Unusual situation, anyone any advice/insights?

Spanish Eyes

I am the executor of a relative's will. The property is to be sold and proceeds divided. Probate has been granted.

The house has been rented under the RAS scheme. Tenants were served notice +Statutory declaration.

The council arranged to pay the rent into the executor account.

Tenant has not moved out although notice period was up a month ago. Says she cannot find anywhere else to live. Council say they are trying to find accommodation.

This is the strange bit. Council advised to open a dispute with RTB to get her out.

RTB advised that as the rent is being paid by the Council until they find alternative accommodation that my issue is with the Council, no need to open a dispute since rent is being paid.

I am so confused. The beneficiaries are asking where their inheritance is!

What do you think? Ask any questions you wish. I am just so frustrated.

Snotty

The rent being paid is irrelevant, they are outside of the agreement, tell the rtb you want a case open straight away.

Secondly, I would look at who was just elected as your local councilors and ask them to assist, this is their role.

Del2005

Contact a solicitor. But if the notice was valid the tenant is over holding, regardless of the rent being paid, so you need to open a dispute with the RTB to ensure that you get the house back, but it's going to take a long time and there is nothing you can do.

Del2005

Snotty wrote: »

Secondly, I would look at who was just elected as your local councilors and ask them to assist, this is their role.

Local councilers won't help an evil landlord evict a tenant to homelessness.

The_Conductor

You need to open a dispute with the RTB with both the tenant and local authority as named respondents to your dispute.
You need to do this immediately.
If the tenant decides they can't find alternate accommodation- they could potentially play the system- which could take 18-24 months before they have exhausted all their legal options.

The local authority will actively be advising the tenant to overhold- they are as liable as anyone else in this situation.

Forget about getting your local councilor to help- he/she probably won't even talk to you- you're a landlord- QED- you're evil- its that simple.

RTB immediately- and lodge a case.

Spanish Eyes

The_Conductor wrote: »

You need to open a dispute with the RTB with both the tenant and local authority as named respondents to your dispute.
You need to do this immediately.
If the tenant decides they can't find alternate accommodation- they could potentially play the system- which could take 18-24 months before they have exhausted all their legal options.

The local authority will actively be advising the tenant to overhold- they are as liable as anyone else in this situation.

Forget about getting your local councilor to help- he/she probably won't even talk to you- you're a landlord- QED- you're evil- its that simple.

RTB immediately- and lodge a case.

Thank you, and everyone.

The RTB and the Council have each said that the council is not a party to any proceedings. That would be between me as executor/landlord (no new agreement was signed when relative died), and the tenant. The council is merely an agent who pays the rent.

In fact the council did tip me off that there is no way the tenant would be out on the quit date. Holy God! They are all complicit.

I will engage a solicitor now, but will have to go on the hunt for one who is familiar with tenant/landlord law. Oh the joys. Any recommendations by PM would be most welcome.

Anything further you all can add especially if anyone else has been in this position would be most welcome.

No reply all day to the weekly whatsapp to tenant for an update on her moving. Hmm.

Mrs OBumble

Do you or the beneficiaries know any landlords who might have a place for the tenant to move to? Can you ask around to see if anyone else does?

While you definitely need to follow the legal route as outlined, it would be quicker and easier if you can expedite things by helping the tenant find somewhere to go.

It's not so much that the council are complicit as that they know full well that there are no rental properties a available in many places.

Spanish Eyes

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Do you or the beneficiaries know any landlords who might have a place for the tenant to move to? Can you ask around to see if anyone else does?

While you definitely need to follow the legal route as outlined, it would be quicker and easier if you can expedite things by helping the tenant find somewhere to go.

It's not so much that the council are complicit as that they know full well that there are no rental properties a available in many places.

The tenant is on the housing list, therefore at the time was eligible for RAS. Unless the council now grant her HAP and she must source her own accommodation (that I don't know) I am guessing she will sit tight until the council re houses her. That could take a long time even with opening a dispute with RTB.

