Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
groupoffour

Enforcing A Ccj Against A Letting Agency Director/landlord

Recommended Posts

I have decided to repost this case with a clearer description of events and my questions regarding them. I should apologise, however, for any still present lack of clarity and also for the length of the post:

I am one of four tenants who were awarded a CCJ against the person who countersigned our tenancy agreement claiming to be both the landlord and the director of a letting agency managing the house which we rented. I will from now on refer to him as ‘CCJed’ (unless anyone can suggest a better name) and he was named directly in the order without any reference to him being director but with the letting agency office stated as his address which we used for correspondence.

The CCJ was awarded as a penalty for not protecting (via TDS) or repaying our deposit. However, in investigating how to enforce the CCJ we have found several complications and discrepancies via the following sources:

Land Registry – Shows the Landlords to be a differently named (apparently) married couple and not CCJed, the director of the letting agency who is signed as landlord on the tenancy agreement.

Companies House –

16/02/2007 date of appointment of Letting Agency

04/09/2007 Letting Agency was dissolved

26/10/2007 We, the tenants, signed a new assured shorthold tenancy agreement beginning from Nov 2007.

01/05/2008 Tenancy agreement expired.

13/08/2008 Our small-claims case filed.

This information appears to confirm CCJed as the director of the letting agency which is a limited company (“LTDâ€), however, it appears that, from before we signed the contract the letting agency had been dissolved. With this information in mind it is unclear whether or not it is still a legitimate (correctly awarded) CCJ and where we can hope to get our deposit back. The letting agency’s office is still open and the company continues to trade.

Another point of confusion as to whether this is a legitimate CCJ, is that it has been placed on the director which a forum member informed me would normally be illegitimate because the letting agency is a limited company. However, the fact that this director (CCJed) has signed as the landlord (albeit seemingly illegitimately) may mean our CCJ was correctly made and can be enforced. Firstly, does this appear to be still a legitimate CCJ? Secondly, is it not a criminal offence to give one’s name as landlord on a tenancy agreement when it is not the case?

A forum member also suggested we might be best served looking into switching our focus to the landlords. Clearly in this respect we jumped the gun in deciding who to bring our case against. If this appears recommendable, would it be easily changeable via the existing CCJ or would we need to start a new case with fresh court costs?

We have received no contact from CCJed subsequent to him posting his defence and counterclaim which was subsequently struck out due to him not attending our hearing with I believe a default judgment in our favour.

The address of CCJed was given as the Letting Agency but this may be insufficient given the lack of response to our case following the judgement and the fact that the company has officially been dissolved (despite it continuing to trade, now, long after its dissolved date). I am currently out of the country and am therefore conducting this research from afar. When I return I intend to contact the Dawn Advice Ltd on 0845 456 6815, attempt to access half an hour’s free advice from a solicitor, and possibility employ a licensed private investigator in order to successfully enforce. Other avenues which appear may be useful which I have found from reading numerous posts on numerous legal/consumer rights websites are Business Anti-Fraud helpline on 0800 788 887, Customs Confidential hotline on 0800 595 000, the Tax Evasion Hotline on 0800 788 887.

If any members have any extra advice or similar experiences I would greatly appreciate it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This sounds like a very complicated case, and I think you need to speak to a solicitor or at least the Citizens Advide Bureau.

I'm not sure anyone here will have the legal expertise required to help you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have decided to repost this case with a clearer description of events and my questions regarding them. I should apologise, however, for any still present lack of clarity and also for the length of the post:

I am one of four tenants who were awarded a CCJ against the person who countersigned our tenancy agreement claiming to be both the landlord and the director of a letting agency managing the house which we rented. I will from now on refer to him as ‘CCJed’ (unless anyone can suggest a better name) and he was named directly in the order without any reference to him being director but with the letting agency office stated as his address which we used for correspondence.

The CCJ was awarded as a penalty for not protecting (via TDS) or repaying our deposit. However, in investigating how to enforce the CCJ we have found several complications and discrepancies via the following sources:

Land Registry – Shows the Landlords to be a differently named (apparently) married couple and not CCJed, the director of the letting agency who is signed as landlord on the tenancy agreement.

Companies House –

16/02/2007 date of appointment of Letting Agency

04/09/2007 Letting Agency was dissolved

26/10/2007 We, the tenants, signed a new assured shorthold tenancy agreement beginning from Nov 2007.

01/05/2008 Tenancy agreement expired.

13/08/2008 Our small-claims case filed.

