x

Luke Aaron

1956 Profile Views

About Me

my expertise in the industry

Luke's Recent Activity

The difference being that you pay your indemnity insurance. And you try your best not to need it. Tenants will not pay if it’s left to them, feel it’s a perfectly acceptable ‘cleaning policy’ to make thorough use of, and the LL is left trying to convince the insurer to pay out. £1,200pa seems perfectly reasonable. Try asking what some of societies poorest tenants pay for their latest designer breeds…£4k is nowhere near out of the question.

From: Luke Aaron 17 June 2022 10:17 AM

Presumably you’re Algarve-based? I’m currently here seeking my way out of the industry and the madness that is the UK…would you happen to have any tips on where to locate myself, please?

From: Luke Aaron 17 June 2022 10:08 AM

The rent is the least of the worries…will they guarantor all damages? If not, it’s a non-starter.

From: Luke Aaron 10 June 2022 10:14 AM

Theoretically, yes. But we all already know Govt. will make a complete mess of any new system. The Courts should be forced to clear cases in a matter of a couple of weeks, instead they’ll just add to the backlog.

From: Luke Aaron 11 May 2022 10:50 AM

Isn't it strange that when it comes to another of life's essentials: food, we love the idea of getting AWAY from the corporates (supermarkets) and actively try to support small, local, 'grassroots' operators that sell their homegrown goods at farmers style markets. But with rented property, local smalltime landlords are vilified in favour of corporates that will not, ultimately, make the market any better. Nobody thinks the slightly more expensive, organically-fed, free-range eggs are the seller being a greedy parasite, do they...?!

From: Luke Aaron 03 May 2022 11:50 AM

That's a good point...if 'shelter' is their genuine concern, surely this extends beyond occupiers of the private rental sector??

From: Luke Aaron 27 April 2022 13:42 PM

And if we keep an eye on by how much s.8 Court Hearings increase (after the abolition of s.21), we can then prove all those old s.21 Notices were indeed for rent arrears/damage/ASB rather than, as is currently claimed 'no fault'.

From: Luke Aaron 27 April 2022 13:40 PM

And I for one will be on a beach somewhere sunny (spending my UK-earned money in a place that treats me better) chuckling away to myself, having sold up when that happens.

From: Luke Aaron 27 April 2022 13:36 PM

Unfortunately (if they have children), they *will* be rehoused, for it is deemed not to be the fault of the child(ren) of the intentional homelessness and, by proxy, their useless non-paying/ASB parents are rehoused too, so not quite what we'd hoped. The childless ones will hopefully be out on their ear, though.

From: Luke Aaron 27 April 2022 13:33 PM

Generation Rent's Dan Wilson-Craw was on LBC yesterday being, knowingly or otherwise, a communist - saying the cost of living has increased and LLs should share in the pain of Covid! What?? We not all living in some commune, Dan! It's not our job to bail either Govt. or the dregs of society out when the proverbial hits the fan!

From: Luke Aaron 27 April 2022 13:30 PM

I too thought this might be the ‘silver-lining’. However, it would appear that although the adult has made themselves intentionally homeless through, for example, non-payment of rent, it would not be their children’s fault and therefore the Local Authority would be housing the children and, by default, their parents too.

From: Luke Aaron 27 April 2022 09:34 AM

Usual assumption LLs evict for fun. No need for S.13, I’ll just use S.8 when they’re in arrears…if they’re not, then I’m happy for them to stay.

From: Luke Aaron 12 April 2022 10:02 AM

We should respond accordingly and all just simply comment: “CLICKBAIT!”

From: Luke Aaron 11 April 2022 08:30 AM

It’s bigger than that, modern political economics pursues an increase in GDP (by creating ‘jobs’) as an end in itself, rather than a measure of economic prosperity…and, as used to be the case, general happiness of the nation. This sort of nonsense crates jobs, increases GDP, but makes no-one any more pleased with life.

