Consumer Credit Support  
Bailiff Advice Online

Go Back   Consumer Credit Support > Housing > Housing
FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #41  
Old 23-06-2009, 10:33 AM
Dragonlady's Avatar
Dragonlady Dragonlady is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Proud member of the CFC.
Posts: 10,998
Dragonlady has disabled reputation
Default

If she tries to push it. i would take her to court and make her prove her claim. You can issue an N1 for the return of your security
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 23-06-2009, 02:53 PM
Belibaste's Avatar
Belibaste Belibaste is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,992
Belibaste is a name known to allBelibaste is a name known to allBelibaste is a name known to allBelibaste is a name known to allBelibaste is a name known to allBelibaste is a name known to all
Default

She is trying to put you off lodging your own claim whilst at the same time putting in spurious claims for items which were not on the original dilapidation schedule with the intention of bettering the physical state of the property at your expense.

The tenancy term she is citing, I am pretty sure could be challenged in any case as an unfair term under the UTCCR. She would certainly not be awarded court costs unless she won a claim, not just as a matter of course because of a term she inserted in the tenancy. If it is deemed unfair, it cannot be enforced.

Don't be put off - issue your N1, as DL says. If she counterclaims, don't forget to lodge a defence pretty quickly otherwise, she could be awarded the counterclaim amount by default.
__________________
E-mail addresses are now available to all members at a cost of 5.00 per year. Please PM tamadus for details

Please do not be offended if I have to edit out derogatory words or statements from your posts. Sometimes, this is necessary to protect the poster and the site from retaliatory action



Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 23-06-2009, 04:15 PM
Belibaste's Avatar
Belibaste Belibaste is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,992
Belibaste is a name known to allBelibaste is a name known to allBelibaste is a name known to allBelibaste is a name known to allBelibaste is a name known to allBelibaste is a name known to all
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by neill1999 View Post
She also stated a clause in our tenancy which is as follows could someone explain it to me
"To pay all fees expenses and costs including soliciters, court fees, and surveyor fees incurred by the landlord in preparing and serving a Notice of Schedule on the eanant of any breach of any convenant on the part of the tenant contained herein"
1. Was there a balancing clause in your favour in the tenancy?

2. This is what the OFT say about legal fees etc Legal costs

"3.55 Terms sometimes require the tenant to pay all the landlord's costs in bringing any court proceedings, regardless of their outcome. Under English law the award of legal costs in court proceedings is always at the discretion of the court.24 Such a term could be relied upon to charge the tenant excessive legal costs and also allow the landlord to seek to recover the costs of an action which a court would be likely to dismiss. A court normally awards costs against the party at fault. There is no objection to a term saying that tenants who break the terms of the tenancy can expect to have to meet any reasonable legal costs properly incurred as a result.

3.56 For similar reasons, we would object to any term that appears to allow a landlord to claim more compensation from a tenant in court proceedings than would actually be awarded. Such terms are misleading, cannot be enforced, and could be used to make a tenant comply with demands that have no legal basis.

3.57 We also object to terms that purport to require tenants to pay legal costs on an indemnity basis. The word 'indemnify' is legal jargon, which, if understood at all, is liable to be taken as a threat to pass on legal and other costs incurred without regard to reasonableness."
__________________
E-mail addresses are now available to all members at a cost of 5.00 per year. Please PM tamadus for details

Please do not be offended if I have to edit out derogatory words or statements from your posts. Sometimes, this is necessary to protect the poster and the site from retaliatory action




Last edited by Belibaste : 23-06-2009 at 04:19 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 23-06-2009, 04:51 PM
The Terminator's Avatar
The Terminator The Terminator is offline
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Getting in a DCA's face
Posts: 1,940
The Terminator is a name known to allThe Terminator is a name known to allThe Terminator is a name known to allThe Terminator is a name known to allThe Terminator is a name known to allThe Terminator is a name known to all
Default

I think your also find that she has breached this and I would put it in your poc

21 Recovery of possession on expiry or termination of assured shorthold tenancy.
(4) Without prejudice to any such right as is referred to in subsection (1) above, a court shall make an order for possession of a dwelling-house let on an assured shorthold tenancy which is a periodic tenancy if the court is satisfied—
(a) that the landlord or, in the case of joint landlords, at least one of them has given to the tenant a notice stating that, after a date specified in the notice, being the last day of a period of the tenancy and not earlier than two months after the date the notice was given, possession of the dwelling-house is required by virtue of this section; and
(b) that the date specified in the notice under paragraph (a) above is not earlier than the earliest day on which, apart from section 5(1) above, the tenancy could be brought to an end by a notice to quit given by the landlord on the same date as the notice under paragraph (a) above.

Taken from the Housing Act 1988.My question is did she follow that procedure.

Term
__________________
The real evil is not the payment of money, but the secrecy attending it (Chitty L.J. in the case of Shipway v Broadwood [1899] 1 QB 369, 373). .

The courts shall not make an enforcement order under section 65(1) if section 61(1)(a) (signing of agreements) was not complied with unless a document (whether or not in the prescribed form and complying with regulations under section 60(1)) itself containing all the prescribed terms of the agreement was signed by the debtor or hirer (whether or not in the prescribed manner

Moneylending transactions as a class give rise to significant social problems.

