Council tactics re_ leasing

Mad_maxx

This topic is being dealt with in a general sense on another thread but I just wanted to highlight the reality that local authorities are using these arrangements to dump scum tenants, it has happened to me very recently, the neighbours are almost ready to have a nervous breakdown yet the council couldn't care less.

My house cost me very little as its in a very bad area though the quietest little enclave of said area, these tenants have house parties every night and have a hefty rap sheet, I have never met them as I only signed over the house last June, only became aware of the problem through one of the neighbours who contacted me, I only know this person from when I was bringing furniture in prior to letting. We exchanged numbers as I thought it useful to know one person nearby, they incorrectly assumed I bought to move in myself but I confess to not correcting them so I had house signed over to the council before ever explaining I myself was not moving in

I'm paid 10 k gross per year for a house which cost me 68 k and I have no dealings with the tenants, in fact the council are my tenant, I know damn well that if I raise hell with the council about the disturbances, they will find a way to opt out of the lease and leave me with the problem tenants so when I inspect the property for the first time post the commencement of the lease ( hoping to inspect in next week), I will need to have a calm strategy. Will keep this thread posted as to how the situation develops, house is an hour away so once I'm paid its " out of sight - out of mind" but a complacent attitude can set in with such a detached arrangement, I bought this house with cash and it isn't my only property, its in a flood area but had extensive flood relief work carried out since the flood of 2014, o bought it post flood and post refurbishment, sort of saw it as a punt. Nobody however should enter into a long term lease with a valuable house

To summarise, despite the apparent attractions of a long term lease, the council use the scheme to deal with toxic problem tenants.

Some people deserve homelessness and government are good for nothing when it comes down to it.

tigger123

So, you own the house, have rented it out to the council, the council have rented it out to tenants that are 'driving the neighbours to a nervous breakdown'? Am I right?

Have you spoken to the Council? How do you know about the tenants behaviour?

Mrs OBumble

You said yourself that it's in a bad area: how could they (or you) get good tenants to go in there?

Mad_maxx

tigger123 wrote: »

So, you own the house, have rented it out to the council, the council have rented it out to tenants that are 'driving the neighbours to a nervous breakdown'? Am I right?

Have you spoken to the Council? How do you know about the tenants behaviour?

Hi there

This is a relatively recent discovery for me, under the long term lease scheme, the landlord has no dealings with the people living in the property, I have no right to march up to the property, I didn't select the tenants, that is the role of the council here

I received all these troubling reports from the one local resident who I have contact with, I made the decision not to approach the council until I view the property but I have asked for an inspection as part of the lease contract, I would have inspected before now but I have been recovering from a personal injury which happened many months ago

Unless my neighbour is telling lies, I see no reason to feel relaxed about it though as I've said, even the tenants have turned the place upside down, I will need to tread carefully

tigger123

Mad_maxx wrote: »

Hi there

This is a relatively recent discovery for me, under the long term lease scheme, the landlord has no dealings with the people living in the property, I have no right to march up to the property, I didn't select the tenants, that is the role of the council here

I received all these troubling reports from the one local resident who I have contact with, I made the decision not to approach the council until I view the property but I have asked for an inspection as part of the lease contract, I would have inspected before now but I have been recovering from a personal injury which happened many months ago

Unless my neighbour is telling lies, I see no reason to feel relaxed about it though as I've said, even the tenants have turned the place upside down, I will need to tread carefully

If it was me, the first thing I'd do is report it to the council and start talking to them about what you can do about it.

If the landlord has no dealings with the property, you've no recourse to the tenants. The only thing you can then do is pass the information on to the Council. And/or ask the neighbour to do the same thing.

I'm not being smart here, but if you lease a property to the council, there always was the possibility that this kind of thing could happen.

tigger123

Mad_maxx wrote: »

This topic is being dealt with in a general sense on another thread but I just wanted to highlight the reality that local authorities are using these arrangements to dump scum tenants, it has happened to me very recently, the neighbours are almost ready to have a nervous breakdown yet the council couldn't care less.

