The flat finally sold a few weeks ago. The new owner has long since changed the locks and is in the process of renovating the flat. No doubt he has needed a skip and will have to fumigate the property. The last time we set foot in the flat, there were swarms of flies in the kitchen due to the decaying rubbish Julie had left there.

We just feel relieved that the flat is no longer our concern.

We were so extremely patient with Julie while she was our tenant. Every time she sabotaged something within the flat, we just quietly fixed the problem and encouraged her to get things sorted in there. But she is a destructive and fundamentally dirty person, so after several attempts at putting right what she damaged, there came a point when we realised that you just can't help some people. Furthermore why should we spend hundreds of pounds paying for tradesmen when she wouldn't help herself.

She moved into a newly renovated flat that had no problems whatsoever and destroyed it with her filth and drinking habits. It still astounds me that she wants to set such an example to her daughter. An immoral liar, Julie is the type of person who will never amount to anything in life-she is one of life's spongers. How does it make YOU feel, knowing that your taxes go to fund losers like her?

If you are a landlord in South Somerset, Julie is renting another flat not far from (what was) ours. If you recognise yourself, be afraid. You have gained the original tenant from hell. We didn't give her a reference, so if you have one in your possession, look at it again. It will be a false one, likely done by a pal of Julie's. Did you follow it up by calling the 'landlord'? If you did, you would have spoken to that pal, because you sure didn't speak to us. Scum doesn't disappear, it just stagnates in a different location.

Don't have nightmares, just evict her.

Comments

I thought you might like to see pictures of the disgusting state of some of the rooms showing how Julie has left them. We took loads of photographs of every room in the property for proof and I showed them to my parents today. Of course they had seen the property immediately after we had renovated it and so were horrified at the pictures showing just how appalling it looks now. My father commented that the flat now looked like 'a squat'. Click on the pictures for a larger image and my comments.

This immoral and slutty excuse for a member of the human race is now living in someone else's private rental. I pity them.

Comments

Our buyer (who agreed to take on the eviction process as part of the purchase price) took Julie to court. The judge awarded in our favour and she was supposed to be out by the 31st October 2007. However she appealed against this and it was necessary for me to attend court with a solicitor-I had to go because we are still the legal owners at this time because the buyer's mortgage lenders will not allow completion of the sale until she is out of the property. (This is because she claims Housing Benefit and it is against their lending criteria when a tenant claims Housing Benefit).

The court was a farce. I went armed with sheaths of paperwork for my solicitor as he had asked me to bring anything that would discredit Julie. I spent half an hour with him before the case to prepare. Julie had come up with various different reasons why she should be allowed to remain in the property until January: these included her concerns that her daughter would be unable to get to school (this from the Mother who preferred to stay in bed until midday rather than drive her daughter to school), the fact that she could only have emergency accommodation in a town far from the property (whose fault is that, idiot?), that she should get her deposit returned under the new scheme (her tenancy pre-dates the scheme. Did she not have even the basic intellect to think to check this out?) and that my husband had physically attacked her when we went to the flat with the surveyor (as if he would attack her in front of a witness anyway. She never fails to surprise me with the levels of her stupidity).

However when the time came to enter the court, the usher informed us that the 'other party has failed to turn up'. We spent five minutes with the judge who declared the case "struck out" on account of her failure to show. This was the only legal recourse open to him under the circumstances and so her eviction date of 31st October remained.

However she was clearly still in the property after this date. My husband happened to be in the village where the flat is located and so popped to the flat. Julie's former boyfriend (who she moved into the flat with originally) suddenly materialised. He had obviously seen my husband arrive and was able to walk to the flat from nearby. He asked whether husband was going to change the locks (he wasn't) because (he claimed) Julie was definitely going to be out by the end of that weekend. Husband asked whether they were back together again. He reluctantly admitted that they were.

A few days after that weekend, we let oursleves into the flat. It was still filled with her clutter but she is definitely not living in there. Furthermore she has totally trashed the property. The expensive electric fire that we fitted has been wrenched off the wall and broken along with the wooden mantelpiece and fire surround. She has even pulled the tiles off the wall. Various fixtures and fittings have been stolen including a mirror that was over the fireplace, a door, two electric radiators and fuses from the electric meter so that it is impossible to turn the electric on. She has even graffiti'ed abuse on the wall. She has left bags of rubbish everywhere, including some in the kitchen that have decaying food in them. She has left a fridge freezer that also has rotten food inside. What a filthy person she is, what an example to set to her daughter.

The police cannot take action against the theft or criminal damage. We can only claim as a civil case in a court. We won't bother. There is more than one way to skin a cat........

The council have told me that she hasn't given them a definite date of leaving the flat either, even though they have written to her twice. However they did tell me that she has put in a claim (as a single parent) for Housing Benefit for another property. Dear oh dear Julie. Not a smart move.

So at the moment we legally cannot change the locks. The bailiffs are due shortly and then we can complete with the sale. Presumably Julie thinks she is deliberately costing us by what she is doing with her delaying tactics. Well, I'm sorry to disappoint you love but it is the new buyer you are costing now.

Watch this space.

Comments

We have had a personal crisis of a totally different kind here at home so I have not been blogging for a few days but here is an update.