Neither I nor the beneficiaries want to get involved in re housing her, that is her/ the council's job really. Have enough hassle as it is!

Look, my relative was a great landlord, and the tenant in fairness was a good egg too. But this has to be done, I am under a legal obligation to distribute the estate within a year, and that is nearly up now. Although the beneficiaries will not sue me (famous last words!), they all could do with a few bob and that is what their aunt wanted at the end of the day.

Anyway, will be interesting to see how this pans out. Bit of a nightmare really.

The_Conductor

Also- its entirely possible that the tenant may be paying considerably below comparable properties.
You have two realistic options here- the formal route- logging an RTB case, allowing due process to take its course, responding to the inevitable appeals from the tenant at every step of the way- and eventually in 2 years time- just before its time to call the Sheriff in- the tenant vanishes in the night. The alternate- is to bite the bullet- find somewhere for them to go to- and pay them do so.

The law is structured to protect the tenant every step of the way- it really doesn't matter that you want to sell the property- the tenant will be advised by the local authority to overhold, FLAC will represent them free of charge- and they'll be given all manners of methods to frustrate having to leave the property- by Threshold.

Its just the way it is.........

listermint

Do the council want to buy it ? Could try that angle obviously at market rates.

Del2005

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

I am under a legal obligation to distribute the estate within a year, and that is nearly up now. Although the beneficiaries will not sue me (famous last words!), they all could do with a few bob and that is what their aunt wanted at the end of the day.

Anyway, will be interesting to see how this pans out. Bit of a nightmare really.

That isn't going to happen. A council tenant being told by the council not to move will be there for several months at best, 2+ years at worse. The beneficiaries could sue the council for advising the tenant to overhold, but that will be just wasting their inheritance.

Spanish Eyes

The_Conductor wrote: »

Also- its entirely possible that the tenant may be paying considerably below comparable properties.
You have two realistic options here- the formal route- logging an RTB case, allowing due process to take its course, responding to the inevitable appeals from the tenant at every step of the way- and eventually in 2 years time- just before its time to call the Sheriff in- the tenant vanishes in the night. The alternate- is to bite the bullet- find somewhere for them to go to- and pay them do so.

The law is structured to protect the tenant every step of the way- it really doesn't matter that you want to sell the property- the tenant will be advised by the local authority to overhold, FLAC will represent them free of charge- and they'll be given all manners of methods to frustrate having to leave the property- by Threshold.

Its just the way it is.........

I appreciate your comments, but us finding her somewhere to live is not an option. The lady is a good person never caused a minute's problem, but she is under the Council's remit regarding housing, they will either approve HAP or provide her with a housing association property, and will want everything inspected and so on beforehand.

Anyway, that might work with a private tenant, but not with someone on the housing list I think. Looks like I might be stuck for a while.

Anyway, I am going to the council next week, tenant has given me a contact. We shall see.....

Spanish Eyes

listermint wrote: »

Do the council want to buy it ? Could try that angle obviously at market rates.

We could offer it for sale to the council, but that does not necessarily mean the incumbent tenant will get to stay there either. Depends on her status on the infamous "list". That's as far as I understand it anyway.

I would as executor be obliged to sell to the highest offer anyway, and I am of the opinion that a private sale is the best way to achieve that. House is in a good area too. Not top end, but you know, the middle ground and well established.

4ensic15

You need to open a dispute for overholding but you should consult with a specialist practitioner regarding the validity of your existing notice. The council will string you out for as long as possible and won't rehouse the tenant until the sheriff is on the way. A friend of mine was in that position with a determination order. The tenant still wouldn't move. He was referred to a barrister who get the tenant out in a few weeks.

listermint

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

We could offer it for sale to the council, but that does not necessarily mean the incumbent tenant will get to stay there either. Depends on her status on the infamous "list". That's as far as I understand it anyway.

