What grinds my gears...

[Finnegan]

6 hours ago, Vacamion said:

 

Worst move ever.

 

Leaving aside the possibility of killing people (including innocent neighbours) with the fire....

 

Even if Milo were fortunate enough not to arouse the suspicion of the Fire and Rescue Service Investigator or the police in the first instance, any insurance claim for arson would be routinely passed to a Special Investigator acting for the insurance company.

 

Any Special Investigator worth the name would establish the tenant problem because the legal paper trail which Milo has referred to is covered in standard background enquiries.

 

This would establish motive for the incident, so would cause a deeper investigation, in which the Special Investigator would gather further evidence, including the instruction of forensic experts to test for the use of accelerants, phone records, witness testimonies, CCTV, neighbour evidence, etc.

 

He would be interviewed formally about the claim and any holes in his story, his whereabouts, his alibi and motives would be picked apart.

 

There is a then a good chance that, after an investigation which could take months or years, the Insurers would end up declining the claim for fraud and passing their files to the police.

 

In England and Wales there is a dedicated branch of the police for financial crime such as insurance fraud, called IFED.

 

So... Milo would be left with no payout, a burned out shell of a property, the inability to get insurance for the foreseeable and the possibility of criminal proceedings for insurance fraud or arson or both.

 

It would make a bad situation infinitely worse.

 

 

So, uh, you've done this before then.

[Beliall]

28 minutes ago, Buce said:

 

Sock manufacturers.

 

Why do they not make individual sizes any more? One size DOES NOT FVCKING FIT ALL.

mate just get child size with your tiny feet

[Jattdogg]

7 hours ago, Vacamion said:

 

Worst move ever.

 

Leaving aside the possibility of killing people (including innocent neighbours) with the fire....

 

Even if Milo were fortunate enough not to arouse the suspicion of the Fire and Rescue Service Investigator or the police in the first instance, any insurance claim for arson would be routinely passed to a Special Investigator acting for the insurance company.

 

Any Special Investigator worth the name would establish the tenant problem because the legal paper trail which Milo has referred to is covered in standard background enquiries.

 

This would establish motive for the incident, so would cause a deeper investigation, in which the Special Investigator would gather further evidence, including the instruction of forensic experts to test for the use of accelerants, phone records, witness testimonies, CCTV, neighbour evidence, etc.

 

He would be interviewed formally about the claim and any holes in his story, his whereabouts, his alibi and motives would be picked apart.

 

There is a then a good chance that, after an investigation which could take months or years, the Insurers would end up declining the claim for fraud and passing their files to the police.

 

In England and Wales there is a dedicated branch of the police for financial crime such as insurance fraud, called IFED.

 

So... Milo would be left with no payout, a burned out shell of a property, the inability to get insurance for the foreseeable and the possibility of criminal proceedings for insurance fraud or arson or both.

 

It would make a bad situation infinitely worse.

 

Was more of a joke but like finn said you have some background doing this huh

[StanSP]

@Milo

Did you appeal with the TDS about the deposit? Usually they would allow the landlord to keep the deposit if they have breached the tenancy agreement. What was the reason for the eviction?

 

Local authorities will always advise that I'm afraid until the actual eviction is carried out. It means less officially homeless people and means they don't have to pay out on temporary accommodation while they still have somewhere to live. 

[Tuna]

Door to door folk who leaflet and/or knock on your door asking to do your paving, cut your trees etc...

 

Seriously, go away mate! Everyone needs to earn a living but If I will decide when/if I want any work done and will choose who I want to do the job.

[Alf Bentley]

2 minutes ago, Tuna said:

Door to door folk who leaflet and/or knock on your door asking to do your paving, cut your trees etc...

 

Seriously, go away mate! Everyone needs to earn a living but If I will decide when/if I want any work done and will choose who I want to do the job.

 

In a similar vein, door-to-door (or phone) canvassers who start off by asking "How are you today?" etc.

You're not my mate. You don't know me. You have no interest in how my day has been. This is blatantly a manipulative tactic to reel me in. In reality, it guarantees rejection from me (presumably it works with others?).

 

If I'm not busy and someone knocks at the door and explains in a straight way what they're selling, I'll at least listen to them.

