x
By using this website, you agree to our use of cookies to enhance your experience.
STAY CONNECTED!
    
newsletter-button
icon
Mike Culliney
67  Profile Views

About Me

my expertise in the industry

Mike's Recent Activity

Mike Culliney
I totally agree with the view that the industry is changing and becoming more client focused. I do not object to these changes as long as they are balanced. I listened to the reporting of this subject on BBC and the presenter said that the legislation was to stop tenants losing their home for no reason. I believe this is where the problem lies. We have been using s21 notices for rent arrears when we believe there is little chance of recovering rent arrears and because it was also a faster route. The problem with this is that there is no factual record of the scale of the rent arrears problem as there is nothing on a s21 to distinguish why we are asking tenants to leave and, therefore, providing the ammunition for people like shelter to beat us with. I would like to propose that we all support this new change in the law but would ask for the following. A designated housing court to hear possession claims within 2 weeks at a nominal cost to the landlord. It is no good saying we can recover cost from the tenant when in most cases where tenants are on low income we are not able to recover cost. A simpler document for possession that can be completed by Landlord or Agent and the automatic right for both the Landlord or Agent to attend court without a solicitor where the criteria for possession has been met. We should not pretend that tenants will not take advantage of any loopholes around this legislation. Also, a code of conduct for local authorities in how they deal with the potential homeless and what advise they give and a clear undertaking that they will accept responsibility for re-housing the tenant from whenever possession is given without the need for bailiffs. A guarantee that any benefit claimed by the tenant that is subsequently found to of been claimed either in error or fraudulently can not be recovered from the person to whom it is paid(either landlord or agent) unless it can be proved the the landlord or agent was complicit and clearly was aware of the wrongdoing. I believe all of the above is fair and balanced and only in cases where landlord's are selling their property or there are rent arrears would we need tenants to give up their home. I believe both of these reasons are quite legitimate

From: Mike Culliney 16 April 2019 10:12 AM

Zero Deposit Zero Deposit Zero Deposit