We have decided to sell the flat to one of those people that buy at a discount in exchange for a very fast sale. I have been in discussions with a chap who is interested and it looks like things are starting to move.

He made us two offers: one price with J out altogether (which would mean we couldn't sell for weeks) and another offer (obviously less!) with J still in and he will take over the eviction process from where we have left off.

After much discussion, we have decided that we will sell the flat with her in and let him have the hassle of taking her to court and getting bailiffs involved. Yes, we will get less for the sale of the flat but weighing it all up, we feel it is something we need to do. With our other crisis to deal with, J and her petty, pathetic games are the last thing we need.

He WILL continue to evict her as I have been totally honest about the situation with her and he doesn't want her as his own tenant. His aim will be to clean the flat up and put a tenant of his own in there. So J will still end up homeless.

Financially it is probably a necessity too because since the Housing Benefit stopped the rent, we have slipped behind with the mortgage. Arrears have built up and with the threat of repossession, it makes sense to sell. We will have some equity so won't be out of pocket. We just won't make as much of a profit as we could have had we sold it tidied up. But when we weigh up the court costs of removing J, it evens out along the way.

Funnily enough I phoned the Housing Benefit people and told them that J was definitely still in the flat so now they have agreed to restore the rent. How bizarre it all is!

It is my hope that the sale will proceed okay. The buyer seems a decent enough guy so I'm not worried about him backing out. But I am worried about the survey that his mortgage lender will obviously require. Since J has 'trashed' the flat, I am scared that the surveyor will not recommend it to the mortgage lender. But we will have to wait and see on that one.

As the sale is supposed to go through in about a month, I hope this ordeal will soon be over.

And I can reveal J's name to the world.

Comments

She is still there. All of the windows were open and he saw a hand chucking stuff out of the kitchen window. I could have cried when he told me.

Ought to mention here that one of the things the couple in the flat below complained about was J's extraordinary habit of lobbing teabags out of her kitchen window. They would find teabags on their kitchen windowsill on a daily basis. At the time we were told this, we went to the side of the block of flats and sure enough, there were hundreds of used teabags on the grass beneath her window. And the couple in the flat below were able to show us several teabags sitting on their sill.

So therefore when my husband saw a hand throwing something out of the kitchen window, it is clear that not only is J still in situ, but the dirty bint is still chucking teabags out of the window...for whatever reason she feels the need to do so.

Can't really focus at the moment so will sleep on the situation and work out what to do for the best tomorrow.

But in the meantime my head hurts from the pressure of it all.

Comments

I've just remembered what else my husband said to me regarding J and whether or not she will leave.

It is his opinion that she will want to avoid being pursued by the owner/landlady of the flat beneath ours for the damaged ceiling caused by J's (firstly) leaking washing machine then (secondly) by her deliberate sabotage. Also we ourselves could reasonably pursue her for the damage she has caused in the flat, especially with regards to the sabotage.

She knows she will be held liable so my husband thinks that J will want to avoid any of us knowing where she is going. This way neither the landlady of the flat beneath or us could pursue her for financial compensation. Her deposit will not be returned to her in view of the damage she has caused but it won't be sufficient to compensate us totally for the things she has done.

She will know this and will no doubt not expect her deposit to be returned to her. So therefore my husband thinks she will prefer to go leaving no forwarding address (especially as it seems likely that she will have debts she will want to leave behind). She won't return our keys this way but she will assume, rightly, that we will change the locks anyway.

Oh, how I hope he is right. And there can't be many wives saying that about their spouses!

Comments

You must be so hopeful right now thinking that the nightmare might soon be over. I really am rooting for you although I know that an unpleasant clean-up awaits you. Still, it'll be great to get your place back.

Thank you Stephen for your kind thoughts. I have to admit that now I am feeling very anxious. The final eviction date is midnight today, the 1st of August. My stomach is tied up in knots so I try not to think about whether or not J has gone. But when the thought slips back into my mind, I feel distinctly queasy.

I so hope that J will just go but I am really afraid that she won't and we will be forced to instigate proceedings. And we just can't afford that. We have had to stop the mortgage payments on the property because now the council have suspended her Housing Benefit, we really can't meet the mortgage payments. We had to make a choice and so consequently we have chosen the house we live in...the roof over our heads. Thus we will now be in arrears with the flat.

If J leaves today, like she is meant to, we can sell quickly and avoid potential repossession. If she drags it out by forcing us to take her to court.....well, the delay could spell disaster for us. And this is why my stomach is in knots.

My husband, usually the worrier between us, has taken the "que sera, sera" approach. He is point blank refusing to allow the flat or anything to do with it to impinge upon his thoughts. He prefers to worry instead about our business. I asked him what his thoughts were about repossession but he just shrugged and said that the lenders (of the mortgage for the flat) would be costing themselves more by forcing repossession when they know that we will be selling the property immediately it becomes empty.

But that doesn't stop me worrying. And feeling sick.

Comments

I was watching 'How clean is your house' last night and as with most episodes, I was appalled by the disgusting living conditions of the family featured. They had clutter and stuff everywhere-on the floors, surfaces and just about anywhere they could find a spot. They had to walk over piles of stuff just to walk around the house and the poor kids had to root through the clutter on the floor to find their school uniform. And as for the squalor and filth in the kitchen...

