Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Guest_FaFa!_*

  1. Really? http://www.adviceguide.org.uk/index/family...rights_of_entry Anyway shall we just agree to disagree? I think this htread is starting to go severely off topic
  2. We are discussing viewings, not inspections. I think it is clear to everyone that the LL has the right to inspect the state of repair of the property with adequate notice. But that is an entirely separate issue.
  3. He certainly was! Two flats in Didsbury.... Long on property, short on brains
  4. I love the way you don't deny my point that you have a total contempt for your tenants. Of course ultimately buying a property is better than renting, but only an affordable levels and not in a falling market. If the LL gives a bad reference the tenant would have the right to have sight of it and right to reply. Anyway, another example of the contempt you have for tenants and your general superior attitude to them. No-one should be buying at the moment and some are unable to anyway. But according to you, they should have no rights to complain and just be trampled all over.
  5. The agent doesn't want to go to dispute because it is going to make them look very bad: 1. They didn't pass the inventory onto the LL, which they should have. They are liable for this, not you. Do you have a copy of the amended inventory (dated) and written acknowledgement that the agent has it? 2. If it is not on the inventory, you are not liable. That's unfortunate for the landlord, but there you go. Go to dispute, you have absoultely nothing to lose. The agent has erred, not you and they should carry the can. Why should you pay for their mistakes? Do not accept this in any way, shape or form. Having said that, if you are in contact with the LL, I suggest you point this out to them in a politely worded letter, drawing attention to the fact that in previous inspection there were no problems, that you have been great tenants and that the agent is responsible. Say that you are sorry about the damage, but you are not responsible for something you pointed out when you moved in and you are not responsible for something not on the inventory. Tell the LL to pursue the agent for this, not you. If you express all this in polite, sympathetic tones (after all there is damage to the property) it might help the LL change their mind and will look good at the dispute. Best of luck!
  6. I love the total contempt you have for the people who are paying your mortgage. I think I will weep copiously when you and your ilk get shafted in the years to come
  7. I hesitated to answer this as I do not have any legal training, so before I answer the point I want to reiterate to anyone reading that this is just my opinion and they should always get legal advice from the free legal centres (link given in my post above)or the Citizens Advice Bureau, and not from internet forums. Also here is the link for the full law we are discussing below so others reading can have a look and come to their own conclusions. http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2004/ukpga...4_en_19#pt6-ch4 Having said that I think the point is totally erroneous for the following reasons: 1. It is highly unlikely that disputes concerning the TDS will come to light until the tenant has left the property. Even if the tenant becomes aware that the LL has not been compliant with the TDS during the tenancy they may hold fire until they leave in order not to damage their relationship with the LL. It is not for the tenant to chase up the LL concerning the LL's legal obligations. It is for the LL to comply with the law, and show how they are compliant on demand. Given the TDS is in place to assist tenants once they have left the property and are re-claiming the deposit, it would go totally against the spirit of the law to say they are not entitled to sue the LL because they are no longer resident at the property referred to in the AST. 2. The reason why the law refers to the tenant is to ensure it is clear who is liable for what. The TDS is linked to a specific AST. The AST will refer to the LL as the LL and the tenant as the tenant. I cannot think of another way of describing their relationship without getting unnecessarily complex and confusing. The court will refer to the AST to establish who is responsible for paying the deposit into the TDS (the LL) and whose money the deposit is (the tenant). Referring to them as the LL and the tenant is just shorthand to clarify who we are talking about. 3. There is no statute of limitations on the law. The law clearly states that the LL must 1. place the deposit in a TDS and then 2. inform the tenant where the TDS within 14 days of the tenancy commencing. If the LL fails to do this they are liable to the 3 times the deposit compensation. There is nothing in the law referring to how long the tenant has to take the LL to court concerning the TDS. 4. I sued my LL over a month after I left my tenancy. This was because my LL's failure to comply with the TDS did not come to light until I tried to recover my deposit. In the court the judge made it clear to my LL that the LL is liable for the 3 times deposit fine and that he will have to pay this. The only reason the LL was given time to mount a defence is because the LL disputed the amount of the deposit he must pay back (I think he is on a hiding to nothing here) which meant there was a substanial dispute of fact and the judge ruled that he should have time to mount a defence as it may lessen his liabilities in terms of the deposit he may need to pay back, but not in terms of him having to pay the 3 times compensation. If I was not allowed to sue because I am not longer the tenant, the judge would have thrown this out immediately. I hope this is clear. My apologies for the length, but I am on my coffee break and have no time to be briefer. Once again I would appeal to any readers to take any internet advice from a stranger with a pinch of salt and to get advice from professionals.