My house cost me very little as its in a very bad area though the quietest little enclave of said area, these tenants have house parties every night and have a hefty rap sheet, I have never met them as I only signed over the house last June, only became aware of the problem through one of the neighbours who contacted me, I only know this person from when I was bringing furniture in prior to letting. We exchanged numbers as I thought it useful to know one person nearby, they incorrectly assumed I bought to move in myself but I confess to not correcting them so I had house signed over to the council before ever explaining I myself was not moving in

I'm paid 10 k gross per year for a house which cost me 68 k and I have no dealings with the tenants, in fact the council are my tenant, I know damn well that if I raise hell with the council about the disturbances, they will find a way to opt out of the lease and leave me with the problem tenants so when I inspect the property for the first time post the commencement of the lease ( hoping to inspect in next week), I will need to have a calm strategy. Will keep this thread posted as to how the situation develops, house is an hour away so once I'm paid its " out of sight - out of mind" but a complacent attitude can set in with such a detached arrangement, I bought this house with cash and it isn't my only property, its in a flood area but had extensive flood relief work carried out since the flood of 2014, o bought it post flood and post refurbishment, sort of saw it as a punt. Nobody however should enter into a long term lease with a valuable house

To summarise, despite the apparent attractions of a long term lease, the council use the scheme to deal with toxic problem tenants.

Some people deserve homelessness and government are good for nothing when it comes down to it.

Is this a common thing? Genuine question.

Mad_maxx

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

You said yourself that it's in a bad area: how could they (or you) get good tenants to go in there?

Decent people also live in bad areas, I don't see why people like my neighbours ( who work) should have their protests ignored by the local authority.

The point of this thread is to highlight what the council are doing with these long term leasing schemes, it's cynical and exploitative

Mad_maxx

tigger123 wrote: »

If it was me, the first thing I'd do is report it to the council and start talking to them about what you can do about it.

If the landlord has no dealings with the property, you've no recourse to the tenants. The only thing you can then do is pass the information on to the Council. And/or ask the neighbour to do the same thing.

I'm not being smart here, but if you lease a property to the council, there always was the possibility that this kind of thing could happen.

There are a lot of people on the housing list, people with anti social behaviour records should not be anywhere near the top, I'll deal with the matter but let it be a warning to others

Shefwedfan

First mistake you made was giving your number over. You have given over your house to the council, you should have no involvement at all in the house

It is up to the council to deal with the tenants and if they are causing a problem for the other residents then they should contact the council and not you

For all you know the “friendly” neighbour is the pain in the ass, he/she might be getting reported to the council and is using you to try get other tenants threw out

Are you supposed to visit the property? I didn’t think you done anything with it if you have signed it over

Also saying the council will pull out and leave you with tenants is illegal and you could sue them for the price of the house. So no idea why you would think that

Mad_maxx

tigger123 wrote: »

Is this a common thing? Genuine question.

One of the grounds for termination is if the council demands that structural repairs be carried out within twenty eight days, with toxic tenants who decide to drill holes in the wall, you could have a situation where repairs are regularly required, suffice to say that the council would not take the problem tenants with them.

tigger123

Mad_maxx wrote: »

There are a lot of people on the housing list, people with anti social behaviour records should not be anywhere near the top, I'll deal with the matter but let it be a warning to others

How are you going to deal with it though? Surely its up to the council to deal with it, no?

What's the warning about? Are you (justifiably) concerned that the tenants will destroy the place?

Shefwedfan

Mad_maxx wrote: »

Decent people also live in bad areas, I don't see why people like my neighbours ( who work) should have their protests ignored by the local authority.

The point of this thread is to highlight what the council are doing with these long term leasing schemes, it's cynical and exploitative

Everyone knows exactly what they are getting when they sign up, you know yourself the ability to get good tenants in a s**t area is hard, you will spend more time trying to manage the complaints that the few quid you make is not worth it

That’s why people sign over to council, it’s handy money and the council need to fix the dodgy tenants.,..

As I said the mistake you made was giving your number in the first place, you will be hounded now for the rest of the contract

If it was me, turn off the number and get a new one

Shefwedfan

tigger123 wrote: »

How are you going to deal with it though? Surely its up to the council to deal with it, no?

What's the warning about? Are you (justifiably) concerned that the tenants will destroy the place?

If they destroy it the council fixes it.....he won’t have to pay a penny

tigger123

Mad_maxx wrote: »

One of the grounds for termination is if the council demands that structural repairs be carried out within twenty eight days, with toxic tenants who decide to drill holes in the wall, you could have a situation where repairs are regularly required, suffice to say that the council would not take the problem tenants with them.

You're worried the council are just going to bail on the arrangement, and leave you with the tenants then.