From: Luke Aaron 27 March 2022 20:47 PM

If any ‘landlords redress scheme’ is anything like the current agents redress scheme, if an agent is breaking the rules and not signed up to either of the (now) two options, they will not and cannot act. Theoretically they could be in bother, but Trading Standards haven’t a clue -at least not in my area- either what they’re meant to do with cases of non-membership, nor even that they were the police for this. You can’t actually talk directly to TS anyway… PRS/TPO: “I’m sorry Mr Tenant, unfortunately we cannot take action against your landlord as they’re not a member of our scheme.”

From: Luke Aaron 27 March 2022 20:38 PM

If tenants are not capable of recycling without intervention, then one has to seriously question their capabilities to understand/sign a tenancy agreement and responsibly run/look after the premises... Here's an idea Wandsworth...petition the Department for Levelling Up, Housing & Communities to add recycling requirements, and where to find them, to the How to Rent guide - that way, there's no need to involve LLs directly. I'll even do the wording for you: "As the occupier of the property, it is your responsibility to ensure the correct use of any recycling bins/boxes. To find more information on how to recycle in the correct manner, please visit your local council's website for further details."

From: Luke Aaron 18 March 2022 13:24 PM

Brilliant…then I can take out my 5l V8 instead of the Tesla for the same cost (assuming fuel duty is dropped in favour of per-mile charging or when electricity, which is fast becoming the case, equals fossil fuel prices)…

From: Luke Aaron 17 March 2022 14:19 PM

*Why* is it equally clear reform is still required?? Oh, the actual (proper sample-size) evidence shows different to your expectations, so you’ll just shoot with emotion and supposition instead…??

From: Luke Aaron 16 March 2022 07:51 AM

Stick it so far up your backside Torridge Council! After the way you and central Govt. have acted toward LLs, I hope you fail on every conceivable level. Once again I will promote my idea (that eventually will be picked up as though it were some MPs own)...if you told all C.2m LLs that they could have CGT relief on any empty/derelict property they brought back into use for the PRS, you'd have a helluva lot of stock. Virtually overnight! And far quicker than building new houses. We all know of abandoned houses in our towns and cities that could be resurrected if only the incentive were there. If it were averaged at one property per LL (some will do none, others will do multiple), we would, within a twelve months, have over 11 years the supply of new-build property!! ELEVEN YEARS!!! Somehow, corporate builders' shareholders getting almighty wealthy by slowing supply is better than 'enriching' greedy snivelling private LLs actually actively solving the housing crisis, whilst simultaneously (god forbid) making a few quid for themselves...

From: Luke Aaron 10 March 2022 09:38 AM

"Mr Justice Scoffield said there was no expectation of action being taken in the middle of the night. He said, the *council* wanted to 'leverage' influence over nuisance residents, and that landlords may be more successful in that regard than police or other officers." So with no expectation of action (though I'm pretty sure even 'leveraging influence' over tenants constitutes 'action'), this is nothing more than (unnecessary) deliberate judicial inconveniencing of landlords. Oh...and 'the council' *want* it [leverage] do they? Regardless of what anyone (individual or institution) wants, it's what's proportionate and legal that should matter!!

From: Luke Aaron 28 February 2022 13:19 PM

What an absurdity that penalties for roughing up & threatening the tenant would be lesser. Even murder barely gets a sentence these days…! Unlawful eviction (which will doubtless extend to a completely normal, legal eviction save for the serving of a single piece of administration), is hardly a crime, let alone one requiring such massive threats. Whatever happened to proportionality?

From: Luke Aaron 24 February 2022 08:27 AM

Can we democratically control in the community the price of my shopping trolley from the supermarkets, please? How dare they set prices according to costs/market-forces...

From: Luke Aaron 23 February 2022 09:01 AM

My LA actively house tenants with these (known) Lis because they don't have the accommodation for them themselves!!!

From: Luke Aaron 03 February 2022 11:25 AM

Big business friends of Govt. will be given special clauses…

From: Luke Aaron 02 February 2022 08:50 AM

One (of many) problems is, they'd allow the local authority to administer and police it. They are some of the biggest culprits of rule-breaking themselves. Remember when a couple tried to set up a letting agency and fell at the first hurdle, failing to display an EPC for an advertised property. They're utterly clueless. The only way I'd want to accept such a register and the councils to operate it would be if I/an independent body could monitor and fine these local authorities for their own property breaches. I'd maybe even make it my full-time hobby!! **cough** Grenfell ** cough**

From: Luke Aaron 01 February 2022 08:53 AM

Have the results of the consultation now finally been published then?

