it (rubbing salt in the wound by requiring me to jump through another admin hoop.) At the moment the T needs to be sure of their ground to dispute your deposit deductions, if any, but I doubt this will be the case under TDS.

I suppose its fear of the unknown, but also a worry that it will be similar to ground 8 court action against a bad tenant, which seems to be weighted against the LL. Hope I'm wrong (especially as I will probably have a new tenancy starting around the start of May-happy happy, joy joy!)

lorenzo
14-03-2007, 18:57 PM
In my case, I am somewhat worried that the TDS will be a Tenant's charter to cause damage and get away with it (rubbing salt in the wound by requiring me to jump through another admin hoop.) At the moment the T needs to be sure of their ground to dispute your deposit deductions, if any, but I doubt this will be the case under TDS.

I suppose its fear of the unknown, but also a worry that it will be similar to ground 8 court action against a bad tenant, which seems to be weighted against the LL. Hope I'm wrong (especially as I will probably have a new tenancy starting around the start of May-happy happy, joy joy!)
Well here in Oz where a similar scheme has been running for donkey's years, it all comes down to an accurate condition report and much effort is put into preparing these.

Where this is done adequately, there is no argument if the tenant has caused damage, left it dirty or whatever.

Much better than the way it was before where Ts & LLs were in a state of undeclared war .

In the UK it may mean using independent clerks from what I'm reading round about.... but FWIW these don't exist here...I've never heard of it anyway, all done in-house.

Miffy
14-03-2007, 19:25 PM
Well here in Oz where a similar scheme has been running for donkey's years, it all comes down to an accurate condition report and much effort is put into preparing these.

Where this is done adequately, there is no argument if the tenant has caused damage, left it dirty or whatever.

Much better than the way it was before where Ts & LLs were in a state of undeclared war .

In the UK it may mean using independent clerks from what I'm reading round about.... but FWIW these don't exist here...I've never heard of it anyway, all done in-house.

Yes, I am thinking I need to beef up my inventory into a comprehensive condition report and maybe even take some video footage. Bit of a pain and things could still get missed, but it seems the best way. Hopefully the tenants won't be too arsey over damage, as they will presumably want their deposits back ASAP. How easily things will get resolved if the tenants do a moonlight flit is also a bit of a worry.

Joannepowell
14-03-2007, 19:45 PM
I agree with Miffy re moonlight flits! What are the procedures likely to be in the event of abandonment? Anyone know?

J

swadey2050
14-03-2007, 20:04 PM
Only guaranteed avoidance method is by switching to Standard Assured Tenancies (losing s.21 availability, though).


Hi Jeffrey

Where can templates of these be downloaded?

hypotheticalmonkey
14-03-2007, 21:10 PM
can i just state categorically this is not about avoiding the paltry £15 costs. It is about sticking one to the state and their endless interfering. thx

Joannepowell
14-03-2007, 22:22 PM
Hi Jeffrey

Where can templates of these be downloaded?



Do you really want to go down that route swadey??? You need to clue yourself up before even considering such action! Not to be able to use a section 21 notice could be extremely restricting!!! :eek:

Kind Regards

J

nick..
15-03-2007, 07:16 AM
can i just state categorically this is not about avoiding the paltry £15 costs. It is about sticking one to the state and their endless interfering. thx

So, just to "stick one to the state", you'd be willing to either lose your powers of eviction or run the risk of people skipping paying their rent in the last 2 months?

And an "administration fee" when you start a rental ? do you seriously think people just blindly pay for things without question?

Its highly amusing watching the amateurs squirm over this

Not quite sure what the worry is that tenants can cause damage and get away with it, it just means this way landlords will have to PROVE it happened and money is not being witheld to give the place a lick of paint, a novel concept I know

I wondered if maybe for some flying close to the edge that the 30 quid would be the difference between profit and loss, now I'm beginning to wonder if some weren't relying on nabbing 200 quid of the tenants deposit to make their profit....

hypotheticalmonkey
15-03-2007, 07:21 AM
you make too many assumptions, Nick.

Joannepowell
15-03-2007, 08:14 AM
So, just to "stick one to the state", you'd be willing to either lose your powers of eviction or run the risk of people skipping paying their rent in the last 2 months?

And an "administration fee" when you start a rental ? do you seriously think people just blindly pay for things without question?

Its highly amusing watching the amateurs squirm over this

Not quite sure what the worry is that tenants can cause damage and get away with it, it just means this way landlords will have to PROVE it happened and money is not being witheld to give the place a lick of paint, a novel concept I know

I wondered if maybe for some flying close to the edge that the 30 quid would be the difference between profit and loss, now I'm beginning to wonder if some weren't relying on nabbing 200 quid of the tenants deposit to make their profit....

Ditto hypo!

Nick, if the tenant took a landlord through small claims court the landlord would still have to PROVE IT as you say!

The TDS is just another peace of armour for a tenant which the landlord has to pay for! It's not about the cost, it's about the principle that the law is weighted so much more in the favour of the tenant! OK so the landlord can also go through small claims in the event of monies outstanding but as defaulting tenants are often 'men of straw' it just a case of throwing more good money after bad!

The TDS might be deemed to be there for the protection of the landlord too but let's have it right - all a tenant has to do is skip a months rent and they've got their deposit back regardless of how much damage they may have caused to the property!

Once the TDS kicks in it should be interesting to see the nature of the postings on this site in 6 to 12 mths time when the sh*t starts hitting the fan!

As for profit margins - would certainly appear that some people are in the wrong game! Would seem that 'professional tenants' make a much healthier living than some landlords and strangely enough the laws of this land actually let them get away with it! :mad:

J

lorenzo
15-03-2007, 08:23 AM
can i just state categorically this is not about avoiding the paltry £15 costs. It is about sticking one to the state and their endless interfering. thx
I can truly empathize with this sentiment, but there are some things in which the state is required. The state is involved when LL and T take each other to court for instance.

In this instance I truly believe the state is fulfilling a need in this scheme, lets just hope they get it right.

BTW, I am in no way a lefty and think the state shouldn't have in snout in most places it sticks it.

But the situation is absurd when tenants are subjected to more DD than someone obtaining a mortgage and no DD is possible on the LL at all.

Having a foot in both camps, I am positive about TDS.

nick..
15-03-2007, 10:15 AM
Nick, if the tenant took a landlord through small claims court the landlord would still have to PROVE IT as you say!