A few days ago one of those ex-offenders who go door-to-door selling household goods knocked. He was straight about why he was there - to sell his goods - and he got an overpriced sale out of me, as he had something I wanted and it seemed a good cause. If he'd started off by asking how my day had been, I'd have made my excuses and he'd have got no sale.

[Milo]

1 hour ago, StanSP said:

Did you appeal with the TDS about the deposit? Usually they would allow the landlord to keep the deposit if they have breached the tenancy agreement. What was the reason for the eviction?

 

Local authorities will always advise that I'm afraid until the actual eviction is carried out. It means less officially homeless people and means they don't have to pay out on temporary accommodation while they still have somewhere to live

Apparently they haven’t breached the tenancy agreement! They were evasive in the extreme and made it impossible to serve the notice or get in contact with them. They even turned down alternate accommodation from the local council, prefering to stay where they were...!! 

 

We’ve been advised not to challenge it as it’s unlikely to be successful.

 

Tenants claiming housing benefit, disability benefit, don’t work and are untouchable. (And no, it wasn’t me who rented the place to them!). 

 

I'm a generally passive chap, but coming up against a system that protects parasites like this is quite testing. We’ve had to deal with the financial consequences and some fairly stressful emotional episodes as well...and have not been able to move house until all of this has been resolved. 

 

I look forward to bumping into them at some stage in the future. 

 

 

Edited 18 January 2018 by Milo

[Mike Oxlong]

Cars that have “Powered By Fairy Dust” written on them

 

Not true. 

Edited 19 January 2018 by Mike Oxlong

[Trav Le Bleu]

People who reply to a question by saying "so".

 

It's either a conjunction people, which means it needs a previous statement, or it's a comparative adverb, which again, means it needs a previous statement. It doesn't belong at the start of a sentence, unless you're asking a question.

 

So, what does everyone else think?

[Beliall]

So what?

[Rogstanley]

[shawy2510]

On 18/01/2018 at 12:28, Milo said:

Apparently they haven’t breached the tenancy agreement! They were evasive in the extreme and made it impossible to serve the notice or get in contact with them. They even turned down alternate accommodation from the local council, prefering to stay where they were...!! 

 

We’ve been advised not to challenge it as it’s unlikely to be successful.

 

Tenants claiming housing benefit, disability benefit, don’t work and are untouchable. (And no, it wasn’t me who rented the place to them!). 

 

I'm a generally passive chap, but coming up against a system that protects parasites like this is quite testing. We’ve had to deal with the financial consequences and some fairly stressful emotional episodes as well...and have not been able to move house until all of this has been resolved. 

 

I look forward to bumping into them at some stage in the future. 

 

 

Not sure how it works but the can't pay we will take it away program always has tennants staying put as they have been told to wait but as soon as they have a writ from high court they have to get out. Maybe thats a possibility?

Edited 20 January 2018 by shawy2510

[Rogstanley]

Tbh it’s quite right that tenants should be well protected otherwise the reality is that many of them would be made homeless by unscrupulous landlords. It’s much more important to protect the rights of tenants than it is to help landlords make lots of hassle free profit. If you don’t like the rules of the game then stop playing. There’s plenty of other ways to invest your money.

[Strokes]

13 minutes ago, Rogstanley said:

Tbh it’s quite right that tenants should be well protected otherwise the reality is that many of them would be made homeless by unscrupulous landlords. It’s much more important to protect the rights of tenants than it is to help landlords make lots of hassle free profit. If you don’t like the rules of the game then stop playing. There’s plenty of other ways to invest your money.

And tbf, the house is probably worth an additional 10-15k in them 18months he has been trying to get them out. So probably not as out of pocket as you might think.

[Beliall]

Who's still reading this thread in 2018?

[Buce]

8 minutes ago, Beliall said:

Who's still reading this thread in 2018?

 

You, apparently.

[Milo]

5 hours ago, shawy2510 said:

Not sure how it works but the can't pay we will take it away program always has tennants staying put as they have been told to wait but as soon as they have a writ from high court they have to get out. Maybe thats a possibility

Cheers - they’re out now. They are threatening legal action if they don’t get their deposit back...even though they’ve refused to leave for a year and cost me the best part of a grand in eviction processes. 