Shefwedfan

Mad_maxx wrote: »

One of the grounds for termination is if the council demands that structural repairs be carried out within twenty eight days, with toxic tenants who decide to drill holes in the wall, you could have a situation where repairs are regularly required, suffice to say that the council would not take the problem tenants with them.

Have you read the contract?

Did you document the condition of house before handing over to council?

If the house is falling down due to an issue not created by tenant then yes you need to repair....roof falling in due to issue which was present before council took over

If the tenant damages the property then the council fixes......

Unless you signed something else?

Mad_maxx

Shefwedfan wrote: »

First mistake you made was giving your number over. You have given over your house to the council, you should have no involvement at all in the house

It is up to the council to deal with the tenants and if they are causing a problem for the other residents then they should contact the council and not you

For all you know the “friendly” neighbour is the pain in the ass, he/she might be getting reported to the council and is using you to try get other tenants threw out

Are you supposed to visit the property? I didn’t think you done anything with it if you have signed it over

Also saying the council will pull out and leave you with tenants is illegal and you could sue them for the price of the house. So no idea why you would think that

All I have received is a few texts from the neighbour, I can block them if I want, they don't know where I live, I told this particular neighbour to inform the council about any issues a few months ago, they text me again in the past week to inform me about late night parties since before Xmas and how the council are making token efforts to deal with complaints, that's all I have to go on but I'd trust the word of the neighbours over the council on these matters

I'll do what I can to try and help the neighbours, good people in troubled areas deserve peace, the core of my point is unaccountable local government

Mad_maxx

tigger123 wrote: »

How are you going to deal with it though? Surely its up to the council to deal with it, no?

What's the warning about? Are you (justifiably) concerned that the tenants will destroy the place?

I have not been inside the house since handing it over, I cannot at this point say if the house is being neglected but as the council appear indifferent to the tenants creating disturbance in the area, it's likely they would also be indifferent to the property being trashed, there is no reason to believe council tenants must wreck a property, again I just wish to alert others to the fact that the council are using these arrangements to dump scum tenants

My own situation will need to be addressed in its own way, I'll keep the thread updated

Shefwedfan

Mad_maxx wrote: »

All I have received is a few texts from the neighbour, I can block them if I want, they don't know where I live, I told this particular neighbour to inform the council about any issues a few months ago, they text me again in the past week to inform me about late night parties since before Xmas and how the council are making token efforts to deal with complaints, that's all I have to go on but I'd trust the word of the neighbours over the council on these matters

I'll do what I can to try and help the neighbours, good people in troubled areas deserve peace, the core of my point is unaccountable local government

How is the government unaccountable? For all you know they are dealing with the issue...you have parts of a story from one side....

How do you know the neighbour is good? You don’t live in house?

I don’t get any of your points to be honest.....

I would suggest you read the contract or get a solicitor to read it and explain it to you, I don’t think you understand what you signed up to which is more concerning.....

Gumbo

Tell the council you are seeking legal advice with regards to terminating the tenancy and the lease scheme arrangement on anti social behavior grounds.

Shefwedfan

kceire wrote: »

Tell the council you are seeking legal advice with regards to terminating the tenancy and the lease scheme arrangement on anti social behavior grounds.

But if you terminate the contract then your left with a house that is very very hard to rent and you will end up personally dealing with dodgy tenants

Last thing I would do is terminate with council, that’s a great deal

tigger123

Mad_maxx wrote: »

I have not been inside the house since handing it over, I cannot at this point say if the house is being neglected but as the council appear indifferent to the tenants creating disturbance in the area, it's likely they would also be indifferent to the property being trashed, there is no reason to believe council tenants must wreck a property, again I just wish to alert others to the fact that the council are using these arrangements to dump scum tenants

My own situation will need to be addressed in its own way, I'll keep the thread updated

Let the buyer beware. You rented the property out to the council as you thought (rightly) that it would be easier than renting it out yourself. This was always a possibility.

dudara

Can you please stop saying “scum tenants”? It’s a sweeping generalisation and it’s not fair to the many social tenants who are not a problem. You have troublesome or anti-social tenants, but stop extending it to all council tenants.

Pkiernan

dudara wrote: »

Can you please stop saying “scum tenants”? It’s a sweeping generalisation and it’s not fair to the many social tenants who are not a problem. You have troublesome or anti-social tenants, but stop extending it to all council tenants.