And thats the whole point, Landlords know full well the chances are they won't be taken to court over a couple of hundred quid, even if the Tenant felt hard done by, because to many, the thought of going through the courts is intimidating, especially when they are under financial pressure to find another deposit


The TDS is just another peace of armour for a tenant which the landlord has to pay for! It's not about the cost, it's about the principle that the law is weighted so much more in the favour of the tenant!

This is the best comment yet, exactly how is the law weighted in the favour of the tenant? if it was, you would not be able to remove a tenant every 6-12 months, or when it takes your fancy. The law SHOULD be in favour of the Tenant, because the property is their HOME. You have got into renting through choice, the same cannot be said for the tenant. The law should be there to ensure the tenant has peaceful enjoyment of their HOME, and is not intimidated by unscrupulous, amateur landlords. Funny how there were no complaints back in the days of secure tenure. What if the government turned around tomorrow and said they were going back to the old system, and you would not be able to kick someone out at the end of the tenancy agreement if they were paying their billls and living by the terms of the agreement? it worked ok for previous generations, and its a basic right of everyone to have security of tenure


The TDS might be deemed to be there for the protection of the landlord too but let's have it right - all a tenant has to do is skip a months rent and they've got their deposit back regardless of how much damage they may have caused to the property!

At which point, you guessed it, you take them to court


Once the TDS kicks in it should be interesting to see the nature of the postings on this site in 6 to 12 mths time when the sh*t starts hitting the fan!

Lots of johnny come latelys throwing in the towell, I should suspect. The pro's have nothing to fear, they will be more than prepared to deal with any issues arising


As for profit margins - would certainly appear that some people are in the wrong game! Would seem that 'professional tenants' make a much healthier living than some landlords and strangely enough the laws of this land actually let them get away with it! :mad:

I don't really understand this statement, are you talking about people screwing one another over? I don't believe its possible for a tenant to make a profit out of living somewhere.....and can't think of any examples

nick..
15-03-2007, 10:21 AM
you make too many assumptions, Nick.

Which assumptions don't apply?

I'm amazed you think you should be able to "stick one to the state" over this, thats just blatant avoidance of your legal responsibilities as a landlord, and says a lot about your professionalism, all companies have to adapt to changes in the law covering their industry

They are not "interfering" as you put it, this legislation has been brought into place because of tenants getting f*cked over by thieving landlords

If it wasn't a problem, it would've have been brought in

jghomer
15-03-2007, 10:46 AM
Call me negative but i agree with Miffy. We will have to fight like mad to retain deposits now. I have 77 buy to lets am in constant arguments with tenants about deposits, and now they will have an ally in fighting me!

Miffy
15-03-2007, 19:38 PM
At the risk of falling for a troll, I will treat this as a genuine post...



This is the best comment yet, exactly how is the law weighted in the favour of the tenant? if it was, you would not be able to remove a tenant every 6-12 months, or when it takes your fancy.
But we can't. Section 8's are easy to circumvent by giving a sob story to the judge about why you can't pay the lawful rent or fulfil the tenancy agreement YOU HAVE VOLUNTARILY AGREED TO. For example, are you seriously suggesting that a tenant should be able to be 2 full months rent in arrears before a court will make them fulfill their responsibilities? Even S21 takes more than 2 months before court acton can even be commenced and the total time to evict is nearer 6 months according to many LL victims.


The law SHOULD be in favour of the Tenant, because the property is their HOME. You have got into renting through choice, the same cannot be said for the tenant. The law should be there to ensure the tenant has peaceful enjoyment of their HOME, and is not intimidated by unscrupulous, amateur landlords.
The tenant has the choice not to rent my house-I don't see how they have no choice. As for peaceful enjoyment of their home; agreed-with the caveat that they pay their rent promptly and fulfil the terms of the tenancy agreement.


Funny how there were no complaints back in the days of secure tenure. What if the government turned around tomorrow and said they were going back to the old system, and you would not be able to kick someone out at the end of the tenancy agreement if they were paying their billls and living by the terms of the agreement? it worked ok for previous generations, and its a basic right of everyone to have security of tenure
As I am sure you know, this statement is rubbish. The whole point of removing the secure tenancies and "fair rent" systems was because no one in their right minds wanted to rent to people and properties were being left to delapidate rather than get rented out. There was a shortage of rental properties as a result. LLs had no incentive or desire to improve properties because that actually ADDED to their upkeep liabilities without increasing their returns. It most certainly did NOT work OK for previous generations. As an example, look at the going rate for properties that come onto the market with secure tenants nowadays and you will find that the price seems ridiculously low (until you realise that the property is a millstone round your neck unless the tenant AND MAYBE THEIR KIDS decide to give it up-not very likely unless they are idiots...)



I don't really understand this statement, are you talking about people screwing one another over? I don't believe its possible for a tenant to make a profit out of living somewhere.....and can't think of any examples
I believe that Joanne is referring to the "professional" tenant who doesn't pay their rent and exploits every loophole to avoid eviction for as long as possible. They will then have made a profit in the sense that they got to live somewhere for free for ages and then disappeared so that they could not be pursued for the arrears.

Joannepowell
15-03-2007, 20:17 PM
I'm not even goin to take the time to respond to Nicks hot-aired reply!!! We all can guess which side he bats for....

The only thing I will say is that if I was gonna go down the professional tenant route to make my living the easiest profit would be to just leave some of my belongings in a property and not pay rent, then sit back and wait for the impatient landlord to change the locks. THEN I'D BE SCREAMING FROM THE ROOFTOPS THAT I'D BEEN ILLEGALLY EVICTED!!! Thousands of £'s for doing jack s**t! I rest my case....

J

hypotheticalmonkey
15-03-2007, 20:17 PM
nick - not to make your mistake of assuming things - but it sounds like you think because a piece of legislation is brought in then it must be right.

Only an *amateur* wouldn't question extra layers of bureaucracy like this scheme.

I assume you also agree with the recent change in the law that prevents me wiring in a plug socket. Or the one that dictates I have to wear a fluorescent jacket to walk around a building site. Or closer to home, the one that tells me to pay more than £400 to license a BRAND NEW townhouse for occupation (i.e. £400 to tell me that all the doors are firedoors, the fire/smoke alarms are hardwired and the stairways are fire resistant for 30 mins).

are you really so naive as to think that just because the powers-that-be tell you to something, it is necessarily the best/most efficient/most sensible thing to do?

there are THOUSANDS of nonsense SI's/acts/laws/legislative measures in the UK – it is people like you (who unfortunately are in the majority) that mean there will be THOUSANDS more in coming years.

