Landlord's mortgage taken over by receiver - where do we stand as tenants?

[gandolfi]

Hoping someone can offer advice....

We are renting a flat through an agency and have been receiving mail for the Landlord including a solicitors letter.

Today we got a letter for 'the occupier' saying that the Landlord's mortgage was in the hands of a receiver and that we shouldn't pay rent to him but directly to the receiver.

It also demanded that we supply copies of the tenancy agreement etc in order for our occupancy to be maintained. Without this, they are threatening to enter the property, change the locks and assume vacant occupancy.

What should we do? The agent is saying that it is a misunderstanding - the company are claiming money from the landlord that he says he doesn't owe.

Your help/advice would be much-appreciated.
Thanks and best wishes,
Gandolfi

[Aequitas]

First, and most important, no one can get you out without a court order. They may say that they will assume vacant occupancy, but assumption is not enough if you are in actual occupation.

I can see no harm in letting them have a copy of the tenancy agreement. When replying, ask for a copy of their appointment as receiver as evidence of authority to pay the rent as requested.

[gandolfi]

Originally Posted by Aequitas

First, and most important, no one can get you out without a court order. They may say that they will assume vacant occupancy, but assumption is not enough if you are in actual occupation.

I can see no harm in letting them have a copy of the tenancy agreement. When replying, ask for a copy of their appointment as receiver as evidence of authority to pay the rent as requested.

Thanks Aequitas!
They sent a copy of the mortgage (buy-to-let Home loan) company's letter of appointment of them as receivers. Meanwhile, our agent is telling us to pass the letter on to them, ignore it and don't worry - that the situation is the result of a misunderstanding between the landlord and loan company asking him for money that he claims not to owe.

While we await a clearer picture of what is going on, would it be wise to not pay rent to the landlord?

If we start paying rent to the receiver what happens when the landlord starts to get difficult with us?

What responsibilities does the agent have in all of this - should they be protecting us?

All advice very much appreciated.
Many thanks,
Gandolfi

[Aequitas]

You must pay the rent to the receiver now that you have notice of his appointment and he has requested the rent to be paid to him. It is the agent you need to ignore.

The receiver is deemed to be the agent of the landlord. If you pay rent to him, the landlord cannot claim it later.

[Pebble]

You need to establish your position first and foremost. Obvioulsy the landlord is going to tell you that not to worry and pay the rental to him.

Receivers would only be appointed as a time, whereas all communication via the landlord/lender has broken down. Bearing in mind, if they are acting on behalf of lenders, most lenders would of done correspondance to the landlord to chase the debt.

The receivers/lenders would have discretion if they are to let the tenancy continue. If the landlord is being pursued for monies he states he does not owe, his solicitor or appointed representive would be chasing this up via the receivers.

In respect to the rental payments, keep paying them to the receiver until the position is made clearer.

Regards

Pebble - efffective landlord solutions