I would as executor be obliged to sell to the highest offer anyway, and I am of the opinion that a private sale is the best way to achieve that. House is in a good area too. Not top end, but you know, the middle ground and well established.

Establish market value and selling it to them for that would remove your problem and make the tenancy their problem.

Spanish Eyes

Mad that there are no sanctions whatsoever for overholding. But I knew this anyway.

Wondered since the council are paying rent into the executor account, will the RTB take any notice. Overholding, ie not leaving on quit day is one thing, but they may rebut and say hey, but the rent is being paid what are you moaning about!

I'm a bit muddled about all this. But will engage legal advice, no option now, it is not going to be pretty I reckon!

Spanish Eyes

listermint wrote: »

Establish market value and selling it to them for that would remove your problem and make the tenancy their problem.

I am going to see the council next week. I might broach this with them.

I am a bit wary that they may string any sale out indefinitely. But it might be quicker than an eviction process in the end. I just don't know what's the best option here.

Anyway, onwards and upwards. It's going to be a battle either way.

Del2005

listermint wrote: »

Establish market value and selling it to them for that would remove your problem and make the tenancy their problem.

IIRC the council want vacant possession of properties that they buy, they have to bring them up to council standards before they move people in.

Another good reason to avoid RA/HAP tenants, unfortunately the council and Threshold will advise the tenant to stay put,

Spanish Eyes

Dav010 wrote: »

Another good reason to avoid RA/HAP tenants, unfortunately the council and Threshold will advise the tenant to stay put,

Private tenants are advised the same apparently. No win situation.

At least in our case the council will continue to pay the rent to the executor account until the tenant is rehoused. Many tenants overhold and also refuse to pay rent .

No wonder LLs are leaving in droves.

Spanish Eyes

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Private tenants are advised the same apparently. No win situation.

At least in our case the council will continue to pay the rent to the executor account until the tenant is rehoused. Many tenants overhold and also refuse to pay rent .

No wonder LLs are leaving in droves.

If they are HAP and stop paying their portion to the council, the council automatically stop paying you. HAP has for the most part replaced RA.

Private tenants don’t rely on the council to rehouse them and other LLs are more likely to take private tenants, less so RA/HAP so you could be waiting a very long time for them to move on.

Sorry.

Spanish Eyes

Dav010 wrote: »

If they are HAP and stop paying their portion to the council, the council automatically stop paying you. HAP has for the most part replaced RA.

Private tenants don’t rely on the council to rehouse them and other LLs are more likely to take private tenants, less so RA/HAP so you could be waiting a very long time for them to move on.

Sorry.

They are RAS tenants under the current lease. So the council will pay the full rent until they are rehoused.

Some might say that is a great situation to be in. But not for me as executor with beneficiaries biting at my heels to get the property sold and proceeds distributed. Well they are very patient to be fair, but I can understand where they are coming from.

I don't blame them. None of the beneficiaries are greedy bstrds but could do with their inheritance to pay down debt etc. It is what their aunt wanted.

I am stuck in the middle of all this. Whoa!

Del2005

Del2005 wrote: »

IIRC the council want vacant possession of properties that they buy, they have to bring them up to council standards before they move people in.

What sort of perverse world have we created where it's impossible to get rid of a sitting tenant because the council are telling them to stay put while also refusing to buy houses with council tenants in them?

Quick question.....whose name is on the lease? Is it the tenant or the council?

If i were in your shoes, I'd be opening an RTB case immediately against whoever's name is on the lease.

Old diesel

Am I going soft or am I the only one that would be happy to wait to get my inheritance from house sale if it prevented the tenant becoming homeless.

(Given that rent is actually being paid still).

The debt of the beneficiaries really shouldnt be the OPs problem.

notharrypotter

Old diesel wrote: »

The debt of the beneficiaries really shouldnt be the OPs problem.

