Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • An update to this case as I’ve not been on in a while.    I am still awaiting a charging decision in the case. The two police officers involved have said their personal belief is a section 47 ABH charge is the most likely outcome but this isn’t a sure thing of course.    The EA certificate from the issuing court has now lapsed. The court have refused to recertify him until they’ve had a hearing in to the case, and the district judge has issued orders to surrender all evidence, footage, photos etc.    I have done so promptly.    the EA, not so much . Equita have claimed they cannot provide his bodycam footage as the camera he was wearing is the EA personal one not one of theirs.   the EA has claimed he has asked Equita and the police for the footage as he claims he doesn’t have it.    the police have confirmed they didn’t seize his camera and they don’t have it.    so they are basically pointing the finger at each other all the while failing to comply with the district judges order to provide all evidence they intend to rely on at the rescheduled hearing.    The district judge has stated the hearing for his certification will NOT be the hearing for my complaint as there is no charge as of yet, and just as to whether he should be recertified or not.    I’m not 100% on why that can’t be done at the time, but I’m not about to question a judge…..      
    • Thanks FTMDave, I like the cut of your jib - I'll go with that and obtain proof of postage. Encouraging that NPE have never followed through and seem to blowing hot air, let's see where they go after this   Regards
    • Please see my comments in orange within your post.
    • no i meant the email from parcel2go which email address did they send it from and who signed it off (whos name is at the bottom)
    • I understand confusion with this thread.  I tried to keep threads separate because there have been so many angles.    But a team member merged them all.  This is why it's hard to keep track. This forum exists to help little people fight injustice - however big or small.  Im here to try get a decent resolution. Not to give in to the ' big boys'. My "matter' became complicated 'matters' simply because a lender refused to sell a property. What can I say?  I'll try in a nutshell to give an overview: There's a long lease property. I originally bought it short lease with a s.146 on it from original freeholder.  I had no concerns. So lender should have been able to sell a well-maintained lovely long lease property.  The property was great. The issue is not the property.  Economy, sdlt increases, elections, brexit, covid, interest hikes etc didn't help.  The issue is simple - the lender wanted to keep it.   House or Flat? Before repo I offered to clear my loan.  I was a bit short and lender refused.  They said (recorded) they thought the property was worth much more and they were happy to keep accruing interest (in their benefit) until it reached a point where they felt they could repo and still easily quickly sell to get their £s back.  This was a mistake.  The market was (and is) tough.   2y later the lender ceo bid the same sum to buy the property for himself. He'd rejected higher offers in the intervening period whilst accruing interest. Lenders have a legal obligation to sell the property for the best price they can get. If they feel the offer is low they won't sell it, because it's likely the borrower will say the same. I had the property under offer to a fantastic niche buyer but lender rushed to repo and buyer got spooked and walked.  It had taken a long time to find such a lucrative buyer.  A sale which would have resulted in £s and another asset for me. Post repo lender had 1 offer immediately.  But dragged out the process for >1y - allegedly trying to get other offers. But disclosure shows there was only one valid buyer. Again, points as above. Lender appointed receiver (after 4 months) - simply to try acquire the freehold.  He used his powers as receiver to use me, as leaseholder, to serve notice on freeholders.  Legally that failed. Meanwhile lender failed to secure property - and squatters got in (3 times).  And they failed to maintain it.  So freeholders served a dilapidations notice (external) - on me as leaseholder (cc-ed to lender).   (That's how it works legally) Why serve a delapidations notice? If it's in the terms of the lease to maintain the property to a good standard, then serve an S146 notice instead as it's a clear breach of the lease. I don't own the freehold.  But I am a trustee and have to do right by the freeholders.  This is where matters got/ get complicated.  And probably lose most caggers.   Lawyers got involved for the freeholders to firstly void the receiver enfranchisement notice. Secondly, to serve the dilapidations notice.  The lack of maintenance was in breach of lease and had to be served to protect fh asset. Enfranchisement isn't something that can be "voided", it's in the Leasehold Reform Act 1967 that leaseholders have the right to buy the freehold of the property. It's normal, whether it is a "normal" leaseholder or a repossession with a leasehold house, to claim this right of enfranchisement and sell the property with said rights attached and the purchase price of the freehold included in the final completion price. That's likely what the mortgage provider wished to do. The lender did no repairs. They said a buyer would undertake them. Which was probably correct. If they had sold. After 1y lender finally agreed to sell to the 1st offeror and contracts went with lawyers.  