Join the Residential Landlords Association

Member Forums - Report Post

If you wish for the RLA to contact you regarding this report please remember to provide contact details.

Please Note: - This facility is for reporting of abuse or other breaches of the forum rules. Please do not use this facility to reply to the post as your response will not appear here - to reply please use the quote option.
  1. Please do not post RLA enquiries in these forums. Any enquiries should be sent to info@rla.org.uk.
  2. Please note that the initial message in any forum conversation on this website is viewable by the public.
  3. For security reasons, please do not include your membership number within the title or body of your forum post.
  4. You must not include any personal details relating to your tenants, such as their names and addresses, in your postings.
  5. You must not use the forums to advertise your service or business. Please use the RLA's suppliers guide for all advertising purposes.
  6. Any content deemed as advertising, inappropriate or does not meet the RLA's code of conduct will be removed from the forums.
  7. The RLA cannot be held responsible for any posts made in these forums by non-RLA staff
Report a post:
Tom39 said: Posted on: 07/07/2019 20:24

Dear Advice Team.

Would the following tenant behaviour be sufficient to evict on a S8 Notice?

  1. At the outset of the tenancy, some 3 ˝ years ago, the tenant homed her pet dog (a large Mastiff animal) in the property against the specific terms of the tenancy and without our approval. The move was a premeditated deceit in that she took out a one-month pet insurance policy (prior to the start of the tenancy) which specified the property address as the dog’s permanent home as contingency to the dog being discovered, in a post-discovery attempt to convince us that the dog would not prove an undue drain on her financial resources if it fell ill. When we indeed discovered the deceit several months later and was copied the one-month policy, we challenged her to prove that she had extended the pet policy, she was unable or unwilling to do so. The dog has used the rear garden of the property as a defaecation and urination pit for the full 3 ˝ years of her residence as it is rarely if ever exercised. We have made repeatedly clear to the tenant that dog was and is illicitly homed but stopped short of further action as the contamination of the house and garden had already taken place. We didn’t want the premature hassle of eviction and clean-up.
  2. There has also been one further (more minor) instance of constructive dishonesty.
  3. The tenant has apparently been responsible for two mouse infestations (one 18 months ago and successfully dealt with, one current), by repeatedly leaving doors and windows open in unattended rooms. A pest control company’s reports for the current infestation acknowledge that there are no other potential ingress points (a very few were found and dealt with under the first successful eradication by the same company) and cite pungent dog food left in the kitchen as the likely food source. She has now missed two of three access appointments she herself agreed with the pest control company concerned, but continues to blame us.
  4. The tenant has previously had us arrange electrician visits for “faults” which turned out to be merely blown lightbulbs.
  5. No less than five tradesman have declined to deal with her due to her offensive or time-wasting manner in dealing with them over access.
  6. The tenant has consistently failed to pay her rent by standing order, as set out in the RLA tenancy, thereby making her liable for a £10 charge per failure, although her overall arrears stand at only one week’s rent.

Please advise.

Landlord & Investment Show London Olympia 2019
Residently
99 Homes
John Pye Auctions