But then it suddenly occured to me that what I was seeing was exactly how our flat was the last time we saw it. Our dirty, lazy and slatternly tenant J had created the same conditions as those I was watching on my tv. And yet our flat had been so immaculate when we first let it to her.

This realisation that what I was watching wasn't just a distant tv programme with no reality to me, but in fact actually related exactly to our flat, made me feel very deflated.

And depressed.

Comments

Basically this is because J has told them that she hopes to be "out of the property by the end of the month" (meaning July). In order to avoid landlords being over-paid (heaven forbid!), this is their standard practice so that we (the landlords) are owed by the council rather than the other way round.

I was only thinking about this over the last couple of days anyway. Not the Housing Benefit-I mean I was thinking about J being gone from the property. Her notice expires on the 1st August so in theory we should be able to walk back into the property on the 2nd of August. If she hasn't gone, we would then have to take her to court which could take another 4-6 weeks and will cost us the court fees.

However, going on what she wrote in that text that I received from her (but which wasn't meant for me-click the Tag Text to read) and with what the Housing Benefit are saying, I hope it won't come to that and she will just go.

But I think I will contact the landlady from the flat below ours and ask her if there has been any movement from J; that is, has she been moving stuff out of the property? We have a garage beneath the flat that J had use of as part of her tenancy and I know for a fact that it was stuffed to the gunnels with clutter, so I would have thought that she must have made moves to clear that out at least.

Dare I be optimistic or am I heading for hassle? I so long for it all to be over.

Comments

I watched "Katie and Peter-The Baby Diaries" the other day. There was an upset in their household because their children's nanny had asked for time off to visit her father but it turned out that in fact she had gone off on a holiday to the Algarve.

This was discovered when she failed to come back for work when she was supposed to which left Katie in difficulties. Katie (aka Jordan) had work commitments but being heavily pregnant and with her other children to care for, she was finding it difficult to organise things without the nanny. Bless!

The upshot of this is that Katie was late for an interview on Radio 1 which so incensed the DJ, he point blank refused to interview her when she eventually did arrive. Furthermore he slagged her off on air. Actually I think he behaved very badly but that's not my point here.

The point is that Katie was so angry at the negative publicity she received, she decided to dispense with the nanny's services. So she went into the nanny's private cottage, which was in their grounds and was given to the nanny with her job, in order to pack her stuff into bin bags. It was while Katie was rifling through the nanny's belongings that she discovered that the nanny was actually in the Algarve and had lied to them as to her whereabouts.

Now this is the bit that puzzles me: do the rich and famous not have to abide by the same rules as the rest of us? While I can perfectly understand Katie's anger at the nanny's behaviour, what I can't understand is how she was able to just push the nanny immediately out of her home. Yes, the home was a cottage that belonged to the Andres and yes, it was 'tied'; that is, it went with the nanny's job. But surely, even after the nanny's instant dismissal, there should have been a period of notice before the nanny had to leave the cottage?

Furthermore, is it acceptable that Katie could just bundle the nanny's private possessions into bin bags? Surely this is a gross invasion of her privacy?

Goodness knows that if we could have, we would have bundled our tenant J's stuff into bin bags and left them on the street. But we are not allowed to, by law.

So how come Katie and Peter are able to do so? It doesn't make sense to me.

Comments

i do feel for you. my husband manages a portfolio for his boss and his
biggest problem is tennants who wreck the houses, but they tend to use
an agency to source tennants and secure a very large deposit in the
event of damage.

Whether or not to use a letting agency was something we thought long and hard about at the time we decided to let the flat. But what made our minds up was the experience of a work colleague of mine at the time.

Janet and her husband had bought a new-built property as an investment for their retirement. They used a well established letting agent in this area to deal with not just the sourcing and checking of their potential tenant, but also with the daily running of the tenancy. The costs of this 'full package' of tenancy management was horrific-I was astonished at the price they had to pay to the agent each month. But Janet and her husband were in their 50's and as such did not want the hassle of dealing with any aspect of the tenancy and so preferred to leave it in the hands of the letting agent.

The letting agent found a tenant who had impeccable references and who was financially solvent. The first two months passed fine. But then the tenant missed the third month's rent. When the tenant missed the fourth month's rent, the letting agent proceeded with an eviction notice on the grounds of non payment of rent. Because it takes time to get an eviction through the courts of law, by the time the tenant left the property, FOUR month's rent was outstanding.

It transpired that the tenant had been made redundant and so had been unable to keep up with the rent, something that the references or bank statements could not have possibly predicted. Furthermore the tenant was unable to catch up with the outstanding rent after leaving the property, even though the courts ordered them to repay it.

Therefore Janet and her husband-who let's not forget had to continue paying their mortgage regardless-were left seriously out of pocket. The standard deposit collected by the letting agent in the first instance was not enough to cover the outstanding rent and the letting agents (certainly in this case) had made sure that they were not liable for the rent as could be seen by the small print on Janet's contract with them. It was a no-win situation.

