Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Man of Kent

Members
  • Posts

    257
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Man of Kent

  1. Well, you said that serving a s.21 notice is how landlords avoid a SPT arising: my point is that nothing a landlord does can prevent that from happening. Of course landlords and tenants should be reasonable about these things, but that applies to both sides. Landlords and lettings agents are notorious for (a) exploiting tenants' lack of knowledge of the law and ( not knowing much of the law themselves, so there is no harm in both sides knowing what the situation is. It is unclear to me why a landlord who is happy to let a property to a tenant for six months, would choose to go to all the trouble and expense of evicting that tenant, accepting a void period, then finding a new tenant, for the sake of an AST rather than an SPT. The words "nose," "spite" and "face" spring to mind.
  2. Serving a s. 21 notice does not prevent a Statutory Periodic Tenancy from arising. The law says that a SPT arises at the end of an AST unless there is a court order or "by surrender or other action of the tenant." So if the AST ends, and T remains in occupation, an SPT arises. Also it it something of a misnomer to describe the s. 21 notice as an eviction notice, though I know it is commonly known as one it does give rise to the false impression among many landlords and tenants that T must leave when the notice expires. That is not so. As to the minimum length of an AST, it is true that theoretically these could be as little as one day, however from the landlord's point of view the minimum is now effectively 6 months for new tenancies: a landlord can no longer serve a s. 21 notice within the first four months of an AST.
  3. There are loads of things I would like to blog about, I do have a vague idea for a post or two setting Fergus in some context of the housing market and what it says about our society. I am wary of making the whole thing about him though.
  4. I'm not sure I can agree with that. No man is an island and all that, and in this interconnected world what happens in China goes on to affect us. On the other hand I think it to be a price well worth paying for wiping the smirk off that fat b******d's face. We could make the day he's declared bankrupt a national holiday and everything. Future generations of children can burn a Fergus on the bonfire.
  5. At the risk of being accused of shameless self-promotion, I have blogged on why, IMHO, he still can't stand: https://theviewfromthecreek.wordpress.com/2016/03/15/on-fergus-wilson-again-and-that-appeal/
  6. It's not like getting someone to empty your bins. If you're going to embark on significant and expensive litigation the least you can do is to send notices to the correct address. It looks like their litigation is being conducted by the work experience kid.
  7. It is quite hilarious. A fool and his money are easily parted. One cannot help being amused that they commence proceedings against the wrong defendants, at the wrong address, and at the wrong time. The best joke is buried in their submission, however: read the post on Property999 which sets out when they hope to be in court (they'll be disappointed if it takes until the autumn, apparently) - and now read paragraph 83 of their submission. They request an immediate reference to the Court of Justice of the European Union - which would take years, and cost them huge amounts in legal fees. Looking at it charitably, this might be because they don't want the Government to request a reference at a late stage in proceedings. Looking at it uncharitably, we might suspect that their lawyers have seen them coming.
  8. So, have the undead fools actually commenced their misguided judicial review? The deadline was the other day and I was expecting to see them announcing that they'd served the claim form, but it's all gone quiet. Have they bottled it?
  9. Surely the misrepresentation occurred after the tenancy was entered into? You didn't enter into the contract on the basis of the false information. You may be able to make a small claim for the penalty for non-protection of the deposit. As well as HMRC you could inform the police. Making a false instrument with the intention of inducing you to accept it as genuine, and would not therefore make a claim for non-protection, would appear to be an offence contrary to s.1 of the Forgery and Counterfeiting Act 1981. You might ask whichever scheme it purported to be from to make a complaint too.
  10. It is a bit odd not to be saying what the Government's response is, even in outline. I can see the benefit in not giving too much away to the other side (though parties are meant to be open with each other) but by definition the Treasury know what's in their own letter. Perhaps the Government has responded by saying that, if they lose on the discrimination point, they will not repeal s.24 but will instead impose additional taxes on landlords to which it doesn't apply, so that all landlords are treated the same.
  11. Apparently the Government has replied to the Pre Action Protocol letter, but the BTLers lawyers have advised them not to disclose what it says. I think we can assume that the first word rhymes with "duck." The final deadline for the Claim Form to be served is tomorrow *gets popcorn*.
  12. Their letter says that the remedy they are looking for is repeal of s.24. If the courts were to find it incompatible with the ECHR them all they can do is issue a Declaration of Incompatibility which the Government can safely ignore. If the courts find that it is incompatible with EU law, being unlawful state aid, they can disapply it inasmuch as it does so. If so, the Government can either ignore it, or make the law compatible, presumably by applying it to all landlords. The Insolvency118ers should be careful what they wish for. If memory serves the Claim Form has to be served on Thursday at the latest.
  13. I am also 44 this month, have never owned, and have no realistic prospect of ever owning my own home.
  14. Sale and rent back has only been regulated since 2010 so at that time any Tom, Dick or Derek could do it. I know nothing of this situation obviously, and doubtless for some it has worked OK, but for many it has been a particularly disreputable form of landlordism, preying upon the desperate and vulnerable.
  15. Casino Mentale - Agent Gary loses all his money in an ill-advised punt on the UK property market. Bleak Housing Fergus the Bogeyman
  16. Landlord of the Rings Gary, Mark, Ros and all the other trolls and hobbits travel through the Land of Mor(tgage)dor to dispose of the One Pair of Pants to Rule Them All into Mount Doom. On the way they take out a Judicial Review against Lord Sauron.
  17. Guys, I agree with all of the above with one reservation - can we lay off the tenant in the programme, please. Without giving too much away I used to be a local Councillor for that area and I know it well. There are a lot of vulnerable people there, and it's not always immediately obvious. We don't know her situation but we do know she's not able to defend herself here. Thanks.
  18. I must confess myself confused by this. If I were to read something on the letters page of the Times with which I disagreed, and I were moved to write a closely-argued and effective rebuttal, I think I'd send it to the Times in the hope that it'd be published. Posting it on a website populated entirely by the hard-of-thinking, where it will only be read by people who already agreed with me, would be about as useful as talking to my cat. And my cat's dead. An impartial observer might think I knew I was actually talking small round objects. And to save you the trouble, yes I really should be posting that over there and not here.
  19. Because they don't have any arguments under tax law, and have had to resort to desperation tactics.
×
×
  • 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.