In fairness he didn't ftar a whole group of people in my opinion.

He offered to share his real world experience, and not (apparently) anecdotal horror stories.

I think his post was very valuable.
There are real terrible tenants out there and on the face of it local authorities could well use this scheme to house the worst of them.

dudara

I’m not disagreeing with the basic content of his post. I dislike the use of the word “sum”. Why not say “anti-social” or “troublesome”? It’s click-bait type language.

Shefwedfan

Pkiernan wrote: »

In fairness he didn't ftar a whole group of people in my opinion.

He offered to share his real world experience, and not (apparently) anecdotal horror stories.

I think his post was very valuable.
There are real terrible tenants out there and on the face of it local authorities could well use this scheme to house the worst of them.

It’s an awful post

He doesn’t live in area
Has no information on tenant
Has admitted he has had limited contact with other residents
Has no idea about the person that is providing the information
But still has no problem referring to them with all sorts of names.....

Pkiernan

Shefwedfan wrote: »

It’s an awful post

He doesn’t live in area
Has no information on tenant
Has admitted he has had limited contact with other residents
Has no idea about the person that is providing the information
But still has no problem referring to them with all sorts of names.....

It serves to highlight a landlords compete lack of control if he chooses to let to Councils.
It serves as a warning.

Certainly confirms my s suspicions about the local authorities.

tigger123

Pkiernan wrote: »

It serves to highlight a landlords compete lack of control if he chooses to let to Councils.
It serves as a warning.

Certainly confirms my s suspicions about the local authorities.

You should make yourself aware of that risk tbh. I've never even considered purchasing a BTL property, but even I would know that if you rent it to the council there's an element of risk involved in terms of who's going to get in there.

I'm still failing to see the issue here. He's renting to the Council, getting paid, and it's their responsibility.

Shefwedfan

Pkiernan wrote: »

It serves to highlight a landlords compete lack of control if he chooses to let to Councils.
It serves as a warning.

Certainly confirms my s suspicions about the local authorities.

You sign a contract

It details everything in it....if you don’t read the contract then nobody fault

The whole point of these contracts is for people to get rid of properties they don’t want to manage because of the area they are based in....nothing suspicious about it.....

The lack of control for most people is the best thing as they get paid, no overhead and the council need to keep the property in good conditoon

The_Conductor

In a case like this the neighbours would normally be advised to bring a 3rd party complaint, on the grounds of anti-social behaviour, to the RTB.
The local authority and the property owner- and jointly notified parties to the case and required to present for adjudication.
The owner can respond to the RTB advising of the long term lease with the local authority- and applying to have themselves removed from the case (they are not removed as a matter of course- they have to specifically request it- and it has to be justified via their long term lease with the local authority).

The RTB *is* the agency for the local residents at this point- as the local authority have no vested interest in dealing with the issue- until such time as they their arses handed to them in a sling by another state agency (as has happened in Galway Co. Co., DCC, Fingal and elsewhere- in the last 6 weeks alone).

If the neighbour contacts the owner again- they should be advised in the first instance to contact the local authority- however, if it continues unresolved- its RTB time.

Mad_maxx

Shefwedfan wrote: »

But if you terminate the contract then your left with a house that is very very hard to rent and you will end up personally dealing with dodgy tenants

Last thing I would do is terminate with council, that’s a great deal

I've no intention of terminating the lease, if the council are out of the picture, I'm left with no rent and a bunch of squatting scumbags, the money is good, even it takes a year's rent at the end of the lease to fix up the place, I'm OK with the return

Again I want to just illustrate what local authorities are doing in these circumstances, my house was cheap, I would not consider entering into a long term lease with a valuable property

Shefwedfan

Mad_maxx wrote: »

I've no intention of terminating the lease, if the council are out of the picture, I'm left with no rent and a bunch of squatting scumbags, the money is good, even it takes a year's rent at the end of the lease to fix up the place, I'm OK with the return

Again I want to just illustrate what local authorities are doing in these circumstances, my house was cheap, I would not consider entering into a long term lease with a valuable property

Have you read the contract?

From what you have posted you have not which is fairly shocking.....

I do not understand why anyone would sign up to an agreement with no idea what they have signed

Mad_maxx

Shefwedfan wrote: »

It’s an awful post

He doesn’t live in area
Has no information on tenant
Has admitted he has had limited contact with other residents
Has no idea about the person that is providing the information
But still has no problem referring to them with all sorts of names.....