So this got me thinking: why should I bother to use an agent? Despite the huge fees they collect from the landlord, the landlord is still not protected from non-payment of rent. When Janet calculated what she had spent each month on the letting agent's fees and added it to what she had lost in outstanding rent, she had made a huge loss.

So I bought a book specifically intended for DIY landlords, which has been an excellent source of information. It even contained templates of all the forms necessary to a tenancy, bar the AST agreement form-I downloaded this from a solicitor's website (after paying for it). And the website Landlord Zone has been invaluable.

Like with Janet, our tenancy started off fine (for 18 months in our case) and things only went wrong when J's boyfriend left her. Even then it wasn't an immediate downslide. Her deterioration seemed to begin around October 2006 and seemed to coincide with her increased drinking.

So it seemed to me then-and still seems to me now-that using an agent is no guarantee against things going wrong. If a person is able to deal with the day to day running of the tenancy, I would still recommend doing it solo. I thoroughly checked J's (and her boyfriend's) references and everything stood up to scrutiny. So doing it solo is one area of the tenancy that I would not have changed even if I had known what the eventual outcome would be.

As for the amount of deposit, we followed the law as stated here on Landlord Zone:

The amount of the deposit should be a maximum of two months' rent. If the deposit is more than this amount it could in theory count as a premium and may give the tenant an automatic right to assign the lease without the landlord's consent.

As can be seen above, no more than two months should be taken but in the case of non-payment of rent or excessive damage (as in our case), this amount is far short of the costs that the landlord may be left with. And this is what's so unfair about the tenancy laws.

Thank you for your feedback DevilAngel. :-)

And also to Stephen: your brother's problems with his tenant seemed to begin with the tenant's personal change of circumstances in much the same way as it was with us and our tenant J. No landlord can possibly predict these things so here it stands that we (landlords) are all at risk from misbehaving tenants when events take a downturn for them.

Comments

I have had a visitor (Hello Stephen) who has written the following interesting points:

I could never be a landlord for this reason. The feeling that somehow the landlord ends up having to take responsibility for the tenant because the tenant doesn't want to.

So much easier said and done though!

You are exactly 100% right Stephen. I find it difficult to separate my head from my brain which probably accounts for why I'm not a millionaire! But I have taken the route of staying with my original stance, that is; I cannot retract my reasons for evicting J with the council. I have written to them and said so though I have not had an answer from them as yet.

My real difficulty has been my concern for J's daughter in all this as I feel she is the innocent victim. As a mother myself, it has given me some heart-tugging struggles of conscience. But I have sorted it out in my mind by reminding myself that J herself put her daughter in this situation-I did not. I would never have put my children in such a situation and I know that with total conviction.

I wish I could take my husband's 'ostrich' stance too but I'm unable to switch off in the same way as he does. However if I think about it too much, I feel like going to sleep and that's no good to anyone either!

But Stephen is right. To be successful as a landlord (or any business for that matter), a tough inner core of steel is required. I'm not sure that this can be learnt though because it would perhaps involve changing a person's personality to some degree.

I try to be shrewd within our other business (in our dealings with the public) but at the same time act in an ethical manner. It's a constant dilemma and the public don't make it any easier! But it's probably safe to say that I'm no Alan Sugar!

We all make our choices in life to some extent and J certainly made hers when she decided to trash our flat and behave in an anti-social manner. Nobody made her do that so therefore she has to live with the consequences.

Thank you for your feedback Stephen :-)

Comments

I mentioned something about the flat today to my husband and his answer was, "I don't care anymore about the flat. As far as I'm concerned, I never want to see the place again".

Actually I rather envied his ability to take this ostrich-like approach. I wish I could too. However I don't feel able to shut off from the problems with J and the prospect of what the flat will be like inside once we do manage to get in to it.

Our business is demanding for us both but my husband wants only to concentrate on that and ignore the flat. I think it is a defence mechanism for him but I did gently point out to him that he will eventually have to go to the flat again at some point, as he is joint owner with me. But until J is finally gone for good, he doesn't want to think about it. I don't really blame him.

Previously, when J kept calling us to the flat to get repairs done, my husband would be extremely reluctant to go. And he embarrassed me on a few occasions when he failed to hide his dislike of J. In fact, she once jokingly said to me, "R** can't stand me, can he?". He was there at the time fixing the front door lock (that she had broken) so he clearly heard what she said. But he didn't say anything and just continued to glower. I saw her looking at him.

My husband doesn't usually act like this towards people, I hasten to add. Anyone who knows him will testify to him being an easy-going, affable type of guy who gets on with pretty much anyone.

But he couldn't hide his increasing dislike of J. She obviously annoyed him to such an extent, he wasn't able-or willing-to disguise it. It's actually out-of- character behaviour for him.

However, being an ostrich is not.

Comments

I've just read in today's paper that David and Victoria Beckham have moved to the USA. This actually made my day as they annoy me immensely. Her posturing and pouting actually seems very sad. Desperation seeps from every one of her pores.

There are a few other people I wish they had taken with them, though. Of course top of my list would be 'tenant from hell' J.

But I would also like to see the back of Cherie Blair (it's so obvious where the creators of Wallace and Gromit got their inspiration from!)-I want to chew the skirting boards every time I see her or hear her speak. What exactly is she for?

