UK Landlord Forum / Life

I am still having problems with same tenant as previously. 1st rent was paid Jan 5th in advance . Second rent was 23 days late on 28th Feb. He still hasn't moved in but says he will on March 1st (today) as yet no sign of moving in but weekend is coming.
This property is let through an agent who shared a copy of the contract with me. I was impressed and thought it was comprehensive so agreed to go ahead.

It said in the contract: Forfeiture provision ...the Landlord may apply to the court for repossession if the tenant does not pay the rent within 14 days  of the due date.
So when I queried this the agent said the law was 2 months in arrears. So why 14 days in the contract?

The contract also says that (the named tenant) is the only permitted adult occupier but the tenant now says his girlfriend will be moving in with him. Agent says this is ok

The property is furnished but the tenant says he will move the furniture out to make room for his own furniture. The contract says he can't without written permission from the landlord but the Agent says this is a reasonable thing for him to do.

Because he has not yet moved in, the property will have been empty for 60 consecutive days early next week which makes my landlord insurance void. I have explained this to the Agent but he says the tenant is entitled to do this.

I have to ask  -  what use is a contract?

More to the point,what use is an agent? The tenant should have said his girlfriend was moving in,and she could have been checked out and added to the tenancy agreement.He should have said he intended bringing his own furniture,and got your permission for your stuff to be moved.I no longer give consent to this,after a tenant put my new sofa in his Dad's shed,with cobwebs and leaking roof.Is this full agent management,or are you handling it? Either way,time to assert yourself.Has he paid the late rent yet? 

Agreed on the fact that your Agent seems to be confused as to who is paying his wages. 

Some Agents do this... they get confused... they think that they're there for the best interests of the Tenant, they're not. They're not even split. They're acting for the Landlord.

Is it OK for a Tenant to have guests... but not move other people in. This is a red line. ASTs are useful, because they illustrate what is expected from each party... it's a document people read, then sign, and you then hope they adhere to. Normally this is fine. When Tenants (or Landlords) decide to explicitly go against the terms of an agreement it can get difficult. But my own experience tells me, clearly, that this is not the norm. What you are experiencing is not the norm... sadly, you appear to have an Agent who is not working for you in your best interests... as I say, they appear confused. It is true that some things are up for negotiation, and even renegotiation, and I have definitely moved furniture out and in of properties for Tenants when they make a reasonable request. Reasonableness goes both ways, of course.

Letting unfurnished, apart from specific special properties - like apartments that are let to students (one of my examples), is the best way to go... no-one really wants what is often the Landlord's old tat they didn't want themselves, right? It's reasonable to not want to be saddled with someone's cast-offs. When I'm asked to move an item if it goes into my SUV I'll just take it and store it, but if it needs a Man with a Van I ask for the Tenants to pay that cost (out and back in) - not one has ever demurred.

Hippogriff and Heavykarma - Thanks for your input. This 'ex-con' tenant that the agent has installed is going to be a nightmare, I can tell. Trouble is I dont want to upset him, he could just trash the house and disappear. Next rent is due on 14 th March (he has asked for date to be moved from 5th pcm and paid an appropriate interim sum to move it which I have yet to see) I am new to this landlord thing and feel I have been tricked. Im sure the agent didnt do proper checks - I went on Facebook and looked at tenants profile and it told me all I needed to know I didnt want him, sadly too late! No sign of moving in yet but he has put a few 'bits' in the garage so has taken possession. Will update on 14th or before if I need to 'vent my wroth' Thanks for help (and for listening)

Some tenancy contractual terms have no effect while the tenancy is assured, but essential if it ever becomes a common law tenancy. Some are in there because the law requires it to. An example is:

Quote from: Sam Preston on March 01, 2019, 06:01:31 PM
It said in the contract: Forfeiture provision ...the Landlord may apply to the court for repossession if the tenant does not pay the rent within 14 days  of the due date.
So when I queried this the agent said the law was 2 months in arrears. So why 14 days in the contract?

There have to be a forfeiture or reentry clause if the landlord are to use s8 notice during the fixed term. The details of the clause itself have no effect if the tenancy is assured, but important if it's not.

On the other hand, many tenancy contract clause exist because bad drafting.