The only way the above is incorrect ( or awful) is if the neighbour is telling lies, you obviously believe that they might be as your pretty damming about my interpretation

I already stated that the locals are entitled to peace, I did not write off the people who live there, I saw no trouble in the few month period between buying and handing over possession but a handful of bad eggs can ruin an area and it becomes viewed as " bad"

I am uncomfortable with the idea of people's lives being upended by anti social behaviour and ultimately its the authorities responsibility to tackle these issues, how this whole thing effects me is another matter, my overriding point is that the councils are using this long term lease scheme as a vehicle for repeat troublemakers, why would the council bother evicting them when the folks involved would be on to SF or PBP crying about homelessness?

" empty vessels" etc

Mad_maxx

dudara wrote: »

Can you please stop saying “scum tenants”? It’s a sweeping generalisation and it’s not fair to the many social tenants who are not a problem. You have troublesome or anti-social tenants, but stop extending it to all council tenants.

OK understood, I also defended the people in the locality, when other posters took an attitude of " well bad areas mean bad tenants"

my issue is the council not having a proper screening process or worse deliberately offloading problem tenants

Mad_maxx

dudara wrote: »

I’m not disagreeing with the basic content of his post. I dislike the use of the word “sum”. Why not say “anti-social” or “troublesome”? It’s click-bait type language.

Appologies

Mad_maxx

tigger123 wrote: »

You should make yourself aware of that risk tbh. I've never even considered purchasing a BTL property, but even I would know that if you rent it to the council there's an element of risk involved in terms of who's going to get in there.

I'm still failing to see the issue here. He's renting to the Council, getting paid, and it's their responsibility.

Yes I'm earning a lot per month considering what I put in to it but I won't know until I inspect it whether it's being neglected or not, I am ( per the lease contract) entitled to inspect every so often, even the property is being looked after, it seems that the council are indifferent to the anti social behaviour effecting the residents of the adjoining houses

Mad_maxx

The_Conductor wrote: »

In a case like this the neighbours would normally be advised to bring a 3rd party complaint, on the grounds of anti-social behaviour, to the RTB.
The local authority and the property owner- and jointly notified parties to the case and required to present for adjudication.
The owner can respond to the RTB advising of the long term lease with the local authority- and applying to have themselves removed from the case (they are not removed as a matter of course- they have to specifically request it- and it has to be justified via their long term lease with the local authority).

The RTB *is* the agency for the local residents at this point- as the local authority have no vested interest in dealing with the issue- until such time as they their arses handed to them in a sling by another state agency (as has happened in Galway Co. Co., DCC, Fingal and elsewhere- in the last 6 weeks alone).

If the neighbour contacts the owner again- they should be advised in the first instance to contact the local authority- however, if it continues unresolved- its RTB time.

RTB not involved here and aren't under long term lease as tenant is a public body

Mad_maxx

Shefwedfan wrote: »

Have you read the contract?

From what you have posted you have not which is fairly shocking.....

I do not understand why anyone would sign up to an agreement with no idea what they have signed

I have read the lease, I don't see anything in your posts bar personal assumptions.

tigger123

Mad_maxx wrote: »

Yes I'm earning a lot per month considering what I put in to it but I won't know until I inspect it whether it's being neglected or not, I am ( per the lease contract) entitled to inspect every so often, even the property is being looked after, it seems that the council are indifferent to the anti social behaviour effecting the residents of the adjoining houses

How can you say that if you haven't discussed it with the council? (Apologies if you have and I missed that).

Mad_maxx

tigger123 wrote: »

How can you say that if you haven't discussed it with the council? (Apologies if you have and I missed that).

Who is more likely to be a reliable source?

Those living next door or a local authority who selected the very people being complained about.

I'll soon know more but I won't be terribly surprised if the council do anything but play it down, admitting it's a major problem would potentially create work and councils hate work

tigger123

Mad_maxx wrote: »

Who is more likely to be a reliable source?

Those living next door or a local authority who selected the very people being complained about.

I'll soon know more but I won't be terribly surprised if the council do anything but play it down, admitting it's a major problem would potentially create work and councils hate work

I'm not saying the neighbour is an unreliable source, I'm saying how do you know whether the council are indifferent to it or not if you haven't spoken to them?