Please America, adopt Jonathon Ross. Or Russell Brand. Or Jade Goody. Oh and that 'orrible bloke who fancies himself as a ladies man on Eastenders; you know, that Max Brannon bloke. I mean, as if! Most unlikely Lothario I've ever seen.

It may seem as if I've got rather side tracked here from my problems with J! But when problems weigh you down, it always pays to try and find the uplifting things in life. Which goes back round to the Beckhams moving to the States-see, there are good things happening!

Comments

Back two years ago, when J and her boyfriend first came to view the flat and to apply to be the tenants, I asked them what they did for a living. In J's case, she told me that she was temporarily not working but was definitely going to be looking for work in the near future. This wasn't a big issue then as her boyfriend's wages was enough to cover the rent at the time.

However J had also told me that she had had a very good job with a local radio station but she had been 'laid off'. She claimed that she had taken them to an industrial tribunal for unfair dismissal as she believed that they had dismissed her due to an incident that occured while she was there. She reckoned that she had been awarded damages and so had been awarded money from the court.

I'm not about to go into what that incident was as I don't feel it would be fair on the radio station. Given that J has proved that she is prepared to blatantly lie when she is upset with someone (as we know only too well), I have come to the conclusion that while the radio station probably did dismiss her, it is unlikely to be for the reason she gave me.

I would be inclined to believe that when they dismissed her (which could be for any number of reasons, including her work, timekeeping etc), she decided to get them back and so lied in order to take it to the tribunal. And yes, she probably did win damages.

Does my opinion sound harsh? I think not. As I said, I know she is prepared to lie when angry.

But the twist in the tail is that we-as a company-have had professional dealings with this particular radio station. And we know that they are lovely people working there. Furthermore they are a totally committed and professional team. Therefore I do not believe that this incident ever actually happened. It's my belief that it was probably a revenge claim to embarrass the radio station and was also a means of extorting money out of them (in damages).

And therein lies my opinion, for what's it worth.

Comments

I've just realised that one of the adverts here on my blog is for 'Tenant's Rights'. While I accept that the adverts are a necessary evil in order to keep the free blogs going, did they have to pick an advert for tenant's rights to go with my blog?

After all, my point in this blog is that tenant's are better protected than the landlords, for goodness sake. How about landlord's rights?

And how annoying on the part of the advertisers.

Comments

I have been thinking about how all this started. It was all because (like so many others) we couldn't afford to buy a property in the county of my birth, the county in which we lived, worked and our children went to school.

I remember reading somewhere that Dorset is the second most expensive place to buy property after London. I don't know whether that is true but I do know that we were in a quandary.

By my husband resigning his job on the farm, we would have been 'intentionally homeless' ourselves and would not have received any help from the council. But when we started looking at the prices of renting a 3-bed property in our area, it seemed like such a waste of money as the rental costs were so high.

We knew we couldn't afford to be too fussy and so consequently would have to move into a town. But we accepted this. Despite being used to living in the country (and me in particular as I was brought up on a dairy farm in the middle of a small hamlet), we were totally at ease with trying town life. Yes, we miss the open fields and peaceful quiet; yes, we have had to learn to adapt to having neighbours either side of us. But there were so many complications with renting. Some said no children (and we had two). Some said no pets (and we had a dog and a cat). So buying a place of our own was the only sensible option.

But if you were to ask me would I do all the same things again, my answer would be: mostly yes but we would have sold the flat rather than get a tenant. I regret that we have accumulated so much debt although on reflection I don't think we could have changed that. But there is nothing we can do about that except pay it back slowly but surely. It will take us years and it gets frustrating when we can't afford to buy things (for instance, new clothes become a luxury). But having a tenant is the ONLY thing I would have done differently.

Oh and we love our home and we have adapted to town life-it definitely has it's advantages!

Comments

Well, today I have finally written a reply to the council in response to their asking if I could 'retract' J's eviction.

Having thought about it carefully over the last few days, I have come to the conclusion that I cannot in all honesty consider any kind of retraction. When I consider the damage she has caused us, both emotionally and financially, I feel surely that she has feathered her own nest, so to speak. So I cannot worry about her future welfare. The fact that she will be considered 'intentionally homeless' is her own doing.

But I do feel that some people can't be helped. When J was unable to cope with the electricity board when they were taking loads of debt via her key meter, it was me that had to phone the electricity board (at my expense and time, mind!) to try and sort it all out. J just didn't seem to be able to cope with it at all and phoned me in tears. Frankly it wasn't my concern (as a landlord) but I felt sorry for her. So it was me that negotiated a far smaller amount of debt collection from her key meter and it was me that saw to it that that they acted immediately so she wasn't left without enough money to buy food.

Was she using me by playing on my sympathies? Rather looks like it now as she seems to find the money for other things.

Why did she not phone the electricity company herself? Why did she not have the strength of character to sort out her own problems? Does this make me a muppet? Definitely.

Comments

In a strange turn up of events, I have received a text on my mobile tonight from a number I don't recognise but I can make an educated guess that it was sent from J to a third party. However it ended up coming to me by accident. My husband wondered if it was a deliberate slip but judging by the contents of the text, I think not. Plus, my name begins with a 'C' and the text was addressed to someone called Chris, so I think it was definitely a mistake on her part. Please note that in the text, her name is written in full.