"If it wasn't a problem, it would've have been brought in" <<< funniest thing i have read for at least 10 minutes

lorenzo
15-03-2007, 20:37 PM
Well this turning into a pitched battle! lol

****pulls up a chair, large popcorn and a sixpack to watch the fun. :D

Joannepowell
15-03-2007, 20:37 PM
And thats the whole point, Landlords know full well the chances are they won't be taken to court over a couple of hundred quid, even if the Tenant felt hard done by, because to many, the thought of going through the courts is intimidating, especially when they are under financial pressure to find another deposit



This is the best comment yet, exactly how is the law weighted in the favour of the tenant? if it was, you would not be able to remove a tenant every 6-12 months, or when it takes your fancy. The law SHOULD be in favour of the Tenant, because the property is their HOME. You have got into renting through choice, the same cannot be said for the tenant. The law should be there to ensure the tenant has peaceful enjoyment of their HOME, and is not intimidated by unscrupulous, amateur landlords. Funny how there were no complaints back in the days of secure tenure. What if the government turned around tomorrow and said they were going back to the old system, and you would not be able to kick someone out at the end of the tenancy agreement if they were paying their billls and living by the terms of the agreement? it worked ok for previous generations, and its a basic right of everyone to have security of tenure



At which point, you guessed it, you take them to court



Lots of johnny come latelys throwing in the towell, I should suspect. The pro's have nothing to fear, they will be more than prepared to deal with any issues arising



I don't really understand this statement, are you talking about people screwing one another over? I don't believe its possible for a tenant to make a profit out of living somewhere.....and can't think of any examples


Right Nick, the more I read this post the more I am baffled by your logic! Which planet are you from? You've obviously not be on earth for any length of time!!! You only have to read half an hours worth of this forum to know that landlords are being screwed for thousands every bloody day!!! & I'm talking thousands in unpaid rent, damaged property, court & solicitor fees etc etc! Quite often we landlords don't stand a chance of getting any of this lost income back even if we go through the court system which is so obviously so much more in our favour.... GET A GRIP!

If a tenant is owed a deposit we are usually talking one months rent.... but when a landlord gets screwed it's usually a good six months rent (& court costs etc)! HOW CAN YOU COMPARE THE TWO???

Tenant gets ripped off once or twice for a few quid and the powers that be penalise ALL LANDLORDS! & yet defaulting tenants can cause businesses to fail and put people out of jobs!!! How on earth is that fair? WAKE UP, SMELL THE ROSES & JOIN THE REAL WORLD! :mad:

J

Joannepowell
15-03-2007, 20:54 PM
Well this turning into a pitched battle! lol

****pulls up a chair, large popcorn and a sixpack to watch the fun.


Our posts crossed lorenzo.

I'd rather pull a sixpack on a large bloke and have some fun! We can all dream.... :D

J

DianeB
15-03-2007, 22:45 PM
I've arrived late on this one. Has Nick got to the bit yet about Gordon Brown raiding our pension funds - and is there any popcorn left?

Ruth Less
16-03-2007, 03:31 AM
The only thing I will say is that if I was gonna go down the professional tenant route to make my living the easiest profit would be to just leave some of my belongings in a property and not pay rent, then sit back and wait for the impatient landlord to change the locks. THEN I'D BE SCREAMING FROM THE ROOFTOPS THAT I'D BEEN ILLEGALLY EVICTED!!! Thousands of £'s for doing jack s**t! I rest my case...

Joanne, I know this was mentioned to you already in another thread, but you really really should watch Pacific Heights :D

Joannepowell
16-03-2007, 08:49 AM
Joanne, I know this was mentioned to you already in another thread, but you really really should watch Pacific Heights


You know what Ruthless, I think you're right! It's the only way I'm ever gonna know what everybody on about! Problem is that with four daughters and a business to run I don't really get much time to indulge in watching television. Will make sourcing the film job number 3 for today - I'll be doing my first job of the day when local authority opens in ten minutes and will do job number two when I can remember what it was! :rolleyes:

Kind Regards

J

PS. It was nice to hear from you again RuthLess.

nick..
16-03-2007, 09:20 AM
Good morning all


At the risk of falling for a troll

Please don't call me that, my arrogance and "hot-headedness" are merely symptomatic of taking part in discussions of something I feel strongly about, I'm here to be educated if I'm wrong



But we can't. Section 8's are easy to circumvent by giving a sob story to the judge about why you can't pay the lawful rent or fulfil the tenancy agreement YOU HAVE VOLUNTARILY AGREED TO. For example, are you seriously suggesting that a tenant should be able to be 2 full months rent in arrears before a court will make them fulfill their responsibilities? Even S21 takes more than 2 months before court acton can even be commenced and the total time to evict is nearer 6 months according to many LL victims.

Which came first, you choosing to become a "landlord", or the rules that so disgust you? I will not waste time talking about "professional" tenants, there are crooks on both sides, see it from my point of view as someone who pays their bills on time, and yet faces the threat of being moved on every 12 months if the landlord decides he can find someone willing to pay £50 more pcm


The tenant has the choice not to rent my house-I don't see how they have no choice.

I'm not talking about *your* house, I'm talking about renting *A* house. You opted into landlord-ery, I can't opt out of living somewhere


As I am sure you know, this statement is rubbish. The whole point of removing the secure tenancies and "fair rent" systems was because no one in their right minds wanted to rent to people and properties were being left to delapidate rather than get rented out. There was a shortage of rental properties as a result.

And what was the single most important upside to this situation? AFFORDABLE HOMES FOR ALL, not articfially inflated due to easy credit and laws that encourage amateurs into the landlord industry


LLs had no incentive or desire to improve properties because that actually ADDED to their upkeep liabilities without increasing their returns.

Yes, and because people were living in them long term, no-one wanted landlords to improve them, it was worthwhile the tenants doing it themselves because it felt like their home


It most certainly did NOT work OK for previous generations. As an example, look at the going rate for properties that come onto the market with secure tenants nowadays and you will find that the price seems ridiculously low (until you realise that the property is a millstone round your neck unless the tenant AND MAYBE THEIR KIDS decide to give it up-not very likely unless they are idiots...)

Exactly, because believe it or not, "properties" are homes first and investment/profit vehicles second. I know this is a tough concept to get your head around as part of Gordys miracle economy. The whole point of secured tenancies and low sell on rates is to encourage long term renting to professional organisations, freeing up the millions of homes bought by amateurs on easy credit for everyone else to buy. I, like many millions, am forced into renting because of house price inflation. Fewer houses to rent means more to buy, lower prices, and those that *HAVE* to rent, get to rent securely


I believe that Joanne is referring to the "professional" tenant who doesn't pay their rent and exploits every loophole to avoid eviction for as long as possible.