From: Luke Aaron 27 January 2022 10:15 AM

You really should have done that 5 years back and implemented annual rent increases. We never bothered as we and the tenants were happy. It's also a massive task across several hundred properties each year (it always seems to come around too quickly), but such is the state of things.

From: Luke Aaron 24 January 2022 12:59 PM

EPC C will be like vaccine passport threat…we’ll be allowed to believe, up to the eleventh hour, that it will happen but will be pushed back (because it’s completely and utterly unrealistic and would decimate the stock).

From: Luke Aaron 17 September 2021 09:08 AM

Definitely not a LL…your ‘honest day’s work’ sarcasm very strongly suggests you do not consider managing tenants/properties in a rental portfolio to be honest work…precisely the sort of thing a tenant/troll/Shelter-supporter would say.

From: Luke Aaron 07 September 2021 09:05 AM

UPTO £5k fine or clad the place, install an air-source heat pump and solar panels...??

From: Luke Aaron 06 September 2021 15:29 PM

@Leics Landlord, which bit do you think is made up - the holiday bit? Because the article mentions '...while the tenants were away on holiday...'

From: Luke Aaron 06 September 2021 15:24 PM

Often there’s nothing to mediate. They owe the rent and that’s that. I’ve only ever had these people attempt to get me to back down on what is owed…”Would you take half the owed rent and call it quits?” No. No I bloody well won’t! “What about a 25% reduction?” Again, no!

From: Luke Aaron 16 June 2021 12:20 PM

God help us. Not only are the NRLA a complete wet blanket, but Ben Beadle within that organisation is not overly intelligent, nor articulate enough. His personality also strikes me as one of agreeable - someone not wanting to upset the apple cart too much. Sigh.

From: Luke Aaron 15 June 2021 10:04 AM

It made seem like a potentially reasonable option in theory, but every time control of a market is attempted, it fails. Have you never seen The Butterfly Effect?

From: Luke Aaron 17 May 2021 11:36 AM

But you cannot accept a part of the UK and/or a free-market capitalist society being off-limits to certain people based on a single moment in time’s residence status… They also cannot rely on the huge economic benefits of, in large parts, a tourism industry, yet lock those tourists out in a way they wish to be involved.

From: Luke Aaron 15 May 2021 23:22 PM

I’m curious as to Jersey’s residents’ levels of Nimbyism…?

From: Luke Aaron 14 May 2021 12:53 PM

Don’t be silly…criminal tenants are a civil matter, right…?

From: Luke Aaron 26 April 2021 13:04 PM

How long before requesting a guarantor is subject to calls for a ban...?

From: Luke Aaron 15 March 2021 14:01 PM

More to the point, why are such unions making comment on issues seemingly beyond their industry? And why are those opinions being given airtime…?

From: Luke Aaron 03 March 2021 10:52 AM

What does the legislation say specifically about the length of validity on a S.21? They used to last indefinitely but, I think, that is now restricted to six months - is that six months from date of service (so with the new six month required notice period, they’d effectively expire if you didn’t utilise it on the notice period expiry date) or is the legislation worded in such a way that they expire four months after the expiry date (accounting for the old two months notice, plus four to make a total of six)...?

From: Luke Aaron 26 February 2021 13:11 PM

We could have a National Road-building School that teaches this very thing to JobSeekers claimants, with a requirement to work in this capacity whilst on state benefit for unemployment…

From: Luke Aaron 26 February 2021 10:32 AM

Perhaps we should all have rent increase clauses tied to council tax increases…they’re effectively in control of if/when and by how much rents go up by!

From: Luke Aaron 09 February 2021 16:02 PM

Then he or someone like him would fight our corner.

From: Luke Aaron 09 February 2021 16:01 PM

I’m no Labour supporter, but it simply cannot be argued that the Blair years were some of the best for LLs (much as it pains me to say). I don’t care if that’s because they borrowed from the future...let’s have that again and I’ll take what I can and get out.

