Comments by "Peter \x26 Pete" (@PeterPete) on "98-year-old D-Day veteran FORCED out of home after no-fault eviction notice" video.

Anything negative to say about the landlord? (silence.........................) Oh I guess not!!
3
@bridiesmith5110 But one has a secured tenancy when living in council or HA accommodation. There's more security as a tenant than as a tenant in the private sector. Rents are cheaper too!! Private landlords only care about themselves and getting the rent, not about their tenants. Whichever way you look at it tenants in the private sector get a bum deal, whether one is an army vet or not.
3
Deb Dean: We received a solicitor’s letter for a no-fault eviction. The elderly landlord is a friend of ours but he is in ill health and his children have decided to sell. They have followed the correct process so our issue is not so much with them but with Dorset council. Just some facts that gb news have omitted from this report
2
@kieran5191 you're missing the point, the Council are temporarily housing him and his family under homelessness legislation. It's temporary accommodation. A proper bungalow would be permanenet accommodation. Once permanent accommodation is found the Council can then offer him the accommodation, if he accepts the Council can discharge its duty towards him.
2
@kieran5191 but the guy is being housed temporarily until a suitable property crops up. The guy is not sleeping on the streets! For me the real issue here is that a 90yr old person should have more protection in their rented home - with the right protection in law the guy could have remained in his rented home until he died. But we live in a country where money comes first, then property and then lastly people so a landlord can uproot an elderly tenant at anytime as long as notice is given for the sake of money!! That's the real sadness of this case!
2
And yet the elderly landlord could have kept the 98 year old in the property for a few more years until he died, but no, they want the money and cause distress to the poor guy!!! Priorities in Britain, 1) money 2) property 3) people 👍
2
@andrewoliver8930 they receive money in the rent!
2
@andrewoliver8930 this is a prime example where money comes before people!
2
@GKSC Priorities in Britain, 1) money 2) property 3) people 👍
2
@bridiesmith5110 that's BS, the landlord could easily have allowed the veteran to remain in the property until he died. He was 98, there was only a few year in him probably. The landlord was still receiving rent so was not financially deprived in any way. But no, the landlord kicks him and his family out for the Council to pick up the pieces!! It's Great living in Britain!!! Money first, property second and people last 👍
2
Still proud of his king and country and yet he's got nowhere to live - what a joke!!!
1
It was probably a white English landlord who kicked out the 98 year old army veteran 👍 That's right, put money first before people!!!
1
@djbogz1921 They omit this because they want to rile their viewers up so they all get angry with asylum seekers!!!
1
Anything to say about the landlord? Should the landlord hang his head in shame for kicking out a 98 year old man along with his family from his home? Probably white British landlord too.
1
@PA-ss5cq I can condemn the landlord because I think it is callous how the children of the landlord put money before people and decided to sell the property even though they were receiving rental payments. As far as I am concerned no housing legislation should exist that allows ANY landlord to evict a 98 year old person onto the streets. It's another failure on society as whole!!!
1
Kicked out by his white British landlord!!!
1
Asylum seekers (whilst their claims are being processed) are the responsibility of the home office, not local councils. Any person who makes a homeless application to a council and the Council have a duty towards them, the council is responsible for that person and the council will place them in temporary accommodation whilst the council find suitable long term accommodation. If that person decides to find accommodation elsewhere, whether it be a hotel, hostel or friends house, that action terminates the Council's responsibility towards them.
1
I bet the landlord is white British 👍
1
@lesigh1749 huh?? the veteran didn't have a council house before and he has no right to a council house. The Council will find accommodation for him and his family whether it is council stock, housing association stock or in the private sector. What's your beef?
1
@richardstone3473 That's GB News for you!!!! Using vulnerable people to sway people's attitudes to suit a specific agenda 👍 I totally agree with you. The story is more relevant to the lack of security a private renter has and you're the only one who has the decency to recognise that!!
1
@lesigh1749 nobody has a right to a council house. if it was the case there wouldn't be any private renters and most people would all be living in council property 👍
1
@lesigh1749 Like I've stated nobody has a right to a council house. Councils do have an obligation to provide housing to successful asylum seekers but this housing can be anywhere including in the private sector 👍 If people had a right to a council house, the Government would be building council houses 👍
1
@kieran5191 the reality is that tenants in the private sector have little security of tenure. in other words a landlord can evict you at any time as long they give you notice. It's bum rap for tenants in private sector accommodation - it's got nothing to do with asylum seekers and immigrants
1
@lesigh1749 the guy's with his family - they'll give him more comfort than any property can!
1
@lesigh1749 you don't get it do you. As far as I'm aware they ALL lived at the same rented property and the owner of the rented property wishes to sell to make money! Current legislation currently allows a landlord to sell their property as long as notice is given on a tenant. Why are you moaning at asylum seekers when it is clear the law needs to be changed to protect vulnerable tenants in private accommodation! You're coming across to me as one illogical person!
1
@kieran5191 It's only temporary accommodation. The big issue here is how the law allows a landlord to make a vulnerable person homeless. If you think that's right you're seriously not on the army veteran's side!!!
1
@johnsmith-rs2vk who's country? it can't be your country because you wouldn't let any of this happen in the first place 👍
1
@njoyingtube1 Ahhh just because I'm not having a go at the council and instead having a go at the cruel landlord for kicking out a 98 year old veteran because the law allows him to do it..........ahhhhh!!!!
1