You're not going to find me sticking up for these people, I don't "bat" for a particular side, I rent a f*cking house


Only an *amateur* wouldn't question extra layers of bureaucracy like this scheme.

Its not additional bureaucracy, its additional protection of the tenants money. Its not adding layers of paperwork for the sake of it, its securing someone elses money. Do you seriously think its ok for all these bent landlords to be holding thousands of pounds of other peoples money? I know you find it hard to believe there are crooked landlords, but there are probably as many as there are crooked tenants


are you really so naive as to think that just because the powers-that-be tell you to something, it is necessarily the best/most efficient/most sensible thing to do?

Jesus, they're not *telling* me something mythical like unicorns exist, they're protecting me against something thats happened to me and people I know many times in the past. There will be no more mysterious deductions of 200 quid to repaint a flat that has nothing more than wear and tear


there are THOUSANDS of nonsense SI's/acts/laws/legislative measures in the UK – it is people like you (who unfortunately are in the majority) that mean there will be THOUSANDS more in coming years.

Now come on, you're just getting irrational now. Because of me there will be thousands more legislative mesaures in the UK? A humble renting IT consultant is responsible for additional rental laws? perhaps you should first look to the government you elected and the crooked landlords in your midst


"If it wasn't a problem, it would've have been brought in" <<< funniest thing i have read for at least 10 minutes

Whys that? why do you think it was brought in? do you think it was a random act of legislation to squeeze 30 quid out of Gordys favourite entrepreneurs? or perhaps it was in response to outright thieving of other peoples money?

Joanne, I've just been back and edited this bit, I've had a look around the forum and see you've been having problems, I most certainly do not think its ok for people to take the piss like they have, and you have my synpathies. I understand how the law can work against you, but to honest, to genuine tenants, the property is their home. Like it or not, the law should protect the person using the property to live in

I'm in no way attempting to justify tenants screwing over their landlords, I'm taking the position of good tenants who pay their way, and have been the victim of either casual theft of their money without having the knowledge or wherewithall to go to court, and those who just fall foul of being stuck on 12 month ASTs when what they need is somewhere secure to live their life and perhaps start a family


Has Nick got to the bit yet about Gordon Brown raiding our pension funds

He hasn't raided mine, I have private savings and salary supplements instead of a pension. Has he raided your pension? thats the reason most over 50's give when they have to explain to their children how they are destroying their generations ability to have a family in anything other than a rented hovel, and how they are screwing their kids future with the largest generational transfer of wealth in history

And don't think you're getting out of this Lorenzo, you're the closest I have to an ally ;)

Have a lovely weekend

Joannepowell
16-03-2007, 09:54 AM
Nick, my properties are MY KIDS FUTURE and the only person ROBBING from my pension fund are the TENANTS!

& don't worry - my screening measures are quite adequate. My mistake with this tenant was actually choosing to trust somebody I had known for nigh on eight years (his wife)! Won't happen again I can assure you. In fact, my screening so good now I doubt even Tony Blair would get through when he comes knocking!

As for additional protection for tenants - where the hell is the extra protection for landlord who I can assure you are losing many more thousands a week than tenants! At the start of my landlord career I lost £5k between just two defaulting tenants by the time I regained possession. The most they could have lost if I'd robbed them was the £400 each they paid in deposits = total £800. Not even £1k between them!!!

Also, please don't lump me with landlords who you same to just get rid of tenants just for the sake of it (though I can't understand why they would if they were such perfect tenants). I would be more than happy to provide homes for long term tenants (less paperwork, less voids, less work). My longest serving tenant has been with me for almost two years now and he's an absolute dream! I would not be looking to sell the said property but he did ask if he could have first refusal if ever we do decide to sell.

As for us landlords opting into the job and you not having a choice because you have to live somewhere - of course you have choice! You could opt not to rent privately.... everyone has choices.... However, I can tell you something - I've never seen a council house that comes anywhere near the standard of property I provide!

& all those tenants who claim not to be able to afford to buy I'm afraid I would have to say why can't they? Most rents in the private sector are on the same level of a mortgage payment. If you can afford the rent then you can afford a mortgage - it's simple economics!

Ah well, I'm all out of exclamations now but no doubt our paths will cross again....

Kindest of Regards to you Nick

J

rewop46
16-03-2007, 09:54 AM
Wow!!!

After that interesting and informative rant, sorry, post from Nick I think ALL of the members should watch "Pacific Heights" and then call the Samaritans. I don't have their number but I believe Joanne has. Diane (not the real) has the film, she will send you a pirate copy if you want)

At least we both have something in common, Lorenzo. We're mates; he is an avid reader of my posts.

He changed his name though, he signed himself as "What a t0sser" after commenting on my post. I wish he would make up his mind.;)

rewop

jeffrey
16-03-2007, 10:09 AM
Nick: 0
Miffy/Joannepowell: 1. They win hands down.

Laws would be much simpler and shorter if only people would voluntarily do the right and moral thing without compulsion- eg L should keep property in good state [no need for LTA 1985 s.11] and T should pay full rent on time [no need for g8/10/11 in Schedule 2 to Housing Act 1988] and leave when tenancy term ends [s.21 of 1988 Act].

nick..
16-03-2007, 10:09 AM
Nick, my properties are MY KIDS FUTURE and the only person ROBBING from my pension fund are the TENANTS!

I edited my post slightly when I saw your troubles


As for additional protection for tenants - where the hell is the extra protection for landlord who I can assure you are losing many more thousands a week than tenants! At the start of my landlord career I lost £5k between just two defaulting tenants by the time I regained possession. The most they could have lost if I'd robbed them was the £400 each they paid in deposits = total £800. Not even £1k between them!!!

But you are making a profit from your properties, thats the whole point of being a landlord. You are taking on that risk, whereas the tenants deposit is their living expenses. The deposit has nothing to do with missing months or rent payments, thats a different issue entirely, and utterly wrong of course. However, decent tenants deserve to have their deposits protected from landlords prone to casually stop money at the end of an agreement


Also, please don't lump me with landlords who you same to just get rid of tenants just for the sake of it (though I can't understand why they would if they were such perfect tenants). I would be more than happy to provide homes for long term tenants (less paperwork, less voids, less work). My longest serving tenant has been with me for almost two years now and he's an absolute dream! I would not be looking to sell the said property but he did ask if he could have first refusal if ever we do decide to sell.

Believe me, some landlords will move someone on if they can get £50 more pcm, I haven't any personal experience this, just from friends, but I have experienced, twice, someone bailing from the BTL game, forcing me to move

And 2 years is not long term.