Astalavista baby and I'll be back
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 23-06-2009, 05:00 PM
Dragonlady's Avatar
Dragonlady Dragonlady is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Proud member of the CFC.
Posts: 10,998
Dragonlady has disabled reputation
Default

Go get her, now you ar armed with these facts
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 23-06-2009, 05:11 PM
The Terminator's Avatar
The Terminator The Terminator is offline
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Getting in a DCA's face
Posts: 1,940
The Terminator is a name known to allThe Terminator is a name known to allThe Terminator is a name known to allThe Terminator is a name known to allThe Terminator is a name known to allThe Terminator is a name known to all
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dragonlady View Post
Go get her, now you ar armed with these facts
And there is still more to come:

http://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/markup...ald&method=all

Now take her to the cleaners

Term
__________________
The real evil is not the payment of money, but the secrecy attending it (Chitty L.J. in the case of Shipway v Broadwood [1899] 1 QB 369, 373). .

The courts shall not make an enforcement order under section 65(1) if section 61(1)(a) (signing of agreements) was not complied with unless a document (whether or not in the prescribed form and complying with regulations under section 60(1)) itself containing all the prescribed terms of the agreement was signed by the debtor or hirer (whether or not in the prescribed manner

Moneylending transactions as a class give rise to significant social problems.

Astalavista baby and I'll be back
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 23-06-2009, 06:12 PM
Belibaste's Avatar
Belibaste Belibaste is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,992
Belibaste is a name known to allBelibaste is a name known to allBelibaste is a name known to allBelibaste is a name known to allBelibaste is a name known to allBelibaste is a name known to all
Default

Except I think that it was the tenant and not the landlord who gave notice guys. Is that right Neill?
__________________
E-mail addresses are now available to all members at a cost of 5.00 per year. Please PM tamadus for details

Please do not be offended if I have to edit out derogatory words or statements from your posts. Sometimes, this is necessary to protect the poster and the site from retaliatory action



Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 23-06-2009, 06:16 PM
neill1999 neill1999 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Southampton
Posts: 185
neill1999 is on a distinguished road
Default

Beli, no i am sure there is no clause that would balance that out. Is that in the OFT publication beli about the legal costs i was hoping that would be the case. We received a email from LA a couple of weeks ago stating rendering repair was going to be 97.50 but then they said the landlady was going to seek her own workman to do the repair and now it has gone up to 300 !!!! Thing is it is in desperate need of a coat of paint anyway as it has not been painted for 25 years so you can imagine what it looks like magnolia turning greenish lol

Term, Unfortunatly the sec 21 will not apply as it was us who gave a months notice to move out and end the tenancy due to finding a nicer and bigger property.
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 23-06-2009, 06:25 PM
Belibaste's Avatar
Belibaste Belibaste is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,992
Belibaste is a name known to allBelibaste is a name known to allBelibaste is a name known to allBelibaste is a name known to allBelibaste is a name known to allBelibaste is a name known to all
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by neill1999 View Post
Beli, no i am sure there is no clause that would balance that out. Is that in the OFT publication beli about the legal costs i was hoping that would be the case. We received a email from LA a couple of weeks ago stating rendering repair was going to be 97.50 but then they said the landlady was going to seek her own workman to do the repair and now it has gone up to 300 !!!! Thing is it is in desperate need of a coat of paint anyway as it has not been painted for 25 years so you can imagine what it looks like magnolia turning greenish lol

Term, Unfortunatly the sec 21 will not apply as it was us who gave a months notice to move out and end the tenancy due to finding a nicer and bigger property.
Yes, both are in the OFTguidance and are their interpretation of the UTCCR. The contract has to have a balancing term in your favour in order to be fair.

She is clearly hoping that you are going to pay for improvements to the house which are her responsibility and not yours.
__________________
E-mail addresses are now available to all members at a cost of 5.00 per year. Please PM tamadus for details

Please do not be offended if I have to edit out derogatory words or statements from your posts. Sometimes, this is necessary to protect the poster and the site from retaliatory action



Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 07-08-2009, 09:03 AM
neill1999 neill1999 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Southampton
Posts: 185
neill1999 is on a distinguished road
Default

Thought i beeter post you good people a quick update.

This is still ongoing but have taken a bit of back seat for last few weeks due to family berevment.

I will be launching court action for this on 28th August and have given landlady final deadline.

She is still adamant that i have to pay for brand new carpet even though it would be nearly six years old now, furthermore to add insult to injury she has sent me a quotation of 297 for carpet but not had the new carpet laid, and is renting the property out to new tenants with the wooden flooring, so is she going to get them to move all their belongings out of the lounge at some point in the near future to have carpet laid!!!
( I have a feeling she might counterclaim for the cost of carpet but i dont think she stands any chance in court over this)

Also the rendering where the holes were filled there is no mention of the condition of this on the inventory, which i feel is a good point however it could also be a bad point as there was a great big crack right up the render when we moved in and this is not mentioned on inventory in fact it does not state condition of outside of property at all??
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 06:25 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Consumer Credit Support