Within 1 month lender reneged.  Lender tried to suggest buyer walked. Evidence shows he/ his lawyers continued trying to exchange (cash) for 4 months.  Evidence shows lender and receiver strategy had been to renege and for ceo to take control.   I still think that's their plan. Redact and scan said evidence up for others to look at? Lender then stupidly chose to pretty much bulldoze the property.  Other stuff was going on in the background. After repo I was in touch by phone and email and lender knew post got to me.   Despite this, after about 10 months (before and then during covid), they deliberately sent SDs and eventually a B petition to an incorrect address and an obscure small court.  They never served me properly.  (In hindsight I understand they hoped to get a backdoor B - so they could keep the property that way.)  Eventually the random court told them to email me by way of service.  At this point their ruse to make me B failed.  I got a lawyer (friend paid). The B petition was struck out. They’d failed to include the property as an asset. They were in breach of insolvency rules. So this is dealt with then. Simultaneously the receiver again appointed lawyers to act on my behalf as leaseholder. This time to serve notice on the freeholders for a lease extension.  He had hoped to try and vary the strict lease. Evidence shows the already long length of lease wasn't an issue.  The lender obviously hoped to get round their lack of permission to do works (which they were already doing) by hoping to remove the strict clauses that prevent leaseholder doing alterations.  You wouldn't vary a lease through a lease extension. You'd need a Deed of Variation for that. This may be done at the same time but the lease has already been extended once and that's all they have a right to. The extension created a new legal angle for me to deal with.  I had to act as trustee for freeholders against me as leaseholder/ the receiver.  Inconsistencies and incompetence by receiver lawyers dragged this out 3y.  It still isn't properly resolved. The lease has already been extended once so they have no right to another extension. It seems pretty easy to just get the lawyer to say no and stick by those terms as the law is on your side there. Meanwhile - going back to the the works the lender undertook. The works were consciously in breach of lease.  The lender hadn't remedied the breaches listed in the dilapidations notice.  They destroyed the property.  The trustees compiled all evidence.  The freeholders lawyers then served a forfeiture notice. This notice started a different legal battle. I was acting for the freeholders against what the lender had done on my behalf as leaseholder.  This legal battle took 3y to resolve. Again, order them to revert it as they didn't have permission to do the works, or else serve an S146 notice for breach of the lease. The simple exit would have been for lender to sell. A simple agreement to remedy the breaches and recompense the freeholders in compensation - and there's have been clean title to sell.  That option was proposed to them.   This happened by way of mediation for all parties 2y ago.  A resolution option was put forward and in principle agreed.  But immediately after the lender lawyers failed to engage.  A hard lesson to learn - mediation cannot be referred to in court. It's considered w/o prejudice. The steps they took have made no difference to their ability to sell the property.  Almost 3y since they finished works they still haven't sold. ** ** I followed up some leads myself.  A qualified cash buyer offered me a substantial sum.  The lender and receiver both refused it.   I found another offer in disclosure.  6 months later someone had apparently offered a substantial sum via an agent.  The receiver again rejected it.  The problem of course was that the agent had inflated the market price to get the business. But no-one was or is ever going to offer their list price.  Yet the receiver wanted/wants to hold out for the list price.  Which means 1y later not only has it not sold - disclosure shows few viewings and zero interest.  It's transparently over-priced.  And tarnished. For those asking why I don't give up - I couldn't/ can't.  Firstly I have fiduciary duties as a trustee. Secondly, legal advice indicates I (as leaseholder) could succeed with a large compensation claim v the lender.  Also - I started a claim v my old lawyer and the firm immediately reimbursed some £s. That was encouraging.  And a sign to continue.  So I'm going for compensation.  I had finance in place (via friend) to do a deal and take the property back off the lender - and that lawyer messed up bad.   He should have done a deal.  Instead further years have been wasted.   Maybe I only get back my lost savings - but that will be a result.   If I can add some kind of complaint/ claim v the receiver's conscious impropriety I will do so.   I have been left with nothing - so fighting for something is worth it. The lender wants to talk re a form of settlement.  Similar to my proposal 2y ago.  I have a pretty clear idea of what that means to me.  This is exactly why I do not give up.  And why I continue to ask for snippets of advice/ pointers on cag.  
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Please help! House in disrepair - Do I have the right to leave house before end of tenancy?