As for us landlords opting into the job and you not having a choice because you have to live somewhere - of course you have choice! You could opt not to rent privately.... everyone has choices.... However, I can tell you something - I've never seen a council house that comes anywhere near the standard of property I provide!

Renting through the council is not an option for anyone other than refugees or single parents


& all those tenants who claim not to be able to afford to buy I'm afraid I would have to say why can't they? Most rents in the private sector are on the same level of a mortgage payment. If you can afford the rent then you can afford a mortgage - it's simple economics!

My rent - £850, mortgage on this property - £1500. I can afford this, and I'm renting because I'm in the process of saving to buy. But many people cannot afford to buy, and are stuck renting

I'm not talking about IO mortgages of course which would involve gambling on sufficient HPI to pay off the capital


After that interesting and informative rant

I see, so its a rant when someone disagrees....



Nick: 0
Miffy/Joannepowell: 1.

LOL, thats sorted that then

lorenzo
16-03-2007, 10:19 AM
Nick: 0
Miffy/Joannepowell: 1. They win hands down.

Laws would be much simpler and shorter if only people would voluntarily do the right and moral thing without compulsion- eg L should keep property in good state [no need for LTA 1985 s.11] and T should pay full rent on time [no need for g8/10/11 in Schedule 2 to Housing Act 1988] and leave when tenancy term ends [s.21 of 1988 Act].

Damn those biased referees!:D

**Screams from sidelines, throwing dregs of popcorn on the ground in digust - "Are you blind! What about those thieving LLs that are about!"

lorenzo
16-03-2007, 10:27 AM
And don't think you're getting out of this Lorenzo, you're the closest I have to an ally



Oh believe me, I have a lot of empathy with your cause. I just think as long as we're all playing by the rules we should get on really well. It is a symbiotic relationship we have here.

The miserable thieving @sshats on both sides of the fence however, deserve everything they get.

TDS "should" workout just fine.:)

lorenzo
16-03-2007, 10:29 AM
At least we both have something in common, Lorenzo. We're mates; he is an avid reader of my posts.

He changed his name though, he signed himself as "What a t0sser" after commenting on my post. I wish he would make up his mind.;)

rewop
I was expecting a counteroffensive at some stage. LOL

rewop46
16-03-2007, 10:31 AM
I apologise Nick, I was trying to lighten the mood, it is the end of the week and we should be happy:)

rewop

nick..
16-03-2007, 10:36 AM
I apologise Nick, I was trying to lighten the mood, it is the end of the week and we should be happy
rewop

Indeed, I just found out I am staying in my lovely apartment for another year ;)

This is me in a good mood.....

Joannepowell
16-03-2007, 10:40 AM
PMSL

Best larrrrrffff I'd had in ages!!! Don't know what made me laugh most ???? Lorenzo throwing his popcorn or nick thinking I made a profit!!! & rewop noticing Lorenzo changing his name to What a t0sser has had me in tears (of laughter). My 3 yr old spell checker keeps looking at me funny cos she's never seen me laugh so hard!!!

THANKS FOR MAKING MY DAY GUYS! :)

J

PS. Jeffrey - you make a fantastic referee! Nowt wrong with your eyes at all....

Joannepowell
16-03-2007, 10:42 AM
Indeed, I just found out I am staying in my lovely apartment for another year

This is me in a good mood.....


That wouldn't be rent free would it nick? :D Maybe then you could afford to buy... LOL

DianeB
16-03-2007, 11:12 AM
Can I just suggest that now may be a good time for a group hug?

Joannepowell
16-03-2007, 11:20 AM
Can I just suggest that now may be a good time for a group hug?


Will the real diane please stand up, please stand up.... :cool:

Consider yourself hugged Diane!

J

Miffy
16-03-2007, 11:36 AM
Please don't call me that, my arrogance and "hot-headedness" are merely symptomatic of taking part in discussions of something I feel strongly about, I'm here to be educated if I'm wrong
Apologies. I am actually glad to know you're not trolling your line for a sucker to bite or lurking under a bridge for the billy goat. I can see where you are coming from now you have explained more.

Which came first, you choosing to become a "landlord", or the rules that so disgust you?
With respect, I was merely supporting the point that the law favours the bad tenant over the LL disproportionately. I stand by this. Deciding to become a LL is irrelevant to that point. (I will grant you that I should have perhaps been more aware of the ridiculous leeway a bad tenant is given BEFORE becoming a LL, but that doesn't change the basic imbalance or the point I was making).

And what was the single most important upside to this situation? AFFORDABLE HOMES FOR ALL, not articfially inflated due to easy credit and laws that encourage amateurs into the landlord industry
Do you think its fair to blame the continuing house price boom solely or mainly on buy to let? Do you have any evidence for this, if so? (Not being funny, genuinely interested!)

Exactly, because believe it or not, "properties" are homes first and investment/profit vehicles second. I, like many millions, am forced into renting because of house price inflation. Fewer houses to rent means more to buy, lower prices, and those that *HAVE* to rent, get to rent securely
Agreed that such ridiculous house price inflation is a bad thing and benefits no one in the long term (apart from the govt who gets to tax us on IHT, stamp duty etc etc which applies to non LLs as well as LLs, of course) since we have to buy another inflated house when we sell our old one. Well, I suppose I have gained a lot of capital were I to sell my "spare" houses but I genuinely would be happy not to have this gain if houses had remained sensibly priced. After all, my kids have to buy a house eventually (they bloody better had, anyway- I don't want them under my feet forever;) ).

You're not going to find me sticking up for these people, I don't "bat" for a particular side, I rent a f*cking house
Good to see and fair enough. Our response to your assertion that the law doesn't favour the T over the LL was, however, based on "these people" and the difficulties removing them. If the law had more teeth and was swifter to remove bad tenants who don't pay the rent etc than I wouldn't be averse to greater tenure rights (although not the old way of endless security-that's too much). After all, I want to rent my house out for as long as possible to a good tenant!

Jesus, they're not *telling* me something mythical like unicorns exist, they're protecting me against something thats happened to me and people I know many times in the past. There will be no more mysterious deductions of 200 quid to repaint a flat that has nothing more than wear and tear
Well, if its such a blatant rip-off, why not take the LL to court? I rented for 9years in this country and never lost ANY deposit to any LL or agent even as a student (they never tried it on in the first place with us). However, after renting in France I DID lose all my deposit, so I know how it feels. Apparently its standard practice over there to routinely hold onto ALL the deposit so think yourself lucky (joke, joke...)