  8. Here's Oxford February 2008-2009 Can't see much of a pick up m'self......and do note the part in bold. Apologies for the poor formatting, but I think the message is clear Average Property Selling Prices in Oxford (£000's) 3-month moving averages by property type in Oxford Due to the small amount of data available for this graph it may appear to be erratic. To gain a better picture of the Selling Prices in this area please see House Prices Report in Oxfordshire Feb 2008 Feb 2009 Change Detached £519,010 £304,000 -41% Semi £361,197 £230,462 -36% Terraced £297,491 £252,000 -15% Flat £245,130 £166,167 -32% All £338,745 £235,413 -31% Median Property Selling Prices in Oxford (£000's) Due to the small amount of data available for this graph it may appear to be erratic. To gain a better picture of the Selling Prices in this area please see House Prices Report in Oxfordshire Feb 2008 Feb 2009 Change Detached £395,000 £207,000 -48% Semi £280,000 £230,000 -18% Terraced £282,400 £266,500 -6% Flat £215,000 £151,000 -30% Number of Properties Sold in Oxford Feb 2008 Jan 2009 Change Detached 12 18 +50% Semi 51 31 -39% Terraced 28 22 -21% Flat 23 25 +9%
  9. Sorry to hear about your trouble, but there is no need for a tenant to go out of their way to facilitate the viewings. The LL must give 24 hours notice, it needs to be towards the end of the tenancy (check the agreement to find out when the LL is permitted to start viewings) and the tenant is within their rights to say they want to be present when the viewer comes around and also ask for viewings to be moved if it is inconvenient for them. Regarding the deposit, it should be with the TDS so LL should have a limited ability to play silly b**gers with it. I went through the same thing in a tenancy with the LL selling up and made it clear viewings were fine, but also made it clear when I would accept viewings and when I wouldn't. It might be worth sitting down with the LL nearer the time and sorting out some ground rules which should be ok if the LL is reasonably professional and you have a good relationship with them. Remember you can scutter viewings pretty easily by pointing out flaws in the property, neighbourhood etc etc if they decide they want to try to order you about when to accept viewings and it is in their interests to keep you sweet.
  10. I don't think he is a bad guy - just a damn fool. It all reminds me of the time I saw some programme on the BBC about some idiot MEWer who had bankrupted himself. He was all very cheery about it and told the presenter about his new job - as a debt counsellor. He felt he was the best qualified person for the job as when some other moron came in and started saying dimwit stuff like "I spent 20k I don't have on a safari" or "I MEWed at peak to re-do the kitchen/bathroom for the 3rd time in 5 years" he could say "Yep! I did that too" and make other sympathetic noises. *head in hands*
  11. He's done better than that: Edmund L. Andrews is an economics reporter for The Times and the author of “Busted: Life Inside the Great Mortgage Meltdown,” which will be published next month by W.W. Norton and from which this article is adapted. He's made money out of his financial incompetence!
  12. Hi this is my first post. I am in similar situation to your sister (currently in legal battle with the ex-LL concerning tds non-compliance), but have had the benefit of legal advice so want to throw in my supportive two cents Your sister contacted each of the three schemes and got confirmation in writing (preferably by letter but email is ok) right? If the landlord challenges her in court, the onus is on her to prove their non-compliance. Just saying I asked for proof but none was given may not cut it. No, they don't get out it of that easily. What the court wants is for the landlords to have an opportunity to defend themselves. Ok, it is a little lenient, but the judge does have some discretion in these cases. I am in a similar situation, but the landlord attended the hearing without submitting a defence beforehand. The judge gave him time to submit a defence. I am surprised the court has not given definite dates when the ll needs to submit a defence by. Your sister will need to keep chasing this. Yes this is extremely dodgy and as financial hack says, sounds like your sister was living in an illegal dwelling. You should grass up the LL asap. The whole thing about the husband's name is balls. It is not for your sister to enquire into whether the name given on the tenancy agreement is their real name. It was reasonable for your sister to assume the name was correct and unless they are able to prove they are not the LL (I cannot see how they can) they don't have much of a leg to stand on. You and your sister are going to have to be patient. I know how frustrating this is, but that is the way these things are. Ultimately the court will require the LL to present a defence and when they do, your sister will have an opportunity to counter it. If the LL is unwilling or unable to present a defence, a judgment will be issued against them and your sister will then have the fun and games of trying to actually get the money off them. This will take time. The ocurt may look soft, but you don't want to look pushy or hectoring - that will not help your case. The area I think you need to look into are the possible ramifications on the case of the fact your sister lived in an illegal dwelling. It would add to the general picture your sister will want to paint of an awful LL and how she is the poor, downtrodden tenant. I would therefore advise her to get some legal advice, if she hasn't already. Initially she should try a free legal advice centre (http://www.lawcentres.org.uk) and take it from there. Regarding the £350 your sister has spent, that should be added to the claim. The LL should pay that as it is their fault your sister has had to take them to court in the first place. Best of luck!
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.