I suspect legally it is their problem.
They have received a legitimate inheritance and the op is the executor who has a legal obligation to fulfill the wishes of the deceased.

phildin

I had a very similar situation, house was let out under the RAS and the tenants were served valid notice that the rental agreement would not be renewed. The tenants were amicable but were advised by the council to overhold (and the council kept paying rent) as otherwise there would be nowhere for them to go.

The view of the council was that they "won't make someone homeless" and that I should bring a case to the RTB for overholding. Once a determination was made, that would put the tenants on a separate, "high risk of homelessness" list which would get them assigned somewhere more quickly.

Thankfully, the process went quite quickly and smoothly, the tenants moved out about a month after the original date specified. They didn't dispute any of the facts of the case and were happy for the RTB hearing to be done over the phone (as was I) so things moved reasonably quickly.

The process is ridiculous but at least the RTB moved reasonably quickly. I'd been quite happy with the RAS scheme up until that point but my experience at the end means I would strongly recommend against engaging with the scheme.

Old diesel

notharrypotter wrote: »

Old diesel wrote: »

The debt of the beneficiaries really shouldnt be the OPs problem.

I suspect legally it is their problem.
They have received a legitimate inheritance and the op is the executor who has a legal obligation to fulfill the wishes of the deceased.

I thought the debt was personal debt the beneficieries had BEFORE the inheritance and totally unrelated to it.

It sounds to me that the beneficieries are giving the OP a guilt trip over the need to pay debt.

The OP does have legal duties but is currently being obstructed from doing them by the councils antics.

That in itself will require the OP to get legal advice on the best way (legally) to now proceed.

I actually did out another follow up post outlining that but it timed out

Old diesel

What might the OP do now?????.

1) the Councils antics are interfering with the discharge of the OPs legal obligations. I would seek legal advice on the best way forward to handle this in terms of the OPs legal responsibility.

2) the house could possibly be sold with tenant in situ. This would however be at a reduced value if you could even get a buyer. I would get the house valued both vacant procession and with tenant. You then produce those valuations to the beneficiaries. Perhaps they might be happy to wait it out if they saw that their money goes up if they wait for the process to be over.

3) record all correspondence with Council - both to date as best you recall - and from now on.

Edit....

4) I would also outline with the beneficiaries what you have tried to do so far. What actions it is LEGALLY possible to do and what is exactly the hold up.

5) I would try to put together a financial statement of what the costs the house has incurred since you had to handle the inheritance and the income.

I would ask the solicitor if its legally possible to switch the house over to the beneficiaries BEFORE sale. And outline his/her advice on the matter.

Basically you need i think with proper advise establish what exactly you can do and show that you have and are doing everything you can with as much evidence as possible

Old diesel

Old diesel wrote: »

Am I going soft or am I the only one that would be happy to wait to get my inheritance from house sale if it prevented the tenant becoming homeless.

(Given that rent is actually being paid still).

The debt of the beneficiaries really shouldnt be the OPs problem.

In a perfect world.....maybe. But this world ain't perfect. There is any multitude of things that could happen in the meantime.

What if Govt. announces 120,000 new homes tomorrow and the @r$e falls out of the housing market overnight? Those beneficiaries are now due to receive a fraction of what they could have, had OP done his job more diligently....... Or what if one of the beneficiaries is relying on that money to pay their own mortgage, doesn't receive it in time and their house is repo'd. Why should they be homeless instead of the tenant?

To put it another way: The housing situation of the tenant really shouldn't be the OPs problem

Ray Palmer

Old diesel wrote: »

Am I going soft or am I the only one that would be happy to wait to get my inheritance from house sale if it prevented the tenant becoming homeless.

(Given that rent is actually being paid still).

The debt of the beneficiaries really shouldnt be the OPs problem.