 

And the law is on their side! 

 

Comical. 

[Free Falling Foxes]

Litter. I wish I could stop myself challenging people who cause it - you only get abuse. Note I didn't say drop it. Passed some cvnt who finished his beer then threw the can over a fence. There was a bin not 10 paces away. 

Edited 21 January 2018 by Free Falling Foxes

[Carl the Llama]

This sort of 'news' story.  Within the first few sentences it invokes sexism as a chief problem to address but provides only anecdotal evidence (much of which sounds more like anti-cyclist aggression than sexism) and unsubstantiated assumptions to back that up while citing almost decade-old figures from a 2013 article about a 2009 survey which makes no mention of sexism being a key demotivating factor...

 

Though I suppose it's not all bad if somebody reading it gets encouraged to dust their bike off for a ride.

[Milo]

On 20/01/2018 at 07:26, Rogstanley said:

Tbh it’s quite right that tenants should be well protected otherwise the reality is that many of them would be made homeless by unscrupulous landlords. It’s much more important to protect the rights of tenants than it is to help landlords make lots of hassle free profit. If you don’t like the rules of the game then stop playing. There’s plenty of other ways to invest your money.

Ummm, not really. If I want to rent out a property I shouldn’t be penalised in law when I want to end the tenancy and have the place back. 

 

If you rent, you are always going to have to leave sometime - the place doesn’t belong to you. 

 

Just fvck off nicely when you are asked. Not too much to ask, is it. 

 

Anyway - sorted now

[Rogstanley]

24 minutes ago, Milo said:

Ummm, not really. If I want to rent out a property I shouldn’t be penalised in law when I want to end the tenancy and have the place back. 

 

If you rent, you are always going to have to leave sometime - the place doesn’t belong to you. 

 

Just fvck off nicely when you are asked. Not too much to ask, is it. 

 

Anyway - sorted now

Tenants have my full support in these matters. If you didn't understand or fully appreciate the relevant laws and risks then that's nobody's fault but your own I'm afraid.

[Carl the Llama]

40 minutes ago, Milo said:

Ummm, not really. If I want to rent out a property I shouldn’t be penalised in law when I want to end the tenancy and have the place back. 

 

If you rent, you are always going to have to leave sometime - the place doesn’t belong to you. 

 

Just fvck off nicely when you are asked. Not too much to ask, is it. 

 

Anyway - sorted now

6 minutes ago, Rogstanley said:

Tenants have my full support in these matters. If you didn't understand or fully appreciate the relevant laws and risks then that's nobody's fault but your own I'm afraid.

It's tricky.  Most rental contracts have a notice period for letting the other party know you don't wish to maintain the contract so obviously a landlord's going to get the hump when that period passes, they haven't got their property back and law enforcement won't/can't help them.

 

On the other hand if you enshrine in law the forced removal of persons after this period to an alternative lodging then you're on the slippery slope to ghettoisation of undesirables.

Edited 22 January 2018 by Carl the Llama

[leicsmac]

3 hours ago, Carl the Llama said:

It's tricky.  Most rental contracts have a notice period for letting the other party know you don't wish to maintain the contract so obviously a landlord's going to get the hump when that period passes, they haven't got their property back and law enforcement won't/can't help them.

 

On the other hand if you enshrine in law the forced removal of persons after this period to an alternative lodging then you're on the slippery slope to ghettoisation of undesirables.

Yeah, it's a tricky one.

 

TBH though in cases like this where a fundamental human right is involved I'd rather some people play the system (as these tenants have done) than risk anyone being homeless through unscrupulous landlording regs.

[SystonFox]

On 21/01/2018 at 00:07, Free Falling Foxes said:

Litter. I wish I could stop myself challenging people who cause it - you only get abuse. Note I didn't say drop it. Passed some cvnt who finished his beer then threw the can over a fence. There was a bin not 10 paces away. 

Admit it though, it’s loads more fun throwing the can over a fence right?

[Jattdogg]

2 hours ago, SystonFox said:

Admit it though, it’s loads more fun throwing the can over a fence right?

Would have been more fun if he had thrown the cvnt over the fence