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5387 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Hello,

 

I am hoping someone can help me?

 

We are 9 months into our 12 month tenancy. The property is owned by a charity and managed by a letting agent. We have had nothing but problems since we moved in, some of which have affected my health and it is now clear that the landlords will not take all the steps necessary to resolve the problems.

The tenancy is due to end in October, I want to leave August 30th but they say we would have to give 2 months notice. Properties do not come up often where I live and I can’t afford to miss out.

My question is surely if the problems are bad enough they have broken the contract and we should be able to hand the keys back without recourse?

My local authority can insist that they carry out the repairs but in October the landlords could just end the tenancy, at which point there may not be another property available. And to be honest it has put that much strain on me and our relationship that we just don’t want to live there anymore.

I think they should be glad that we do this and not take legal action against them but they obviously don’t agree.

Any advice on how to get out of the contract quickly would be appreciated.

Thanks!

Link to post
Share on other sites

May give you some advice here-Ending a fixed term agreement

 

There are special rules on how you can end your tenancy if it for a fixed period (such as six months or one year), which has not yet ended. Your tenancy could be fixed term even if you pay the rent each week/month.

Contents

 

 

 

What if my landlord agrees that I can leave?

 

It is possible to get out of the agreement at any time if you can come to a mutual agreement with your landlord. This is called 'surrender'. To be valid, both sides must agree, and it's always best to put what's been agreed in writing so everyone knows where they stand. If you have a joint tenancy all the joint tenants and the landlord must agree to the surrender.

It's worth seeing if your landlord is willing to negotiate even if your tenancy agreement says you can't leave early. It may be convenient for both of you!

Back to top

What happens when my agreement runs out?

 

If your agreement is for a fixed term (eg six months), you can leave on the last day of the fixed term without giving notice. But you must ensure that you do not stay even one day over, or you will automatically become a periodic tenant and will have to give proper notice or come to an agreement with your landlord.

If you intend to leave on the last day you are not legally required to give the landlord any notice, but it's usually a good idea to do so, to avoid any dispute about when you actually left. Good communication helps things to go smoothly. Remember that you may need a reference to get a new home and, if you've paid a deposit, you're more likely to get it back if you keep the landlord informed.

If you stay for beyond the fixed term and your landlord doesn't give you a new fixed term agreement, your tenancy or licence will automatically become periodic, which means that it rolls from week to week or month to month. Most of your other rights will stay the same, but the rules on how you can end the agreement will be different.

Back to top

Can I give the landlord notice and if so, how much?

 

Many fixed term agreements (including some assured shorthold tenancies with private landlords) contain a 'break clause', which allows you to end the agreement before the end of the fixed term.

Check your agreement to see if it includes a clause like this.

 

  • If it does include a break clause, it should also say how much notice you have to give and whether there are any special procedures you have to follow.
  • If it doesn't include a break clause then you cannot end the tenancy early unless the landlord agrees to it. If you leave anyway you can still be liable for the rent to the end of the period.

Contact a local advice centre if there's anything you're not sure of - use our directory to find one.

Back to top

Can I get someone else to move in?