From: Luke Aaron 09 February 2021 15:31 PM

It also appears to be the only debt that has little in the way of consequences...steal from a shop and you risk a criminal record, don’t pay, say, a car payment and your credit score will take a hit...why should rent be any different and outside of credit scoring??

From: Luke Aaron 09 February 2021 15:26 PM

I met with George Freeman at a private dinner (a Tory fund-raiser for some of the biggest/best-connected LLs), even handing him a file of papers on the raw, honest truth of being a LL (things I don’t think he’d have known) and he wasn’t in the slightest bit interested.

From: Luke Aaron 09 February 2021 12:02 PM

It’s an excellent article, very well written and argued and one the Government should take heed of.

From: Luke Aaron 09 February 2021 02:31 AM

I will dig out the Govt. report of I can find it and post it, but there are two significant groups that purchase properties (taking them out of the private rental sector), but also don’t appear in the current tenant figures…divorcees (that were previously in the one marital home, now becoming two household) and adult children still living with parents. Net decrease in BTL stock, net increase in persons/tenants (still) needing (re-)housing.

From: Luke Aaron 08 February 2021 00:25 AM

And if the guarantor had one, it would be highly unlikely the tenant would have one, in which case, one could get rid of the tenant and pursue the guarantor after (eviction and the guarantor’s BS).

From: Luke Aaron 08 February 2021 00:20 AM

You cannot pursue the other (joint) tenant when one has a moratorium.

From: Luke Aaron 28 January 2021 15:51 PM

There’s also the part, “If they are in a position to pay off the money they owe through proper budgeting or selling things, then a Breathing Space *may* not be deemed the right solution for them.” Although I suppose this will be abused either way…if they can’t *fully* pay off the debt then they won’t make them try to sell things, but even if they could pay it off, it’ll be deemed ‘not the right solution for them’ (because losing your unnecessarily large flatscreen telly they can ill-afford would also make them sad)…

From: Luke Aaron 19 January 2021 20:47 PM

The bigger problem is the inability to evict, rather than chasing the guarantor for what has already been accrued.

From: Luke Aaron 19 January 2021 00:56 AM

Because, Laura B, Tenant Fees Act precludes any requirement to either pay anything or even enter into a third-party contract as part of the granting/maintaining a tenancy agreement. You can only take one week holding deposit (fraught with problems/requirements), a maximum of five weeks rent deposit (must be protected) any rent when it’s due, and ‘reasonable’ costs for specified instances/occurrences.

From: Luke Aaron 19 January 2021 00:54 AM

I doubt you’ll be allowed to ask as it’s deemed ‘medical’ and privileged information. Insurance (as far as Govt. are concerned) are exempt from this, unsurprisingly…

From: Luke Aaron 18 January 2021 18:08 PM

No, Tricia…it’s specifically excluded from the Scheme. As are Court fines, Council tax etc.

From: Luke Aaron 18 January 2021 18:05 PM

Unless the guarantor has one of these orders (rather than the tenant)...although you’d still be able to evict in that case. Home owning/working guarantors aren’t immune from mental health problems.

From: Luke Aaron 18 January 2021 16:27 PM

Does anyone know if S.8 Notices will be completely excluded during a Scheme order or just for Ground 8?

From: Luke Aaron 18 January 2021 15:18 PM

In answer to Lia Jordan about what next, it’ll take a little more time, but I believe that guarantors will become part of a a ban. I’ve been taking them since 2007 and they’ve worked wonders, but as almost all tenants, at least where I live/operate (I have volume), end up owing rents arrears or damages, the guarantor ends up paying…because I’ve mastered the Courts. They then don’t want to guarantor for them again and eventually these tenants will have no choice but to become the LAs problem. Then you have the likes of the TDS deposit scheme pushing for an in-house, mandatory, binding conciliation service (which also comes with an imbalance that if the LL breaks the terms is prevented from evicting for SIX MONTHS, but if the tenant breaks the terms then the LL is ‘awarded’ a ‘fast-track’ through the Courts…hmm), when LLs get their fingers burned and virtually everyone has switched over to the guarantor model, the TDS will play up that their new revenue stream has gone, the Govt. won’t like the idea we’ve ‘gotten around’ them being the adjudicators on every single matter (they’re hardly going to side with LLs when that means the tenant becomes their problem) and so will take tenancies outside of normal contract law…it’s not like the housing industry doesn’t already fall outside other norms such as tax with S.24…!