This is what it says:

Hi Chris, j**. Sorry havent been in touch earlier been waitin 4 ring back from housing but no joy. However i can scrape together 2nd month up front.So will be two from housing, then one from me. Sorry thats best can do. maybe we should all meet up tomorrow early evening to discuss. U can get me on this no tonight. Bye for now j**

Any thoughts?

Comments

I have had a letter from the council regarding J's eviction. When the Housing Officer phoned me and asked me why I was evicting J, he asked me if I could put my comments in writing. So I sent him a copy of the report that I had had to create for the solicitor.

Now they have sent me this letter that asks me to consider 'retracting' my reasons for evicting her and would I consider allowing her to remain in the property for longer than the 1st August deadline, in order to avoid the possibility that they will be obliged to provide J with 'emergency and temporary accommodation'? I am guessing that this letter is a standard format, sent to every landlord when a tenant makes an application to the council for housing. But even so, how can I possibly 'retract' after everything J has done?

I fully understand that by formally evicting J because of her sabotage and bad behaviour and making the council aware of the fact, they consider her to have made herself 'intentionally homeless'. Therefore they are under no obligation to provide her with a home except for emergency B&B for a temporary period of three weeks only. This is how the council have explained it to me, leaving me in no doubt that J would be basically stumped unless she could magic up enough money for a deposit for a private rental. And this seems unlikely.

I have considered the effect this could have on her daughter who actually seems to be far more mature than her mother. But both the solicitor and various family and friends have said to me 'it's not your problem'. As they have all pointed out to me, J herself didn't exactly consider her daughter's welfare in all this, so why am I worrying about it?

Landlords are often given bad press and are made out to be some remote Dickensian character. I hope this blog of mine redresses the balance a little. We are not all heartless. And more often than not, we end up as the injured parties, with the law allowing it to happen.

Comments

Well, the cold has really well and truly set in. I can't remember the last time I had a cold but I believe this one got me because I have felt so run-down lately.

I am incredibly bad tempered and have a very short fuse. I have warned my husband not to annoy me tonight while we are working. This is because we use two-way radio for our business and as such we have to conduct ourselves in a respectable manner at all times. Ofcom can monitor the airwaves at any time and if they thought we were swearing, being abusive or just generally using the radio in an inappropriate manner, they can revoke our licence. So as I am at high risk of doing all three, I have told him not to upset me. Actually, this will be quite a tall order as I feel annoyed by just about anything at the moment and as we will be working until 4am, he has a long spell of walking on eggshells ahead of him.

As for our customers, they really should be similarly warned though of course they can't be. As a Saturday night, we will have the usual mix of drunken revellers and hideous bad behaviour that we have come to expect in this trade. Usually I am incredibly polite; in fact, one customer told us that we are the politest firm of our type in our home town. Luckily the customers can't see me; they only get to talk to me over the phone. This is just as well as I could scare them with my 'bulldog chewing a wasp' face today! 

As for J, she has been very quiet lately. She hasn't requested any repairs so I guess she must be living with the breakdowns in the flat rather than risk allowing anyone in there. She can't use the hob at all which must surely be a nuisance but hey, it was her choice not to allow the electrician in to fix it.

Is it the lull before the storm, I wonder?

Comments

In old fashioned language, I am feeling 'liverish'. I think I might have a cold coming on which isn't great news. My head aches, my nose is snuffy, I have a sore throat, I'm tired and I am feeling extremely bad tempered.

Moreover I don't feel like talking to anyone. This is rather unfortunate because my role in our company is to answer the telephone, take bookings in the diary and arrange the schedules for the guys that work for us. As the weekends are our busiest time, not talking to anyone isn't really an option.

Some chocolate and a (DVD) episode of 'On the Buses' might help to improve things. Or failing that, I might have to search for that episode of 'Location, Location, Location' on the internet; you know, that one with Phil Spencer in the hot tub. That will take my mind off my cold........

Comments

As for our landlord at the time, he was a nice guy and gave us no trouble but neither did we give him any. In fact our son accidently kicked a ball through a window while we were there and smashed it. But we didn't go running to the landlord to fix it. We paid for it to be repaired ourselves as we considered the damage to be our doing, so to speak. This is a concept that J does not seem to understand.

I realise that there are many people claiming benefits who for one reason or another need to. My criticism of J is due to her making the benefits system a 'lifestyle choice' for herself. I see no reason why she cannot get herself a job now her daughter is 15 years old. In fact, my youngest son is 15 too and I work.

The irony of us working such long hours while she drinks, smokes, watches tv and sleeps is not lost on me. Lizzie Bardsley anyone ? 

Comments

I am struggling to see the funny side of life right now though usually I am a very optimistic person. We haven't taken a holiday for 18 months and now feel very run-down. Our business is going well-for which I am thankful-but as any self employed business owner will know, there just isn't a standard 39 hour working week.

Our debts are our own doing, we know that. We fully accept that we created them ourselves in our quest to buy our home and in no way do we hold J responsible for them. I want to make that absolutely and totally crystal clear.