 

This may be possible if you have no choice but to leave early and want to avoid paying rent on more than one home. However, you have to get the landlord's agreement for the person you suggest to move into the property. The landlord may want to take up references for them. The landlord should give the new person their own tenancy or licence agreement - otherwise, you will still be legally responsible for the tenancy.

Back to top

What if I just walk away?

 

Walking away or posting the keys through the letterbox is called 'abandonment' and will not end your agreement. Your agreement with the landlord will continue even though you've left and the landlord can continue to charge you rent, so you're likely to build up rent arrears. If your agreement is fixed term, you can be charged rent until the term ends.

The landlord can apply for a court order to make you pay what you owe. The court will decide whether you should have to pay your landlord the money or not. If the landlord has managed to let out the property they can't claim rent from you after the new tenant moved in.

Doing a runner may also make it harder for you to find a new home. Most private landlords ask new tenants for references from previous landlords and are not keen to rent to anyone who has abandoned a tenancy or licence in the past or has a history of rent arrears.

Similarly, it's important to make sure that you have somewhere to go when you leave. If you need to make a homelessness application in future, the council may decide that you are intentionally homeless, because you left a home that you could have stayed in.

Back to top

What other options are there?

 

If the landlord won't allow you to leave early and won't allow a new tenant suggested by you to move in, you may be able to negotiate to only pay part of the rent you owe. For example, if there are four months left on a fixed term agreement, the landlord might agree to only two months' rent instead while they look for a new tenant.

Back to top

What if I have a joint tenancy or licence?

 

You have a joint tenancy or licence if you share with a spouse, partner, family member or friend and both/all of your names are on the agreement.

The actions of each individual person will affect all of your rights. For instance:

 

  • If one of you leaves without ending the tenancy correctly, the whole rent will still be due and the other(s) will have to pay the missing person's share.
  • If one of you has caused damage, the landlord may be entitled to take money out of your shared deposit.

You can only end a fixed term joint tenancy if your landlord and all the other joint tenants agree or if there’s a break clause and the other tenants agree to use it. It’s a good idea to get any permission given in writing so that you have proof of what was agreed. If any of the joint tenants want to stay they would have ensure the landlord would grant them a new tenancy, if the original agreement ends.

If you're thinking about leaving, be sure to discuss it with the other joint tenant(s) before you take any action. It may be possible for someone else to take your place, and/or for the landlord to give a new agreement to those who are staying.

 

 

more_advice.gif find_useful.gif

Edited by tawnyowl
Link to post
Share on other sites

If you're going to have to remain in the property for now and it's in disrepair, your landlord has certain responsibilities to carry out the repairs. There are steps you can take to get your landlord to do the repairs, starting with reporting the problem to them.

Unfortunately, you don't have the right to end the tenancy just because it's in a bad condition. However, it may be that your landlord would rather negotiate with you to leave the tenancy early than carry out repairs.

Edited by tawnyowl
Link to post
Share on other sites

Tawnyowl is correct in that you cannot just walk away from your fixed term contract, unless you come to some kind of agreement with your landlord and it will be on his terms. If they insist on making you stick with the contract, then there is little you can do. Remember though that as it is a fixed term contract you DO NOT HAVE TO GIVE NOTICE TO LEAVE ON THE LAST DAY OF THE FIXED TERM. You can just walk away!!

 

Regarding repairs not being carried out, your best recourse is to do the following:

 

Write to your landlord (via agent if you have to, but it is the landlord's responsibility) and list the repairs required, with the most urgent first. Tell them that you have repeatedly requested that these repairs be carried out and that unless action is taken within the next 7 days, you will arrange for the necessary repairs and deduct the cost from the rent.

 

Then contact the environmental health people at the council and set things in motion. You have nothing to lose, and everything to gain as if they say the property is unfit, you can then walk away.

 

You have not told us what sort of repairs we are talking about - it might be helpful to have some idea.

Kentish Lass

Information given is based on my knowledge and experience and is not to be considered as legal advice

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...