From: Luke Aaron 10 January 2021 12:54 PM

In the space of 10 months it has been normalised to shut down businesses on a whim, enforce lockdowns & curfews, to ban criticism of all government policy & to ban the US President from all social media platforms. This is hardly what you would call normal behaviour, but there seems to be plenty of people out there especially on the left that seem to think all this is perfectly acceptable..

From: Luke Aaron 10 January 2021 03:12 AM

I’ve never understood the motivation to tolerate/encourage/accept any of the indigenous population as long-term unemployed (whilst simultaneously bringing in labour from outside). These people don’t often vote, so that can’t be the worry...?

From: Luke Aaron 09 January 2021 19:27 PM

Further to that, and expanding on my opening comment, when Covid is out of the way, so many areas of life will be a mess and require Govt. focus. We will have the ban extended yet again, as the ‘easy’ option, until they have the time/will to deal with the problem that will continue to mount, making dealing with it ever more difficult.

From: Luke Aaron 09 January 2021 19:18 PM

What was Paul removed for?

From: Luke Aaron 08 January 2021 21:01 PM

Then where is the incentive for them to ever change? I think a Reform UK will be our only hope now. At least give them a shot…

From: Luke Aaron 08 January 2021 17:15 PM

Govt. are backing themselves into a corner they’ll never be able to get out of...!

From: Luke Aaron 08 January 2021 13:35 PM

LLs will just turn a tenant down on a ‘legitimate’ reason. You will never be able to legislate that LLs take somebody without choice (if you tried, they’d simply pack up).

From: Luke Aaron 16 December 2020 12:35 PM

Would you expect a tenant to reach out to a landlord that was, say, hospitalised or struggling for money? It could quite conceivably be the case that the tenant is the financially ‘better off party’ (not that that should matter in either direction). I’m just curious as to your thought-process and why it’s seemingly only one way.

From: Luke Aaron 15 December 2020 21:36 PM

Perhaps tenants having/paying for their own insurance should become part of legislation. If they miss rent, for whatever reason, and the insurance company increases the tenants premium, then it’s on them and nought to do with the LL. it would also sharpen tenants focus for the future.

From: Luke Aaron 10 December 2020 09:31 AM

Literally no different to the homeless sitting down to dine in a restaurant, then refusing (out of necessity) to pay.

From: Luke Aaron 02 November 2020 16:16 PM

Ironically, many of the underclass take student loans (knowing they're unlikely to ever earn enough to repay it) for mickey mouse courses.

From: Luke Aaron 02 November 2020 15:59 PM

Landlords existence is not a constant. The can (and will) choose to exit if it’s too expensive/hard work…

From: Luke Aaron 30 October 2020 10:06 AM

Rent controls a route to no PRS.

From: Luke Aaron 30 October 2020 10:03 AM

Politics. Of. Envy.

From: Luke Aaron 08 October 2020 19:42 PM

English Housing Survey (that the MHCLG also cite in their own research) states 3.9 years as average according to the most recent figures I can find. This is widely known and accepted to be correct.

From: Luke Aaron 08 October 2020 11:14 AM

He's a 'serial failure' because the system is not in the slightest bit fair. It favours the two big parties and relies on them to enact any kind of change. He's also one of the best all-round politicians in the past century, being very quick-thinking, media-savvy, knows his history, has outstanding oratory skills as well as tenacity and the ability to speak to the common man. His ideals are very fair-minded and I don't think we can do much worse than him to be honest. There's not a lot wrong with Trump's actions either underneath the whole 'two fingers up to the media's "usual" way of doing business'. Who would you suggest as an alternative, because it certainly ain't more of the same or the loonies in Labour.

From: Luke Aaron 07 October 2020 16:15 PM

So I guess we vote Farage and hopefully get something resembling traditional conservatism…

From: Luke Aaron 07 October 2020 11:46 AM

Unless BCC are willing to act as full and unlimited guarantor, they haven’t a chance in hell.