I'm in no way attempting to justify tenants screwing over their landlords, I'm taking the position of good tenants who pay their way, and have been the victim of either casual theft of their money without having the knowledge or wherewithall to go to court, and those who just fall foul of being stuck on 12 month ASTs when what they need is somewhere secure to live their life and perhaps start a family
Fair enough, but perhaps this should be balanced with some extra teeth against the bad tenants? To a LL it seems that its all take take take without any concern for our legitimate needs/concerns.

Has he raided your pension? thats the reason most over 50's give when they have to explain to their children how they are destroying their generations ability to have a family in anything other than a rented hovel, and how they are screwing their kids future with the largest generational transfer of wealth in history
Are you referring to the cost of property nowadays or the large hikes in National Insurance that the youngsters will be paying to keep the oldies in healthcare and pensions etc? Not quite clear!

And don't think you're getting out of this Lorenzo, you're the closest I have to an ally
He's good, but you want Ruthless on your side as well. By name and by nature;-)))

Joannepowell
16-03-2007, 11:52 AM
Miffy - don't give him anymore ammo! RuthLess certainly a force to be reckoned with!!!

Re your comment on your kids having to buy a house one day - I also don't want my kids under my feet forever which is why my eldest daughter actually rents a flat from me! :D

J

jeffrey
16-03-2007, 11:55 AM
Miffy - don't give him anymore ammo! RuthLess certainly a force to be reckoned with!!!

Re your comment on your kids having to buy a house one day - I also don't want my kids under my feet forever which is why my eldest daughter actually rents a flat from me! :D

J

Did you give a parental guarantee for her rent, though?

Miffy
16-03-2007, 11:56 AM
Did you give a parental guarantee for her rent, though?

In parenting, as in life, there are no guarantees ;) (Apart from death and taxes...)

Joannepowell
16-03-2007, 11:59 AM
Did you give a parental guarantee for her rent, though?

After reading guarantor stories on this forum do you really think I'd be that daft Jeffrey???

I'd be like a dog chasing my own bloody tail - and I've got too much to lose! :eek:

Mind you, rent late yet again this month so she's sailing a bit close to the wind on that score! Now where did I put that section 21 notice....?

J

jeffrey
16-03-2007, 12:01 PM
After reading guarantor stories on this forum do you really think I'd be that daft Jeffrey???

I'd be like a dog chasing my own bloody tail - and I've got too much to lose! :eek:

Mind you, rent late yet again this month so she's sailing a bit close to the wind on that score! Now where did I put that section 21 notice....?

J

Mmm, I blame the parents...

Joannepowell
16-03-2007, 12:03 PM
Mmm, I blame the parents...

Ha bloody ha.... I actually blame my past tenants for setting a bad example so there! :p

J

Miffy
16-03-2007, 12:05 PM
Ha bloody ha.... I actually blame my past tenants for setting a bad example so there!

J

Ha ha- they have learned first hand that it is better to be a professional tenant than a LL. Bright kids....

Shame for you, though:p .

Joannepowell
16-03-2007, 12:17 PM
Ha ha- they have learned first hand that it is better to be a professional tenant than a LL. Bright kids....

Shame for you, though .


That tickled me Miffy! She's actually at uni doing degree in teaching. Maybe I should give her some proper lessons on how to be a professional tenant and then send her out into the big bad world....

She could then sail through uni and never have to pay for lodgings.... that might actually save me a few quid along the way! Thanks for the tip!

Anybody got any vacant property to let near Manchester Met Uni?

"***** is a model student, rent always paid on time and she has left my flat in fantastic condition. She is very tidy, polite and I get on wonderfully with her. Never a cross word has exchanged between us. My loss is very definately somebody elses gain. I would HIGHLY recommend her to any prospective landlord.... "

Any takers? (preferably an new to BTL landlord with no experience and no knowledge of the law so that we can make a few quid on an illegal eviction claim when she comes home to visit for a few weeks...) :cool:

lorenzo
16-03-2007, 13:23 PM
...in life, there are no guarantees (Apart from death and taxes...)
...and now, tenants deposits. :D

rewop46
16-03-2007, 14:30 PM
Blimey, I only went out for a few hours and when I came back this thread had moved on by three pages. What's going on?

I've tried to catch up but I'm a bit confused!

From what I can see I've got to hug Lorenzo, give Nick the keys to my hoilday villa in Sarajavo, rent a video from Ebay, have an arm wrestle with Joanne's 3 year old spell checker and, if I can find her, get the imposter Dianne to phone the Samaritans with a number supplied by Miffy.

I have no idea what this thread was originally about:confused:

rewop

DianeB
16-03-2007, 14:32 PM
Not to forget sweeping up the spilt popcorn!

Joannepowell
16-03-2007, 14:54 PM
Nice one rewop - that summarised the thread perfectly!

Keep it up guys (& gals) - all this laughter is sure to save me a trip to the doctors. Laughter being the best medicine.... also keeps the phone line at samaritans free for some poor tenant who's just had his deposit nicked (forgive the pun) from some rogue landlord! :D

PMSL

J

lorenzo
16-03-2007, 15:06 PM
Not to forget sweeping up the spilt popcorn!
Notice that not a drop of beer was spilt though. :D

lorenzo
16-03-2007, 15:09 PM
From what I can see I've got to hug Lorenzo,

Shouldn't we, like... hold hands for a while first? :o

rewop46
16-03-2007, 15:25 PM
As this thread has gone loopy can I ask some poignant questions?

How do you become a "senior member". Is it based on the number of posts or their quality in which case I should be one already!

Why can't we put more "Smilies" in our posts. We could then use them in our posts making them more colourful i.e. the word "b:) lls" which somebody mispelt recently. (no names, no packdrill)

Then we could say for example:

The postman put two b0lls through my letter box today, one electric b0ll and one gas b0ll.

It is Friday afternoon, what do you expect?

rewop

DianeB
16-03-2007, 15:37 PM
I suddenly came over a bit seniorish when I hit 100 posts - therefore absolutely nothing to do with quality:D

lorenzo
16-03-2007, 15:38 PM
As this thread has gone loopy can I ask some poignant questions?

How do you become a "senior member". Is it based on the number of posts or their quality in which case I should be one already!

Why can't we put more "Smilies" in our posts. We could then use them in our posts making them more colourful i.e. the word "b. lls" which somebody mispelt recently. (no names, no packdrill)

Then we could say for example:

The postman put two b0lls through my letter box today, one electric b0ll and one gas b0ll.

