A landlady has lost her former home after renting it out to tenants whose references – carried out by an agent – did not reveal their former track record.
Yvonne Finberg is now warning other landlords to be extremely careful over references, and to ensure that they are genuine.
She endured a six-month battle against a serial offending tenant, who was eventually evicted.
However, the ordeal cost her £7,000, leaving her unable to pay the mortgage.
Paul Shamplina, of Landlord Action, which eventually secured possession of the property, said: “It highlights once again the crucial need to carry out thorough tenant referencing to avoid falling victim of unscrupulous tenants and the consequences if you don’t.”
In August 2010, Mrs Finberg went to live with her mother and used a local letting agent to rent out her two-bedroom apartment in Barnet.
After paying two months’ rent upfront, the tenant failed to make any further payments and went about making ‘decorative’ changes to the property without permission, even though it stated in the agreement that this was not permitted.
Mrs Finberg said: “He painted walls and odd cupboard doors, took down radiators, ripped out a sink detaching a waste pipe and removed much of my furniture, which was then dumped in the garden to rot in the winter weather conditions.”
Having used an agent, Mrs Finberg was confident that the tenant-checking process would be carried out thoroughly, ensuring all identification and previous references were valid. It later emerged in court that the tenant had ‘form’.
Shamplina said that gaining possession was difficult: “Discretionary grounds for possession such as this, where the landlord seeks possession on the grounds of ill-treatment to their property, are more difficult as it is up to the courts to decide.
“Once the tenant was also in arrears, we had to wait two months, but at this point we served a section 8 notice seeking possession of the property. Unsurprisingly, the notices were ignored by the tenant.”
At the first hearing last month, the tenant counter-claimed against Mrs Finberg on the ground of disrepair, claiming that he was saving the rent payments, but not passing them on due to the state of the property.
Shamplina said: “Dealing with counter claims increases legal costs and delays the claim process. In this case, court was adjourned until April, at which point further evidence was presented which demonstrated that previous references were falsified (including employment and tenant references) and the tenant had previously been evicted from a property in the area for similar reasons.
“Unfortunately not only were the references not checked properly by the agent, but the contract did not have a six-month break clause to end the tenancy earlier. We won the case and successfully managed to gain possession of the property, but sadly, for Mrs Finberg the suffering is irrevocable.
“With rent arrears in excess of £7,000, she was unable to pay the mortgage and lost her home, could not afford to move anywhere else and her property has suffered an incredible amount of damage.”
Mrs Finberg said: “This has affected every element of my life, leaving me with clinical depression and being subsequently signed off work.
“I have learnt from my mistakes but I cannot stress enough to other landlords, the importance of carrying out thorough referencing checks, meeting with the person face to face, and taking out insurance to protect yourself, so that if the worst happens, you are covered.”
The agent concerned did reimburse Mrs Finberg, but she said that, as a novice landlord, she was unaware that letting agents were not regulated.
.png)
Comments
As the Property was her sole residence she should have issued a section 21 notice not a section 8 Notice. Section 21 is a Mandatory Ground for possession and the Court would have had no choice but to grant an immediate possession order. A section 21 notice is given to the Tenant at the inception of the initial contract, warning them that the property is the sole & primary residence of the Landlord. Therefore the Landlord can implement this as soon as they require the property returned.
a bad tenant has caused a massive loss to Mrs Finberg. The law is staked against the landlord. There is virtually no hope of recovering the money from the tenant because of our laws and Shelter agravates the situation by assiting these tenants to manipulate the laws. Shelter is a political organisation pretending to be Charitable Body. It just hates private landlord and uses its power to undermine private landlord at every opportunity.
Landlords can help, my asking the rent to be paid by Standing Order. This way referencing prospective tenants is a little easier. The reference should be landlords name and road name,
I have seen forged bank statements.... I was annoyed the agency did n't spot it, even though they charged the tenant £200 for referencing.
What out some letting agents will not give the tenants references. So you don't have payslips, bank statements, landlord reference....
When are the authorities going to realise one big thing.