From: Luke Aaron 07 October 2020 11:00 AM

So the Guild of Lettings Management are hosting a similar webinar on 10th if anyone wants to check that out.

From: Luke Aaron 04 September 2020 07:49 AM

Pays whom? FixFlo? It is their webinar, not the NRLA’s. If you are an NRLA member, you may seriously want to reconsider for it is primarily a business that will only ever do what is best for their directors/shareholders, rather than what’s right for LLs. A few online forms and access to an advice line is far too tempting for most, though.

From: Luke Aaron 03 September 2020 16:43 PM

Truthfully they don’t give a toss about any gaps in your knowledge or otherwise…it’s just one big sales-pitch. I’ll let you know what’s said, if you like? It’ll just be DS waffling on explaining pretty much what we already know and to say even *he* doesn’t know what we don’t know.

From: Luke Aaron 03 September 2020 16:21 PM

FixFlo is only really of any use to agents.

From: Luke Aaron 03 September 2020 15:59 PM

From: Luke Aaron 03 September 2020 11:19 AM

Echis, I am one of the largest private property providers to benefit tenants. Almost all make a conscious decision not to pay rent. Every Christmas I watch them spend more than I do, more than is normal on their b*stard kids instead of keeping a roof over their heads. You know not of what you speak, but rather hope/assume (incorrectly) people are innocently desperate…a great, great many are simply scumbags.

From: Luke Aaron 28 August 2020 21:43 PM

‘Impartial’ has also got to be a contender for an award too…!

From: Luke Aaron 27 August 2020 10:52 AM

Some of those (long-term) homeless were swept away in emergency measures and their reappearance on our streets has nothing to do with landlords. Further, the inability to repay a loan, should not therefore mean the financial burden rests on the landlord. It needs to be the tenants (for it is theirs ultimately theirs anyway). At least that way Govt. May be forced to act to help those most in need and now with a loan around their neck…mind you, almost all landlords have a far greater loan around their necks anyway, called a mortgage.

From: Luke Aaron 25 August 2020 11:00 AM

In anticipation Leon, I started raising all mine annually (after barely touching them for decades) four years ago.

From: Luke Aaron 19 August 2020 16:06 PM

In your analogy, the earthquake should be nationwide…no safer back home than remaining in central London. Secondly, an outside event (earthquake or virus) does not and is not affecting the property’s ability to fulfil the contract, so no force majeure.

From: Luke Aaron 23 June 2020 10:03 AM

The act of leaving is not the problem, but the contract still needs paying. Try not using your mobile phone for a month because you were in hospital, incapacitated and then after you were discharged fancied a change of network…do you think Vodafone will let you off the remainder of the 24mo contract that you’re only half way through? There’s no reason students can’t get a job or become an NHS volunteer and remain in their rented student property (most students don’t return home following their studies anyway). And what about the LL that has one or two tenants in, say, a six-bed property where the other students have indeed gone gone but they choose to stay? What the bleedin he’ll do you expect should happen then?

From: Luke Aaron 23 June 2020 10:00 AM

Indeed, I was referring to Ray.

From: Luke Aaron 09 June 2020 14:33 PM

You are a dangerous fool.

From: Luke Aaron 09 June 2020 08:44 AM

The only other industry I know of is water. Owing to its necessity for life and a basic human right, they are not able to suspend supply even in the event of a debt. HOWEVER, owing to this (almost) unique situation, other legislation was enacted to aid the water companies to get paid, such as making it the LL’s responsibility to inform them of the bill payer responsible.

From: Luke Aaron 08 June 2020 10:11 AM

They’d also feel more secure if they could simply walk out of the supermarket without paying, but with no ability of the supermarket to prevent them returning next week. Only after the summer can the supermarket make any moves to even *start* the possibility of getting (very slowly) paid any grocery debt…even then, without the shopper’s cooperation, they’ve no real hope of ever getting the money, just to have them prevented from shopping in that particular store after many months -likely over a year- at best, before they move to a different supermarket. Oh, and if during their time of effective shoplifting they picked up an item a day or two out-of-date, or they were not *offered* a third item as part of a ‘buy 2 get the third free’ offer when already basketing two (even though they’re not technically *buying* anything), then not only do you have to allow ALL the previously taken groceries to go for free, you must pay the ‘customer’ compensation and possibly allow them to continue to shop in store, unhindered, for as long as *they* choose…

From: Luke Aaron 08 June 2020 09:45 AM

Incidentally, the LRU are calling for people to break the law and should be shut down.

