Roy and Tania

... Read More

Hi

Mark is spot on here. The burden of proof is on them (the LL and LA) to prove that the section 21 was served. A statement that one was hand-delivered will not wash with a judge and any proceedings via a court will be dismissed.

However - a second section 21 will then be served correctly (one assumes) and that ordinarily would be accepted by a court. There is a condition though to this....

that your deposit was protected in a DPS scheme and that you received various paperwork (certificate and prescribed information) in relation to that. It sounds like the LL/LA knows little of their obligations and it might be that you do not have this information concerning the deposit or that the deposit is indeed protected at all..

If that is the case, a second section 21 will fail also.

There is also a potential 3x penalty for non-protection.

Ultimately the deposit can be repaid by the LL and an s21 will then become valid and you will at some point have to vacate. As Mark said - stand firm. Most of these bad LL/LA's end up in court trying to defend their position and end having to pay considerable compensation etc to their tenants.

There might also be a disrepair claim and a defence that the s21 (s) are retaliatory. This practice is frowned upon in the courts.

Not sure of your location. We're in the NE and had a fabulous solicitor and barrister fight for us in a nasty case this spring. LL ordered to compensate by £10k+ and nice £7.5k from LA. Mark will share contact details if you'd like to be put in contact in the first instance.... Read More

North Ormesby. Alas, an area that I was once acquainted.

"with major antisocial behaviour issues" - you pay it a compliment.

Having moved up to the NE, I purchased a property in a street off the infamous Beaumont Rd. I viewed in the morning. I should have calculated that the other neighbours were still in bed and not at work. The street was largely without cars, this was not because the neighbours were using them to get to work. The problems became reality when I discovered that 8y.o's had tried to set fire to my curtains through a small sash window which had been left open on the morning of day 2 in the property.

Oh dear and while I can empathise a little.. did you not do your research either? was the temptation to become a LL for such a meagre amount blind you?

selective licensing did not cause the blight in 'doggie' - an endearing term for some of the nocturnal activities that have taken place for years in this area of the Boro'. The problem has occurred as a result of LLs willingly accepting tenants from all walks of life without the necessary checks. The good folk had all moved out in 2000 - 2004. Me also. Folks with a few quid bought out the neighbourhood with a view to profiteering without further thought.

Nothing will solve the problems of North Ormesby - save perhaps a small tactical nuclear warhead.... Read More

... Read More

... Read More

... Read More

It's a grey area whether Superstrike will help you as it related specifically to an AST (signed before the Deposit regs becoming statutory) that ultimately moved into a periodic tenancy (whereupon the regs applied).

The bottom line is that your deposit is now protected. This also gives your LL a strong claim to a repossession order if he so wished and one that you would not be able to use Superstrike to protect yourself from. You would however have evidence that the deposit was not initially protected within 30 days of the tenancy commencing and obviously no PI or leaflet explaining the scheme etc was served either.

So now you have rocked his boat and might receive a s21 notice to quit for your efforts. A s21 might fail if dates are invalid - a common mistake. You would need a strong barrister to assist you if you were relying on failure to protect the deposit.

Regards the 3x penalty. Its up to a max of 3x but rarely granted. It certainly would not accrue for each failure to protect the deposit, unless you had a judge who was a bit soft in the head.

We started our own action for disrepair last Autumn. That invoked a retaliatory accelerated repossession claim by our LL. We successfully defended that as a result of deposit being protected late and were offered considerable damages and full costs in respect of our disrepair claim. It is not for the faint-hearted and will cost you a considerable sum to get to court.... Read More

Wishing you the very best with this Mark. There are, as we have found, a number of Landlords out there who would clearly benefit from your considerable knowledge. Your advice gave us the confidence to proceed with a litigation against ours (one of the rogues).

All the best in Russia this Christmas. Our Russian family will probably pass you in Moscow as they make their way to us for the holiday period.

best regards, Roy and Tanya... Read More

Good morning

Mark asked us to keep you all updated on this. We defended the second attempt to evict by s21 and served a letter before action quoting that we were using the Housing Disrepair Protocol. The 20 days afforded to the LL have elapsed with no reply received to date. So, to litigation.

We've been following many of the posts on here since our OP and must say - that most of you sound really great. Its a pity that we picked the bad combination, poor LL, dishonest LA.

Incidentally, the NAEA and ARLA did respond to our letter. They advised that Rightmove were contacted but that no action was taken against the LA, not even a letter.... Read More

... Read More

... Read More

... Read More

... Read More

... Read More

... Read More

... Read More

... Read More

... Read More

... Read More

... Read More