This information appears to confirm CCJed as the director of the letting agency which is a limited company (“LTDâ€), however, it appears that, from before we signed the contract the letting agency had been dissolved. With this information in mind it is unclear whether or not it is still a legitimate (correctly awarded) CCJ and where we can hope to get our deposit back. The letting agency’s office is still open and the company continues to trade.

Another point of confusion as to whether this is a legitimate CCJ, is that it has been placed on the director which a forum member informed me would normally be illegitimate because the letting agency is a limited company. However, the fact that this director (CCJed) has signed as the landlord (albeit seemingly illegitimately) may mean our CCJ was correctly made and can be enforced. Firstly, does this appear to be still a legitimate CCJ? Secondly, is it not a criminal offence to give one’s name as landlord on a tenancy agreement when it is not the case?

A forum member also suggested we might be best served looking into switching our focus to the landlords. Clearly in this respect we jumped the gun in deciding who to bring our case against. If this appears recommendable, would it be easily changeable via the existing CCJ or would we need to start a new case with fresh court costs?

We have received no contact from CCJed subsequent to him posting his defence and counterclaim which was subsequently struck out due to him not attending our hearing with I believe a default judgment in our favour.

The address of CCJed was given as the Letting Agency but this may be insufficient given the lack of response to our case following the judgement and the fact that the company has officially been dissolved (despite it continuing to trade, now, long after its dissolved date). I am currently out of the country and am therefore conducting this research from afar. When I return I intend to contact the Dawn Advice Ltd on 0845 456 6815, attempt to access half an hour’s free advice from a solicitor, and possibility employ a licensed private investigator in order to successfully enforce. Other avenues which appear may be useful which I have found from reading numerous posts on numerous legal/consumer rights websites are Business Anti-Fraud helpline on 0800 788 887, Customs Confidential hotline on 0800 595 000, the Tax Evasion Hotline on 0800 788 887.

If any members have any extra advice or similar experiences I would greatly appreciate it.

I briefly read you problem, firstly you don't have to own the property to be the landlord but under section 48 of the 1987 LTA (I think not an HA) the landlord by law must provide their name and a contact address (there is some question over care of addresses such as LA's but that is another debate) However once named as the landlord on the tenancy agreement, that individual or company is legally responsible to adhere to all their legal requirement under housing and tenancy law.

In short if the individual was named on your AST as the landlord and you won a CCJ against them based on a breach of tenancy law in relation to your tenancy agreement, that CCJ remain enforce against that named individual.

You might want to consider using a private debt collection agency to reclaim your money, they will take a percentage but it would be satisfying to see CCJ'ed done over

Edited by Matt Henson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I briefly read you problem, firstly you don't have to own the property to be the landlord but under section 48 of the 1987 LTA (I think not an HA) the landlord by law must provide their name and a contact address (there is some question over care of addresses such as LA's but that is another debate) However once named as the landlord on the tenancy agreement, that individual or company is legally responsible to adhere to all their legal requirement under housing and tenancy law.

In short if the individual was named on your AST as the landlord and you won a CCJ against them based on a breach of tenancy law in relation to your tenancy agreement, that CCJ remain enforce against that named individual.

You might want to consider using a private debt collection agency to reclaim your money, they will take a percentage but it would be satisfying to see CCJ'ed done over

I see. Without reading that law I really don't understand the difference between owning a property and being a landlord! I will make sure I do before taking action though so thanks for the lead.

Ok, well hopefully what you are saying will mean that as the landlord CCJed is committed to paying out by whatever means of enforcement we decide.

Many thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I see. Without reading that law I really don't understand the difference between owning a property and being a landlord! I will make sure I do before taking action though so thanks for the lead.

Ok, well hopefully what you are saying will mean that as the landlord CCJed is committed to paying out by whatever means of enforcement we decide.

Many thanks.

The landlord can be anybody for example older people will often put a property in trust to avoid inheritance tax and have a lawyer or company act as the LL. Often people get their wives to be th LL to avoid income tax.

What does matter though is the person names in your contract is the one has all the legal responsibility and so your friend CCJ'ed is the fully responsible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with what others have said. Another way that the landlord and the owner can be different people is where a property is sub-let.

This is mentioned in s.2 Landlord and Tenant Act 1987

If you want to look up statute law, you can do that here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks up2late I will try to check that and thanks very much Matt, that is very clear now.

So on this basis we should not bother looking into contacting the people on the Land Registry form?

Edited by groupoffour

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   326 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

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.