From: Luke Aaron 01 June 2020 12:23 PM

I have a theory about reduced resources and the ‘normal’ way of focussing depleted funds/manpower on the biggest, most serious crime, such as murder. It affects so few people, so little if the time, perhaps, instead of ignoring ‘lesser‘ crimes such as burglary, we should target everything *but* the most serious crimes (that affect more of the people, more of the time). Obviously, in a perfect-world, we‘d tackle both, but we’re starting from a point of some things having to give. Not only would satisfaction rates increase massively, but it would likely have the knock-on effect of cutting down the more serious crimes through either escalation, recklessness or extended opportunity. The petty criminal doesn’t continue to increase either his frequency or bravery into more serious offences, the burglar isn’t able to end up wrangling with the homeowner, accidentally, but recklessly, killing them and everyone knows these ‘lesser’ offences don’t go uninvestigated, so aren’t tempted to go further than they planned.

From: Luke Aaron 01 June 2020 10:40 AM

I take the same view as David. All of his comments are both accurate and fair. Why is it expected, or even assumed a landlord has to joint this (Londoon-centric) community spiritedness? Four walls/roof in exchange for payment. No tea and biscuits, just that at its most simplest.

From: Luke Aaron 01 June 2020 10:28 AM

If I were operating in London, I would be serving notice immediately (even with the temporary notice period extension) and they’d be out on their ear the moment I could get into a Court. They’re holding you to ransom anyway, so just a case of disposing of them as quickly as possible. They always view it as the haves and have nots. Why should a landlord stomach any of this? Simply because, in a tenant’s view, they ‘have’ more? They might have 95% borrowing on the property, so in all reality have far less than some tenants! Why not call for a loan, tenants? Perhaps on similar terms as the BBL ones?? Oh yeah…that’s because you don’t actually wanna pay at all.

From: Luke Aaron 01 June 2020 10:00 AM

It's very simple, and there doesn’t need to be any evictions…pay the rent arrears of the miscreants and they can stay until they again abuse the contract they signed and agreed to. You can get the first £20,000,000 from Shelter as they’re mad-keen to stop evictions.

From: Luke Aaron 01 June 2020 09:54 AM

Protect them by giving them, ideally, loans, but *not* by making that protection at landlords’ expense!!

From: Luke Aaron 01 June 2020 09:51 AM

See Robert Brown’s comment above for an indication…

From: Luke Aaron 26 May 2020 14:31 PM

From: Luke Aaron 26 May 2020 11:43 AM

Be specific about force majeure in this example a tenant choosing to go home isn’t it.

From: Luke Aaron 26 May 2020 11:42 AM

In what sense is it frustrated? If the tenant chose to go home, that does not constitute contractual frustration.

From: Luke Aaron 26 May 2020 11:40 AM

…and Council tax on empty properties, unable to be let during the virus, that those landlords also own…

From: Luke Aaron 26 May 2020 11:34 AM

Indeed. Everything’s interconnected. If you’re going to let tenants off rent, others in the economic chain will also need to be let off other financial obligations. We all pay taxes for Govt. to redistribute/use as is necessary, which includes during times of national/global emergency. Landlords should not need to pay for the pandemic.

From: Luke Aaron 15 April 2020 13:47 PM

Why does LAT keep giving these stories airtime?

From: Luke Aaron 15 April 2020 13:44 PM

How about the tenants join together to save the landlords, who provide their housing year-round, during these unprecedented times. Wait until all of this is over and there’s community-spirited ‘support your local butcher/baker/cafe’…landlords will be ignored as part-of-the-furniture. Furniture to be abused.

From: Luke Aaron 24 March 2020 10:49 AM

Breaking News