Register to Comment
Page 8 of 9 FirstFirst ... 6789 LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 83
Like Tree32Likes
  1. #71
    Sweet Darling Sweet Darling is offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    1,390

    Quote Originally Posted by amist4 View Post
    Except there are precious few landlords who would expect a mature working couple, handing over their own money, to do more damage than a stay at home mother, with a toddler, handing over someone elses.
    A typical unmarried mothers scam to get the rent paid by the workers, then the boyfriend scrot usually moves in within days.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  2. #72
    odie1kanobe odie1kanobe is offline

    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    31,416

    Quote Originally Posted by asset test View Post
    Sooner or later there will only be a conglomerate of landlords left in the market. You know... the vulture fekkers.

    Individual LLs are a very small and reducing market now what with regs, tax, wear and tear and the difficulty in getting messers out. Can take a long while. The messers are rent free, LL income free for months when they refuse to leave/or pay the rent. Joke.

    Anyway, the PRTB will rarely rule against the tenant.

    No wonder tenants just say feck off, I am not moving out and I refuse to pay you rent also. What is the redress for the LL?

    Just wondered.
    As someone I met once in UK claimed he did, he got squatters to take over a house that tenant was in and refusing to leave, police called but issue then was as the tenants were refusing to obey a court order to leave and squatters were squatting then whom should rightly be given posession.

    Squatters moved all tenants posesssions out into garden, they seemingly argued with LL and eventually police said it was a civil matter which court refused to rule on. Squatters then just left after a couple of weeks after decorating the house all on their own. Nobody could prove any relationship between squatter and landlord and there were enough of them that arguing was pointless.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  3. #73
    fionnmccool fionnmccool is offline
    fionnmccool's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    7,779

    Quote Originally Posted by RepublicOfLuas View Post
    Not personal enough
    Your mother found it very personal
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  4. #74
    livingstone livingstone is offline
    livingstone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    19,913

    Quote Originally Posted by razorblade View Post
    Size and space for one thing, anyway she is paying rent at the same rate elsewhere, i think this whole case was completly unnecessesary.
    What legitimate interest does a landlord have in determining that their property is 'more suitable' for a couple because of the space it has?

    There is really no discernible difference between an apartment that is suited to a single person versus a couple. Many single people live in properties that could easily accommodate couples. That's an issue for individuals to decide - if she was willing and able to pay the rent, the landlord had no role in determining whether she was correct to make that choice.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  5. #75
    livingstone livingstone is offline
    livingstone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    19,913

    Quote Originally Posted by Voluntary View Post
    Why is it OK for insurance companies to discriminate (higher premiums) on working status? Try to insure a car declaring you're a student, you'll see what I mean. House insurance also go up when your tenants are students.
    Risk levels.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  6. #76
    odie1kanobe odie1kanobe is offline

    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    31,416

    Quote Originally Posted by livingstone View Post
    What legitimate interest does a landlord have in determining that their property is 'more suitable' for a couple because of the space it has?

    There is really no discernible difference between an apartment that is suited to a single person versus a couple. Many single people live in properties that could easily accommodate couples. That's an issue for individuals to decide - if she was willing and able to pay the rent, the landlord had no role in determining whether she was correct to make that choice.
    Landlord's property, landlord has a right to decide who resides at that property.

    If I tell agents I use, that my preference is for working tenants that would reasonably expect them to provide me with details of people who meet that criteria. I don't need to give a reason why I feel someone is unsuitable nor should Landlords have to.

    As it turns out I have wide criteria but have refused in the past to rent a property to 4 lads all moving out of their parents home for first time, a family who couldn't prove they were in country legally plus a number of others.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  7. #77
    Sweet Darling Sweet Darling is offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    1,390

    Quote Originally Posted by odie1kanobe View Post
    Nope as LL has a right to decide if they want a person in their property. I do and have done for decade plus and will continue to do so.

    If tenant has just been evicted from previous property for Anti Social behaviour they don't get to choose where they live, if they have a record of not paying rent, damaging property or carrying out work on property without consent then no chance. I have refused to rent to seemingly good tenants whose credit rating shows a history of Judgements for not paying bills but also rented to an 18 yr old single mum with a 2 yr old child, zero credit rating because I met her mum and figured she wasn't risk. 5 yrs on she is still a tenant.
    How are you able to do a background check on the people looking to rent off you.?
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  8. #78
    McTell McTell is offline
    McTell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    3,471
    Twitter
    @

    Quote Originally Posted by amist4 View Post
    Except there are precious few landlords who would expect a mature working couple, handing over their own money, to do more damage than a stay at home mother, with a toddler, handing over someone elses.

    Certainly "couple" = 2 incomes to cover the rent.

    It was about cashflow and nonpayment risk, and not about single mothers being good or bad.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  9. #79
    carlovian carlovian is offline
    carlovian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    4,632

    Quote Originally Posted by paulp View Post
    within reason of course, a landlord would have a valid objection to 10 adults moving into a 1 bed apartment for example
    Was the landlord looking for 20 adults ?
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  10. #80
    stopdoingstuff stopdoingstuff is offline
    stopdoingstuff's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    21,084

    Quote Originally Posted by livingstone View Post
    What legitimate interest does a landlord have in determining that their property is 'more suitable' for a couple because of the space it has?
    An ownership interest, which is far more legitimate than any law telling people what to do with property for which they have paid for.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

Page 8 of 9 FirstFirst ... 6789 LastLast
Sign in to CommentRegister to Comment