It is Friday afternoon, what do you expect?

rewop

That would be a b1ll wouldn't it? :)

Joannepowell
16-03-2007, 16:08 PM
As this thread has gone loopy can I ask some poignant questions?

How do you become a "senior member". Is it based on the number of posts or their quality in which case I should be one already!

Why can't we put more "Smilies" in our posts. We could then use them in our posts making them more colourful i.e. the word "b had to remove smilie inserted here to get my own on lls" which somebody mispelt recently. (no names, no packdrill)

Then we could say for example:

The postman put two b0lls through my letter box today, one electric b0ll and one gas b0ll.

It is Friday afternoon, what do you expect?

rewop


I think you need more than 19 posts to become senior rewop! & if you are relying on quality you might be in for a long wait... You walked right into that one! ;)

You're not the only one to mention it's a shame we can't use more than one smilie.... maybe you could take it up with the powers that be?

Hope you lot realise I'd got sod all done today - but hey what he hell? I think I deserve a rest after the last couple of months of hard slog so sod it - I'm giving myself the rest of the day off (what's left of it that is)!

Might just pop the cork on the bottle of champers I've been saving for a rainy day - should wash my popcorn down rather nicely! Well, it would if I had some....

J

Joannepowell
16-03-2007, 16:16 PM
Hey guys

Just had a brill idea about writing a book about the down side of being a landlord. Could fill it with horror stories about BTL world. Thought about calling it Confessions of a landlord but then thought Confessions of a tenant might be more entertaining.

Does anybody want to buy the rights to my book to make a film? We could call it Specific Lows! :p

J

rewop46
16-03-2007, 17:18 PM
Joanne, I've been coming and going all day and every time I sit down here you have a post on every single thread. Now, reach over to the off switch and push it - your family needs you!

Before you go, let me tell you something. I was recently banned from a forum for remarking on a member who had a total of 23,500 posts - in 2 years!

I call him a sad b:mad:gger (note the colourful use of the Smilie).

To cut a long story short, all his mates attacked me. After a lengthy war of rants and inane comments they got banned, formed another forum and dedicated a whole thread to me called "REWOP writes"
At its peak it attracted, in 2 hrs, 60 posts and nearly a thousand viewers.
Is that cool or what?

Now switch off!

(the infamous) rewop

Joannepowell
16-03-2007, 17:32 PM
I would glady switch you off rewop but unfortunately can't find your off button...

It's not often I get a day to do just nothing but indulge in a bit of banter on the forum (and hopefully provide some members with a little valuable support and advice along the way) so you'll have to forgive me for sticking around. Make the most of my contribution as from next week I will be far too busy to loiter around the forum all day...

In the meantime I will try not to be too offended by your post.

J

rewop46
16-03-2007, 20:29 PM
Sorry Joanne, it wasn't meant to be offensive, just an excuse to give you one of my anecdotes. More of a tongue-in-cheek remark I think.

Now you see why I was banned from the other forum; I have an unfortunate way with words.;)

rewop

PS notice I don't use the 46, that's not my age, it's the year I was born!

Joannepowell
16-03-2007, 20:44 PM
Sorry Joanne, it wasn't meant to be offensive, just an excuse to give you one of my anecdotes. More of a tongue-in-cheek remark I think.

Now you see why I was banned from the other forum; I have an unfortunate way with words.

rewop

PS notice I don't use the 46, that's not my age, it's the year I was born!


Apology accepted rewop.

J

PS. Was that 1846?

PPS. My darling spell checkers are now tucked up in bed and the housework is done so you don't have to be worrying about my family now. :p

Miffy
17-03-2007, 06:49 AM
...and now, tenants deposits.

I am viewing that as another tax now the TDS is here :p !

Miffy
17-03-2007, 07:33 AM
Anybody got any vacant property to let near Manchester Met Uni?

"***** is a model student, rent always paid on time and she has left my flat in fantastic condition. She is very tidy, polite and I get on wonderfully with her. Never a cross word has exchanged between us. My loss is very definately somebody elses gain. I would HIGHLY recommend her to any prospective landlord.... "

Any takers? (preferably an new to BTL landlord with no experience and no knowledge of the law so that we can make a few quid on an illegal eviction claim when she comes home to visit for a few weeks...) :cool:

Note to self:- beware of any teachers transferring to Chester college from Manchester with the name "Powell." Unless they have an expertly forged parental guarantee sufficient to fool the court, of course....

rewop46
17-03-2007, 08:07 AM
There's a saying:

If it's too good to be true then it's too good to be true :p

Now the sensible advice, get a testimonial from the landlord before that.

rewop(divad)

Joannepowell
17-03-2007, 08:33 AM
There's a saying:

If it's too good to be true then it's too good to be true

Now the sensible advice, get a testimonial from the landlord before that.

rewop(divad)


You are all forgetting something guys. I AM HER LANDLORD!!! :D


J

Joannepowell
17-03-2007, 08:35 AM
Note to self:- beware of any teachers transferring to Chester college from Manchester with the name "Powell." Unless they have an expertly forged parental guarantee sufficient to fool the court, of course....


Miffy dear - my daughter may well chose to use her father's surname....

J :cool:

rewop46
17-03-2007, 08:47 AM
You are all forgetting something guys. I AM HER LANDLORD!!!


Good morning Joanne.

I've got nothing meaningful to say to that so:

Did you know that Powell originates from the Welsh name "ap Howell". Bit of useless trivia I thought you would like to know to impress your friends with.

Ap means "son of". They didn't have a word for "daughter of " in those days; women where considered to be of little consquence to the family line. You may not agree with that!!!

(ap) rewop

Joannepowell
17-03-2007, 09:03 AM
Good morning Joanne.

I might seem bias but I wouldn't want to be a landlord to my son - it's bad enough being his dad

Did you know that Powell originates from the Welsh name "ap Howell" (son of...). Bit of useless trivia I thought you would like to know to impress your friends with.

(ap) rewop


Morning chuck. Know that the name is Welsh - strangely enough my great grandfather is Welsh. :rolleyes:

As for being my daughter's landlady - TELL ME ABOUT IT!!! But it was either that or have all FOUR daughters under one roof! At least becoming her landlady gave us a chance at remaining friends.... mind you - that was before she took over the shoes of my number one defaulting tenant (who as you know is no longer with me).