But my point here is that with finances already stretched to breaking point, J's damage to the property (after we have already renovated it) and her deliberate sabotage with regards to the water leak, as well as the very real
probability that we will be forced to pay vast sums of money to take her to court fills me with dread.

We just wish now that we had sold the flat two years ago instead of taking a tenant. Hindsight is a wonderful thing but we never imagined that J would lose the plot like she has. We knew she was somewhat vacuous but we didn't realise she was verging on psychotic.

Here is the harsh reality-J spends her days sleeping in bed and her nights drinking and watching tv. She claims single parent benefits and shows no inclination to get a job, even though her daughter is now 15!

We, on the other hand, work long, long days (we don't get to bed until 4am on a weekend because of the nature of our business) and pay our way. We give-we hope-our sons a solid work ethic, demonstrating by example that we work hard for our living. Have we missed the point somewhere?

Interestingly, J told me a few months ago that she had spent £700 on a laptop for her daughter for Christmas. We don't spend anything like that between the two of our sons.

Makes you think, doesn't it?

Comments

I consulted a solicitor regarding J's eviction. I wondered whether we could get her out sooner using a Section 8 on the grounds of the damage she has caused as well as the nuisance to her neighbours.

The solicitor, who was actually very helpful and did not charge me for his telephone advice, told me that as the tenancy laws stand now, it is easier for the tenant than the landlord. He explained that a Section 8 could be contested by a tenant whereas the Section 21 I have already served her cannot.

We would risk spending vast sums of money, which frankly we haven't got, to take her to court and face the possibility of losing because a magistrate will defer it if a) they cannot see sufficient evidence and b) if the tenant counter claims.

I asked the solicitor why this should be when for instance we have the complaints from all of her neighbours as well as receipts for every single thing we have to rectify within the flat. Oh and let's not forget the fire brigade's report in which they have suggested that they suspect sabotage in the case of the water leak.

His answer was that if she contested it-which she is likely to do-and tells a pack of lies, she can automatically get Legal Aid. We, on the other hand, cannot. As landlords we are automatically precluded from Legal Aid, even if our income should be low enough, whereas every tenant can claim Legal Aid even if they are wealthy. How can this be? It's outrageous.

So therefore she will have nothing to lose by taking it all the way in a court of law.....but we will.

I appreciate the solicitor's help. He was very frank and helpful and did not try to exploit us by encouraging us to go straight to court in order to line his pockets. He was a credit to his profession.

So where does this leave us? Well, we have to wait for the natural expiry of the Section 21 which will be the 1st August. The solicitor tells me that a magistrate will not refuse an eviction on a Sec21 and we don't have to give a reason for wanting her out.

The downside is that it is a slow process and the likelihood is that she will not be gone by the 1st August. We will then be forced to take her to court anyway (at our expense, thereby stretching our already stretched finances) which will probably take another 4-6 weeks. If after that she still doesn't go, we would then have to apply for bailiffs, again at our expense.

Marvelous, just marvelous.

Comments

Our business involves keeping a daily diary-we couldn't function without the diary-and through our business we are in constant contact with not only the two full time guys who work for us but a continual stream of the general public. Our movements can be exactly recorded every day.

Furthermore if we are harassing her as she claims, how come she hasn't called the police yet? Just a thought.

Comments

Interestingly I am now receiving comments and feedback from people who have been reading this blog. I started to write this as a means of letting off steam and because it was cheaper than having therapy! So thank you to the kind souls who are writing messages of support, your kind words are much appreciated.

However I have had one message from a visitor who states and I quote, "drying clothes on radiators doesn't seem unreasonable, in fact, fairly normal behaviour, especially in a flat", unquote.

I would just like to say here that the electrician I spoke to regarding the THREE radiators that simultaneously broke down did not consider drying washing on these types of radiators as reasonable. J doing having done so is what caused all three radiators to burn out as they did. Furthermore, every radiator has a manufacturer's label stuck on which clearly states "DO NOT DRAPE ITEMS ON OR NEAR THESE RADIATORS DUE TO RISK OF FIRE".

Therefore J blatantly ignored the manufacturer's warnings. Surely it is only common sense to drape wet clothing on a clothes stand near to the radiators or use a tumble dryer (of which she does have one)?

Having said that, I have never owned a tumble dryer and rely on a combination of Mother Nature and an airing cupboard. Works for me.

Comments

A man from South Somerset District Council called me. He said he was a Housing Officer and was looking into J's application for a house. He asked me why we were evicting her so I told him exactly why.

He then said that what I was saying was the complete opposite of what J was saying. Apparantly she has told him that the flat is in a disgusting state (aint it just? And who's fault is that, madam?) and that she personally has had to pay for all repairs with her own money as we won't do anything.

I actually laughed when he told me this. I pointed out to him that we were the ones with every single receipt for repairs and maintenance done in the flat during her tenancy so how on earth was she planning on producing any receipts? Such a truly outrageous lie-I can't believe it.

She also asked the Housing Officer for her Housing Benefit to be paid to her from now on instead of us in order to 'pay back for all the repairs' she claims to have paid for. When she first told me that her boyfriend had left and she needed to apply for Housing Benefit, I had only agreed to it on the grounds that the HB was paid to us and not via her. I told the Housing Officer that if they agreed to pay her, we would never see the rent money. He explained that he had told J that they would not be able to change it and that she would have to see a solicitor for advice. 