Effectively they are costing the benefactors money. One thing to say let them be but another to say pay for them to stay. Any interest the benefactor is paying on the debt is a cost created by these people over holding. How many strangers are you subsidising so they aren't homeless? One thing to be soft another to say somebody else should subsidise a stranger.

sunnysoutheast

OP - absolutely 100% get proper, specialist legal advice regarding a) acting as executor and) getting control of the asset so it can be sold.

Certainly in the uk can be held legally liable if you do not carry out the role of executor/administrator correctly (e.g. not establishing whether there are any outstanding creditors, any recent gifts not accounted for). It's amazing how often things turn up out of the blue.

This also presents a firewall between you as the executor and the beneficiaries - "it's with the solicitor" is the perfect response. Fees can come out of the estate I believe. Any rent received will go into the estate.

One other consideration is whether tax is due on the inheritances.

The_Conductor

sunnysoutheast wrote: »

One other consideration is whether tax is due on the inheritances.

+1
Regardless of whether, or not, the property is sold- subject to inheritance thresholds- inheritance tax is still due to be paid immediately- not when the asset is finally disposed of.

sunnysoutheast

Old diesel wrote: »

Am I going soft or am I the only one that would be happy to wait to get my inheritance from house sale if it prevented the tenant becoming homeless.

(Given that rent is actually being paid still).

The debt of the beneficiaries really shouldnt be the OPs problem.

I'd say you'd be the only one, yes. Maybe do a poll?!

Spanish Eyes

Thanks for all your comments, much appreciated.

The Inheritance tax is the responsibility of the beneficiary. The executor used to have secondary liability in the event that the benefiaries did not comply with the rules, but thankfully that is no longer the case.

I would just like to say that if anyone is thinking of making a will PLEASE appoint at least two executors. It is a difficult enough job, but having to do it on your own is hard work!

Anyway, I will get legal advice, will liaise with the council, and let the beneficiaries know the state of play. They already know verbally, but I will get my solicitor to put it in writing also.

If there are any developments, I will update the thread.

the_syco

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

But this has to be done, I am under a legal obligation to distribute the estate within a year, and that is nearly up now. Although the beneficiaries will not sue me (famous last words!), they all could do with a few bob and that is what their aunt wanted at the end of the day.

So, you intend on selling? Isn't selling a reason to evict? So start eviction proceedings. And then evict with a sheriff if they don't leave?

phildin

Regarding starting eviction proceedings, there's a few more steps before eviction can be considered, you have to issue a notice of termination listing the reason (selling in this case). This appears to have been done but the tenants are not moving and have been advised to not move by the council.

If the original notice was valid then the RTB should uphold it and issue a determination but you cannot do anything until the RTB hear the case and issue their determination.

If a determination is issued, hopefully the council will take the issue more seriously. If not, then the OP can look at going to court and present the RTB determination to a judge. The judge would likely issue a court order telling the tenants to leave by a certain date. The OP will have to wait for the order to be issued and for whatever date was specified on the order to pass.

If they ignore court the order and stay beyond the specified date then the OP can start talking about forced evictions with the sheriff. I don't know anything about this procedure but without first going through the RTB and then at least one court hearing, no eviction will be possible.

beauf

Old diesel wrote: »

Am I going soft or am I the only one that would be happy to wait to get my inheritance from house sale if it prevented the tenant becoming homeless.

(Given that rent is actually being paid still).

The debt of the beneficiaries really shouldnt be the OPs problem.

The issue will be the tax and the huge fines and penalties for not paying it on time.

https://www.revenue.ie/en/gains-gifts-and-inheritance/gift-and-inheritance-tax-cat/what-charges-are-there-for-late-filing.aspx

Would you be happy to pay those fines to prevent someone being homeless?

The irony here is that it's the govt and council causing the housing problem and the fine thorough over holding. It's also the govt who will get the money from the fine.

The only loser here is the new landlord/beneficiaries. Who could they sue? How much would it cost? It's a stalemate basically.

The beneficiaries might have to consider a loan to pay any taxes due to avoid the fine.