It seems you've gotten a few texts from the neighbour and instead of talking to Council about it (who are responsible for the entire arrangement) you're posting on boards.

And if the Council "hate work", why would you entire into an agreement with such a work shy and unreliable business partner?

Shefwedfan

Mad_maxx wrote: »

I have read the lease, I don't see anything in your posts bar personal assumptions.

You should not be contacting anyone in regards to the property, you have signed it over to the council. Ring the council if you want to discuss, not some neighbour

Also if you read it you wouldn’t make statements about losing rent to do it up, the council has to return the property in the same condition as they took it off you

Also the statement about drilling holes in wall? Also about the council leaving you with the tenants

You clearly haven’t a clue what you signed

Unless you signed a different agreement with council than everyone else has signed

Mad_maxx

tigger123 wrote: »

You're worried the council are just going to bail on the arrangement, and leave you with the tenants then.

It's a concern were I to make demands re_ anti social behaviour, might the council just decide to walk based on some flimsy interpretation of a particular clause

Mad_maxx

tigger123 wrote: »

I'm not saying the neighbour is an unreliable source, I'm saying how do you know whether the council are indifferent to it or not if you haven't spoken to them?

It seems you've gotten a few texts from the neighbour and instead of talking to Council about it (who are responsible for the entire arrangement) you're posting on boards.

And if the Council "hate work", why would you entire into an agreement with such a work shy and unreliable business partner?

The last paragraph suggests that you don't believe that the council are reliable to deal with

tigger123

Mad_maxx wrote: »

The last paragraph suggests that you don't believe that the council are reliable to deal with

I don't know whether they are or not, I've never had to deal with them.

Mad_maxx

Shefwedfan wrote: »

You should not be contacting anyone in regards to the property, you have signed it over to the council. Ring the council if you want to discuss, not some neighbour

Also if you read it you wouldn’t make statements about losing rent to do it up, the council has to return the property in the same condition as they took it off you

Also the statement about drilling holes in wall? Also about the council leaving you with the tenants

You clearly haven’t a clue what you signed

Unless you signed a different agreement with council than everyone else has signed

I'm afraid it's you who " haven't a clue"

The council offer no more than a month's rent to cover any wear and tear at the end of the lease, add to that the lease specifically states that the furniture need not even still be in the property.

The council do not pick up the tab if feral tenants do 50 k worth of damage in a house worth either 70 k or 270 k

Mad_maxx

tigger123 wrote: »

I don't know whether they are or not, I've never had to deal with them.

I've dealt with various councils down the years with respect of various issues, they invariably take the path of least resistance about everything, they want a quiet life, getting troublesome housing list candidates into a house they have for ten years is a pontius pilot job for them.

Sinus pain

Ask the neighbor to contact the council - it’s uo to the council to deal with the tenants - the tenants would have had an anti social behavior clause in their tenancy agreement - let the council deal with them

tigger123

Mad_maxx wrote: »

I've dealt with various councils down the years with respect of various issues, they invariably take the path of least resistance about everything, they want a quiet life, getting troublesome housing list candidates into a house they have for ten years is a pontius pilot job for them.

If you feel that way then you shouldn't have entered into the agreement with them in the first place.

Mad_maxx

Sinus pain wrote: »

Ask the neighbor to contact the council - it’s uo to the council to deal with the tenants - the tenants would have had an anti social behavior clause in their tenancy agreement - let the council deal with them

Ultimately that's very likely the only option, I will inspect the place first, if its in a terrible state, that makes matters more urgent and will prove to me that the council have put in the dregs of the housing list

I might have to consider selling the property to the council but it's likely that they will want it at a significant discount if the tenants ( they selected) have caused damage

Shefwedfan

Mad_maxx wrote: »

I'm afraid it's you who " haven't a clue"

The council offer no more than a month's rent to cover any wear and tear at the end of the lease, add to that the lease specifically states that the furniture need not even still be in the property.

The council do not pick up the tab if feral tenants do 50 k worth of damage in a house worth either 70 k or 270 k

No idea why you would even sign over your house with those T&C....

Mad_maxx

tigger123 wrote: »

If you feel that way then you shouldn't have entered into the agreement with them in the first place.

Well this thread is designed to warn others, afterall there has been a much publicised campaign to get old houses back in the market with the council offering long term leasing arrangements

This thread has hopefully done some good