As soon as the ink is dry on the section 21 I've just printed it'll be through her letterbox. LOL

J

PS. Shucks - just realised she started a new verbal tenancy in January when her boyfriend moved out. So it'll have to be a section 8 - but wait, she's not 2mths in arrears and by the time she is she'll have got her uni grant and rent will be straight again! Back to section 21.... but just realised if I regain possession of the flat I'll also regain possession of a daughter cos she'll have to come home.... DAMNED IF I DO, DAMNED IF I DON'T!!! Kids - who'd ave 'em?

rewop46
17-03-2007, 09:43 AM
As it's trivia day can I give you a bit more of my very profound advice:

If you think that you will finish subsidising your siblings when they leave home then think again. They somehow manage to add another nought to their demands!

Here is an example for our son:

4 years getting p:rolleyes:ssed at uni - £20k
contribute towards wedding £5k
deposit on flat £15k
help with new car after wife smashed it up - £5k

Is it any wonder that we filthy rich landlords are ranting on this forum.

And you've got four!

Sorry, was that the wrong thing to say?

bin al rewop

PS I've just noticed that you posted my original reply before I edited, sorry I got confused about whether you were talking about your daughter or a tenant.

Joannepowell
17-03-2007, 11:42 AM
As it's trivia day can I give you a bit more of my very profound advice:

If you think that you will finish subsidising your siblings when they leave home then think again. They somehow manage to add another nought to their demands!

Here is an example for our son:

4 years getting premoved smiliessed at uni - £20k
contribute towards wedding £5k
deposit on flat £15k
help with new car after wife smashed it up - £5k

Is it any wonder that we filthy rich landlords are ranting on this forum.

And you've got four!

Sorry, was that the wrong thing to say?

bin al rewop

PS I've just noticed that you posted my original reply before I edited, sorry I got confused about whether you were talking about your daughter or a tenant.


Filthy rich rewop? Speak for yourself mate! I know some pretty rich tenants though. I'm forgetting - you don't have to fork out for court fees do you? :cool:

Mind you, my four daughters won't cost me as much as your son cost you.

My eldest daughter pretty much seeing herself through uni by hard graft (I think this teaches kids the TRUE value of money). No such thing as a free lunch remember? Mind you, a couple of my tenants have probably had a fair few free lunches at my expense... The other beauty of her working to support herself is that she's getting invaluable work (and life) experience which uni can not provide.

Secondly, she not daft enough to get married.

Third, why would I lend her a deposit on a flat when she can rent from me?

Lastly, re the car - was it his wife or your wife that smashed it up? As for £5k - I've never had a car costing more than a couple of k so why should my daughter expect any different? She bought her current heap of junk herself and is planning on buying her next one with compensation she will be getting (she was a fee-paying passengar in a taxi which was crashed into by another taxi).

So far cost to me since her leaving home has just been late rent and the odd borrow for a night out (& all the food she manages to consume when she visits me - which is quite often cos her flat is only next bloody door).

The above is stated in good humour rewop (limit on smilies prevents me adding smiles, grins and from sticking my tongue out at you). LOL

J

rewop46
17-03-2007, 12:33 PM
Joanne Just popped in to get a screwdriver.

Why are you writing in pink?

Davina

Joannepowell
17-03-2007, 12:38 PM
Joanne Just popped in to get a screwdriver.

Why are you writing in pink?

Davina


Just felt like it Davina. Makes me feel of some consequence.... Also, brightens up the page in the lack of smilies!

Glad to see it didn't take years to get a screwdriver - didn't Tracey Barlow in Corrie get sent upstairs to get a screwdriver not to be seen again for three years???

You not fixed that extractor fan yet? Hope you are giving tenant compo for the inconvenience.... :D

J

rewop46
17-03-2007, 14:58 PM
That's a sore point.

I fused the lights in the bathroom when I took it out. That was not too bad but I bumped into the (nude) tenant getting up to have a wee. Didn't realise he was on night work.

It wasn't such a problem for him as it was for me; I was on my way to an "Anne Summers" underwear party afterwards and had my ladies attire on.

He thought I was his wife and started to touch me up; I think he must have had a nightcap before he went to bed.

I told him I'd had a vasectomy but he wouldn't listen.

(That's almost a true story) ;)

Vera

Joannepowell
17-03-2007, 15:26 PM
That's a sore point.

I fused the lights in the bathroom when I took it out. That was not too bad but I bumped into the (nude) tenant getting up to have a wee. Didn't realise he was on night work.

It wasn't such a problem for him as it was for me; I was on my way to an "Anne Summers" underwear party afterwards and had my ladies attire on.

He thought I was his wife and started to touch me up; I think he must have had a nightcap before he went to bed.

I told him I'd had a vasectomy but he wouldn't listen.

(That's almost a true story)

Vera


Don't tell me rewop - the bit about fusing the lights was made up! ;)

J

rewop46
17-03-2007, 15:38 PM
Dianne

Nothing gets by you does it?

Anne :cool:

Miffy
18-03-2007, 08:03 AM
If you think that you will finish subsidising your siblings when they leave home then think again. They somehow manage to add another nought to their demands!

Here is an example for our son:

4 years getting p:rolleyes:ssed at uni - £20k
contribute towards wedding £5k
deposit on flat £15k
help with new car after wife smashed it up - £5k


Is that you, Dad?

Joannepowell
18-03-2007, 08:16 AM
Is that you, Dad?


G' Morning! :)

J

Esio Trot
19-03-2007, 10:09 AM
Jesus, they're not *telling* me something mythical like unicorns exist

Why is okay to miss-use the name of the founder of Christianity? If the name of the most revered prophet of Islam was substituted in the post above, there would be uproar.

lorenzo
19-03-2007, 10:27 AM
Why is okay to miss-use the name of the founder of Christianity? If the name of the most revered prophet of Islam was substituted in the post above, there would be uproar.
Was it a mis-use? Perhaps Nick was pleading to Him for greater wisdom and understanding of the matter at hand? I don't know, it was just a thought. ;)

DianeB
19-03-2007, 10:31 AM
Was it a mis-use? Perhaps Nick was pleading to Him for greater wisdom and understanding of the matter at hand? I don't know, it was just a thought.

LOL Good thought Lorenzo:D

jeffrey
19-03-2007, 11:24 AM
LOL Good thought Lorenzo:D

Unless he's Old Nick...

Miffy
19-03-2007, 11:34 AM
Unless he's Old Nick...

Holds head in hands and groans.... though now you mention it, there are similarities.....

lorenzo
19-03-2007, 12:09 PM
Holds head in hands and groans.... though now you mention it, there are similarities.....
**also holds head in hands and groans. (no popcorn within reach)

The administrator would attest to the different IP ;)

jeffrey
19-03-2007, 12:13 PM
93 posts and 1100 views in 5 days. Is this a record?