Even when the tenant leaves it might take a long time to sell the property. The rules on tax and fines are really out of touch with reality on this.

4ensic15

beauf wrote: »

The issue will be the tax and the huge fines and penalties for not paying it on time.

https://www.revenue.ie/en/gains-gifts-and-inheritance/gift-and-inheritance-tax-cat/what-charges-are-there-for-late-filing.aspx

Would you be happy to pay those fines to prevent someone being homeless?

The irony here is that it's the govt and council causing the housing problem and the fine thorough over holding. It's also the govt who will get the money from the fine.

The only loser here is the new landlord/beneficiaries. Who could they sue? How much would it cost? It's a stalemate basically.

The beneficiaries might have to consider a loan to pay any taxes due to avoid the fine.

Even when the tenant leaves it might take a long time to sell the property. The rules on tax and fines are really out of touch with reality on this.

The beneficiaries will have to pay tax on the value of their inheritance whether they have received any money or not. Unless they have plenty of cash in the bank they will have serious problems if they have a large tax liability and no funds to pay it.

Old diesel

beauf wrote: »

Old diesel wrote: »

Am I going soft or am I the only one that would be happy to wait to get my inheritance from house sale if it prevented the tenant becoming homeless.

(Given that rent is actually being paid still).

The debt of the beneficiaries really shouldnt be the OPs problem.

The issue will be the tax and the huge fines and penalties for not paying it on time.

https://www.revenue.ie/en/gains-gifts-and-inheritance/gift-and-inheritance-tax-cat/what-charges-are-there-for-late-filing.aspx

Would you be happy to pay those fines to prevent someone being homeless?

The irony here is that it's the govt and council causing the housing problem and the fine thorough over holding. It's also the govt who will get the money from the fine.

The only loser here is the new landlord/beneficiaries. Who could they sue? How much would it cost? It's a stalemate basically.

The beneficiaries might have to consider a loan to pay any taxes due to avoid the fine.

Even when the tenant leaves it might take a long time to sell the property. The rules on tax and fines are really out of touch with reality on this.

My thinking was that the Beneficiaries haven't actually got the inheritance yet.

Hence why the OP still has the legal issues.

Does the tax still apply if the beneficiaries have yet actually get the property into their hands yet.

Because if the Beneficiaries have actually taken control of the property that would turn the thread on its head entirely.

4ensic15

Old diesel wrote: »

My thinking was that the Beneficiaries haven't actually got the inheritance yet.

Hence why the OP still has the legal issues.

Does the tax still apply if the beneficiaries have yet actually get the property into their hands yet.

Because if the Beneficiaries have actually taken control of the property that would turn the thread on its head entirely.

Once the house is inherited the tax becomes due, whether or not anyone has got any money. Depending on the time in the year the inheritance may not have to be declared for few months and the money not paid for a further period. It is not when the beneficiaries get a cheque in their hand that they are deemed to have got an inheritance. It is from the date of death (in most cases).

Old diesel

Old diesel wrote: »

Am I going soft or am I the only one that would be happy to wait to get my inheritance from house sale if it prevented the tenant becoming homeless.

(Given that rent is actually being paid still).

The debt of the beneficiaries really shouldnt be the OPs problem.

I got this a bit wrong as it seems the inheritance tax becomes due faster then I would have thought.

Apologies

devlinio

My parents had a tenant not pay rent. She was in receipt of rent allowance. She destroyed the house, my parents had no rent for 4 months, and it cost 10K and 3 months of us working on it to bring it up to scratch. She refused to acknowledge the notice, and Threshold advised her to stay (shower of bastards). She moved out when my parents paid her back her deposit of 1K.