THE LANDLORD OWNES THE PROPERTY !
If something whatever it is is owned by somebody it is theirs end of story, that does not seem to come into it.
Too much of this and many landlords will start investing their money elsewhere and then of course good and bad tenants alike will be really badly effected.
'The agent concerned did reimburse Mrs Finberg'
Now that has GOT to be a result! I love a happy ending.
This is the future. Shelter have sucessfully campaigned the Scottish Government to outlaw tenant referencing fees which will be illegal from 30 th November in Scotland. They are now aggressively campaigning England & Wales. Watch this space.
I am sorry for this lady. I recently went through a gruelling 10 month process of eviction and have suffered a loss of £10k. There was also a lot of administrative bungling by the CC. Unfortunately the media will not highlight rogue tenants but would have given great publicity if it was the other way round.There needs to be a register of rogue tenants and landlords.
I am sorry for this lady. I recently went through a gruelling 10 month process of eviction and have suffered a loss of £10k. There was also a lot of administrative bungling by the CC. Unfortunately the media will not highlight rogue tenants but would have given great publicity if it was the other way round.There needs to be a register of rogue tenants and landlords.
Bullsh!t this story!
There are loads of good lettings agents in North London. Why did she pick an incompetent one? Price? Lesson to be learned - only use an ARLA agent.
Also there are holes in the story here. Was it a working radiator ripped out? Throwing out the furniture means presumably replacing it with new at the tenant's expense. Doesn't sound right to me.
Also a two-bed flat in Barnet has got to be worth £150k. How much did she actually lose here over and above the £7k? Also can't she sue the tenant post-eviction. Long shot I know, but occasionally works.
Just playing Devil's Advocate.
Good advice from Gareth
It is amazing that solicitors advise their clients to contact a existing landlord for a reference.
In the above story you can see how expensive it is to remove a bad tennant some landlords will be tempted to polish references to get rid of a poor tennant or tarnish to keep a good one.When it is pointed out that they would be better off speaking to a old landlord and sitting down to a cup of coffee with the possible tennant they have become quite annoyed !
also for GODS SAKE PAY THE LEGAL INSURANCE PREMIUM !
We have the name of the victim but not the names of the perpetrators of the crime, despite the fact there is evidence of their wrongdoing.
LRS and Tenant ID type services is a MUST. Also request a reference from the 2nd but last landlord (although the bad tenant would probably lie or not tell you the information in the first place) since they will more often tell you the truth.
Always get a guarantor and then buy rent guarantee and legal protection insurance.
If your property is empty during tenancies, contact me and I'll show you where you can, for £40, buy a squatters protection policy to evict squatters if you did find yourself in that unfortunate situation (it happens).
ARLA is not a magic potion that protects landlords against rogue agents. It merely reduces the pain because you MIGHT get some money back from an action of some kind against the agent. However always bear in mind ARLA does not guarantee the business acumen of the agent and so ARLA agents still go bust leaving havoc behind them.
something very similar has happened to me quite recently. my question is i am over 4,000 pounds in rent arrears. how do i go about recouping that sum of money. any kind of suggestions would be most welcoming.
I am new to the landlord industry how would an ARLA agent benefit me?
I would like to know whether the agent used a third party referencing or was they doing the reference themselves?
Presumably if the was using reputable referencing company they would have some kind of insurance cover against this.
I agree that a side story is that the landlord was not aware of what an ARLA agent would be able to bring to the table.
This is an argument for LRS and Tenant ID. The last landlord could have grassed up the tenants, but there could be some false names in play.
It’s a shame the landlady didn’t take any insurance. I believe she would also be better off with an ARLA
I personally think I would have tried to claim my property back wishing to occupy myself.
I also feel that perhaps a good representation to the lender would maybe be able to put the possession on hold long enough for the recompense to pay the arrears. I personally wonder if there was permission to let?
To conclude a bad tenant – no ARLA – bad agent – bad possession fight – no insurance – she has be extremely unfortunate.
This story is so sad but could happen to anyone at the same time. If I was in Mrs Finberg position I am not sure what I would do.