Comments

Decided to send an electrician on the 18th May to make the hob safe until they could get an element in stock. Gave J 24 hours notice but she still refused to give electrician access to the flat. He had to come away without having managed to achieve anything. Got him to write 'Refused access' on his invoice in case of any risk from the hob. What more can I do?

Landlady of flat below, Ms B, contacted me on the 11th June to say that leaking had begun again and now the ceiling in her flat had collapsed. Water was now dripping at a fast rate. Ms B had approached our tenant regarding the leak but J was so abusive, police were called. However they refused to come out or get involved. Husband and I went to the flat with our keys, suspicious that J had reversed what the surveyor had fixed with regards to the washing machine. J would not allow us in and we could not gain access even with our keys.

Sent a handyman, Mr L, to the flat in the evening. J refused him access and swore at him very aggressively. She ranted at Mr L about her eviction notice but when he replied that he didn't know anything about that as all he wanted to do was sort the leak out, she screamed that 'the f** leak won't be stopped and will continue to leak until the day I leave'. I sent her a text message saying situation was dangerous and please could she allow him access. She replied by text that she wasn't letting anyone in to the flat at all.

I called the police myself the next morning as I was so worried at the damage that was being caused. Police were again reluctant to attend. I asked them about the leak being deliberately started and so therefore must be 'criminal damage'? I also pointed out that the surveyor had explained to me that the leak continuing in this way would pose a very real threat to not only J and her daughter, but also to the other residents of the building. Only then did they decide the fire brigade should be sent.

Fire brigade attended on the 13th June. They too could not get J to answer the door until they shouted that they would have to call the police if she did not allow them in. On eventually letting them in, J freely told them where the leak was coming from (the washing machine) but still would not agree to us gaining access to the flat in order to stop it. Fire brigade explained risks of water undermining safety of whole building and fire risk from water going onto electrics. They told J that if water did not stop, they would have the power to evacuate the whole building.

We were able to speak later to one of the fireman that attended the scene. He told us that tenant kept ranting about her eviction notice and so consequently he had written in his report that he had suspected 'deliberate sabotage'. He had also commented on the disgusting state of squalor in the flat. He told us that we are able to obtain a copy of their report.

At this stage we do not know what fresh damage has been wreaked from the new onset of water leaking from J's washing machine pipe. This gives us grave cause for concern as both the surveyor and the fire brigade have warned us that the water may have severely damaged the joists. As J refuses us any access to the property, we have not been able to check the damage or even whether the leak has stopped. It is our hope that the fire brigade have sufficiently frightened J into stopping the leak but we cannot be sure.

Comments

We had become tired at the rising costs of sending out various trades people for what appeared to be 'sabotage' so we decided to evict J and sell the flat.

However before we had a chance to do so, the landlady of the flat below ours, Ms B, contacted me and explained that our tenant was being a nuisance to all the others in the block. We had a catalogue of complaints from all residents including hoovering at 3am and throwing fireworks from the window of the flat into the car park area below.

Ms B also told us that water had been leaking from our flat down to her flat below and was damaging the ceiling. Ms B had first approached J to ask for the leak to be investigated but J became abusive and refused to assist. Ms B's husband later returned to ask J for our phone number but again J was abusive and point-blank refused to give him our number. It was J's daughter who eventually gave him our number.

I went to flat with Mr C, a surveyor. He discovered that leak was coming from the pipe supplying the washing machine. Washing machine was broken and had not been used for weeks; however it had not been 'de-commissioned' from water supply, hence water was continuing to feed into pipe but was not being used. Mr C turned off small tap on pipe to stop water supply to machine, dried area and waited for 10 minutes. Drip had definitely stopped.

We did not supply washing machine; it was put in by tenant so I explained that damage to flat below would be accountable to her. There was also significant damage to the under-sink area within our flat caused by the leak, which will necessitate not only a new kitchen cupboard but also new flooring.

Worth mentioning here that when Mr C pulled the washing machine away from the wall, a rotting chicken carcass was behind it. Another example of the squalor J has created.

J told us that electric hob had stopped working. Mr C thought element had probably burnt out.

It was on this day that I served J with a Section 21 Eviction Notice with Mr C as my witness (Wednesday 16th May 2007).

There had been a leaseholder's meeting held in April that Ms B had wanted us to attend due to J causing problems. She left a written invitation with J and asked her to pass it on to us. We never received it and so had not known of meeting.

However once Ms B had obtained our phone number and informed us of water leak, she was also able to invite us to a second meeting on Monday 21st May 2007. We subsequently attended and one of the items on the agenda was J's constant anti-social behaviour. Even the owners of the shop had experienced problems with J. She had intimidated them to such an extent, they no longer used the back entrance of their shop to unload their supplies but instead used the front, carrying their stock right through the shop.

After this meeting, Ms B invited us to survey the damage to the ceiling in her flat below ours. Meeting was five days after leak had been stopped and it was evident that ceiling was then dry and no further leaking was taking place. Visible damage had stopped at brown water stain and some peeling but had not broken plaster right through.

Comments