So 15K out of pocket, but they have had two different tenants in that house for the last 6 years, with no issue. 99% of tenants will be great.

bingbong500

The_Conductor wrote: »

If the tenant decides they can't find alternate accommodation- they could potentially play the system-

I'm sure you are actually aware that many people evicted in this way actually cannot find alternative accomodation and have no wish to play any system. What would you do if you have a house, are evicted from it, and there is nowhere who will take you as a tenant for a rent you can afford?
What should someone do in that situation?

4ensic15

bingbong500 wrote: »

I'm sure you are actually aware that many people evicted in this way actually cannot find alternative accomodation and have no wish to play any system. What would you do if you have a house, are evicted from it, and there is nowhere who will take you as a tenant for a rent you can afford?
What should someone do in that situation?

That is like saying that if you have no money for food you can just go into shops or restaurants and help yourself for free.

Old diesel

bingbong500 wrote: »

The_Conductor wrote: »

If the tenant decides they can't find alternate accommodation- they could potentially play the system-

I'm sure you are actually aware that many people evicted in this way actually cannot find alternative accomodation and have no wish to play any system. What would you do if you have a house, are evicted from it, and there is nowhere who will take you as a tenant for a rent you can afford?
What should someone do in that situation?

What if the person who owns or is managing the property can't actually afford to have someone overstay in the property.

What if the landlord actually needs to live in it ASAP.

It's a real mess though because frequently the option is to rock up to the council homeless section and end up getting into emergency accommodation.

The problem with people overstaying (in general) is that that being able to do it for a long period of a year or more is added risk for the landlord.

That risk might mean he sells up and NO ONE can then rent it. It's also a disincentive to a new buy to let investor.

The_Conductor

Ironically- in both Galway and Dublin (don't know about Cork)- property owners who sought to move back into their own, sole, property- have ended up in emergency local authority accommodation- when their tenants refused to vacate the units they were in. I wish I were joking. The system doesn't work.

beauf

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

I am the executor of a relative's will. The property is to be sold and proceeds divided. Probate has been granted.

....

What do you think? Ask any questions you wish. I am just so frustrated.

I think this is going to be more common. The system has no means to handle this situation.

At this point the beneficiaries have to accept that it's not going to be sorted for a long time. You the executor might consider if you are not getting anything. It might be a consideration to renunciate.

bingbong500

4ensic15 wrote: »

That is like saying that if you have no money for food you can just go into shops or restaurants and help yourself for free.

It isn't, but tbh if you are actually starving I have no moral issue with you stealing a loaf of bread from Tesco.

The point being that you can be doing the "wrong thing" for non bad reasons. And you didn't answer me: what would you do? Would you leave your rented home with nowhere to go? Then what?

I'm not saying its good to do it, or that it doesn't completely suck for the landlord. I'm just saying that its understandable when people have no other options, and most of us would do the exact same if we had nowhere else to go.

None of us would say "alright mate, fair enough, it's your house after all, I'll take a sleeping bag and find a nice doorway....."

4ensic15

bingbong500 wrote: »

It isn't, but tbh if you are actually starving I have no moral issue with you stealing a loaf of bread from Tesco.

The point being that you can be doing the "wrong thing" for non bad reasons. And you didn't answer me: what would you do? Would you leave your rented home with nowhere to go? Then what?

I'm not saying its good to do it, or that it doesn't completely suck for the landlord. I'm just saying that its understandable when people have no other options, and most of us would do the exact same if we had nowhere else to go.

None of us would say "alright mate, fair enough, it's your house after all, I'll take a sleeping bag and find a nice doorway....."

All right. You are a dishonourable thief.

bingbong500

4ensic15 wrote: »

All right. You are a dishonourable thief.

I am? In what way? I'm not OP's tenant! Not that I agree with the premise that the tenant is either dishonourable or a thief, but still, the point stands.

Still didn't answer the question I note.

4ensic15

bingbong500 wrote: »

I am? In what way? I'm not OP's tenant! Not that I agree with the premise that the tenant is either dishonourable or a thief, but still, the point stands.

Still didn't answer the question I note.

What question?