No notice, because “it’s my house”!

Reply to the comment left by Robert Mellors at 10/06/2018 - 20:57
The lodgers had broken in the previous day and left the windows open. I had phoned the police at 10pm when the landlords son told me they had got in. The police attended, taking it as a burglary, and the landlord said it was not a burglary. So they left. So basically the landlord used them to get inside and leave the windows open. But they know full well it was not abandoned as I was in the process of moving out. And the lodgers possessions were also still inside.
I had already said I would clean up and hand over the property in a few days. Perhaps they did not believe me.
That might be why they did this.

The landlord had already said to me in April that he wants me to leave. But of course he had not served any notice because he couldn’t. I told him to serve notice or I would leave once I was ready.

Both doors were double locked, not left open. Which is why the locksmith was there drilling the locks.

Also can’t be abandoned as I was there just two days earlier with the police when the lodgers left and all windows were closed and secure.

I would say the landlord encouraged the lodgers to break in for their own reasons then when they found the doors were double locked they decided to call the locksmith.

He says on the video that I did not have permission to change the locks. But clearly I had very good reason to. He had come inside my house many times without permission and turned on the heating to try to dry the walls out, while I was paying the gas bill.

He can’t claim the property was abandoned as he was on the phone with me just the previous day trying to arrange for the lodgers to collect their things.

I wanted them to collect with police presence so there would be no breach of the peace

Reply to the comment left by Robert Mellors at 10/06/2018 - 20:51
The property was I good condition when I took it in November. Paint was flaking off in a few places.
I know the builder who did the plastering for him. He is the one who introduced us.

The landlord just thought it needed heat and airing out. Which is why he came in and turned on my heating several times.

The property deteriated rapidly over the next few months as the damp problems emerged.

Which is why in April I refused to pay rent until he signed a letter I had prepared confirming that he had rented me the house and I had permission to sub rent it.
I also got him to confirm he was holding a £550 deposit which he would return in full as the problems in the house were not my doing.
Incidentally there was a huge drainage problem also when I took the property. The main drain was blocked and he only called in an expert after weeks of being told
He didn’t want to spend the money.
Eventually the whole kitchen and lounge was flooded with water before he acted.

The water from toilet was backing up into shower. Then the toilet developed a fault where the water was overflowing, but the overflow was into the basin not outside so the water started coming out of the shower and flooded the kitchen and lounge

Also damaged the things I had in the lounge which I will also be claiming for. I have a photo of the water in the lounge

Reply to the comment left by Art at 11/06/2018 - 09:17
I’m sorry Art but this sounds to me like six of one and half a dozen of the other without even hearing the owners story.

You claim not to have a tenancy but also to have permission to sublet.

We have no idea whether any of that is true or whether the House was over-crowded or the type and lifestyle of people living in it. How many were there? Would it have meant you needed a HMO license?

Have you suggested to your landlord that he reads and comments on this thread? I would love to hear his side of the story.

The property was I good condition when I took it in November. Paint was flaking off in a few places.
I know the builder who did the plastering for him. He is the one who introduced us.

The landlord just thought it needed heat and airing out. Which is why he came in and turned on my heating several times.

The property deteriated rapidly over the next few months as the damp problems emerged.

Which is why in April I refused to pay rent until he signed a letter I had prepared confirming that he had rented me the house and I had permission to sub rent it.
I also got him to confirm he was holding a £550 deposit which he would return in full as the problems in the house were not my doing.
Incidentally there was a huge drainage problem also when I took the property. The main drain was blocked and he only called in an expert after weeks of being told
He didn’t want to spend the money.
Eventually the whole kitchen and lounge was flooded with water before he acted.

The water from toilet was backing up into shower. Then the toilet developed a fault where the water was overflowing, but the overflow was into the basin not outside so the water started coming out of the shower and flooded the kitchen and lounge

Also damaged the things I had in the lounge which I will also be claiming for. I have a photo of the water in the lounge

Reply to the comment left by Mark Alexander at 11/06/2018 - 09:45
I got him to sign a letter confirming I have permission to sub let and that all rent was up to date and he had the deposit because all payments were cash

Reply to the comment left by Art at 11/06/2018 - 09:52
If you were using the place as a "residence" at the time of the eviction then the LL is in a very sticky uncomfortable place that I would choose not to be in.

By residence I mean just that - it need not be your only residence as you may work and also sleep elsewhere and only come back to that residence at weekends when your work is over as it's so far away. If your "other residence" where you're spending most of your time is just a couple of miles away then it's likely to be difficult to make a case that were occupying the place as a residence.

The Protection from Eviction Act only applies to residential occupiers and not to those who have cease to live at a dwelling.

What exactly were you doing at the time of the eviction - residence wise?

Reply to the comment left by Teddy at 11/06/2018 - 23:37
it may be hard to argue it was my main residence as I only stayed there occasionally and mainly used it to store some items I had and also sub-let to cover the rent

Hi Art

If this was not your only and main residence, but instead you rented the property in order to sub-let it (and store a few of your possessions there), then you are probably in deep sh** as you were a landlord to your tenants (even though you call them lodgers, if you were not living there then they were your tenants, not your lodgers). This means that YOU were probably legally responsible for the conditions in the house. You knowingly let the property when you knew of, or should have known of, the defects (i.e. all the matters that you are complaining about). You sub-let the property (with or without permission) for commercial gain, and you failed to ensure the safety of your tenants. As you say you did not have a proper documented tenancy agreement showing the terms and conditions of the tenancy, then it will be very difficult to evidence who has agreed to what. As you have knowingly taken on the role of "landlord" when you sublet the house (or parts of the house), you have taken on all the legal responsibilities that this entails.

Did you give your tenants proper written tenancy agreements? Did you give them proper written Notice to end their tenancies? Did you protect their deposits in a Government approved deposit protection scheme? Did you ensure that the property you were letting to them was up to the required standard? Did you give them a copy of the "How to Rent" booklet? Did you give them a copy of the gas safety certificate? Did you carry out Right to Rent checks? Did you give them a copy of the EPC?

How many tenants did you have in the house? If more than 3 tenants in two or more households, then it would be a House in Multiple Occupation (HMO), and a whole load of additional rules and regulations come into force, for example, did you have an EICR for the property? Did you have a mains interlinked fire alarm system? Did you have self-closing fire doors to each room? etc, etc.

Reply to the comment left by Robert Mellors at 12/06/2018 - 11:22
I was not aware of the problems, when they began to surface, I served notice for them to leave. It was my residence, but I did not stay there all the time.

"The Protection from Eviction Act only applies to residential occupiers and not to those who have cease to live at a dwelling."

I only just moved my things out a few days ago. Does that mean the landlord can just drill the locks and take over the next day, without notice?
I had not even moved all my things out. Just most of them.

I might not even pursue the other matters and will just claim the 1x - 3x rent deposit for not registering the deposit, as I have just had a few quotes and the costs are high to pursue the matter, and even if I win, I then have to enforce the judgement. All costs and money.

Reply to the comment left by Art at 12/06/2018 - 22:17
The lodgers did not pay me a deposit and were in arrears in their rent and were all served proper notice according to the lodger agreement and they signed off to accept the notice.