Problems with ex. landlord

[rogertdog]

hi,

I will try and explain the situation as best as i can...

We basically re-located to a new area, after spending 5 years in residential housing, found a house to rent, and contacted landlord.

Met with landlords agent (his wife) who had a standard 12 month assured shorthold tenancy agreement with her. The original had been pre-signed by the landlord and she brought with her a photocopy, the photocopy pre-signed by herself. It was for 12 months at £650/month with 1 months rent as deposit, and we signed our bit, however we made it clear at the time that we would be looking for a house to buy before the tenancy ended (due to one of our children being disabled, and us needing our own property, as our child requires special adaptations only avaliable in a privately owned property)

Fast forward 4 months and we found a property to buy.

We informed the landlord in writing that we would be moving out in 2 months time, asked him to release us from the contract early, and placed adverts in the local papers etc to find new tenants, of which there were at least 4 interested parties.

We sent the landlord 2 more letters keeping him informed of our leaving date.

We left 2 months later (6 months early) with the landlord had failed to appoint new tenants, and us not having recieved anything in response to our 3 letters.

We met with his agent to pass the keys over and to inspect the property, which she did and was satisfied with its condition.

Then the problems started.

The landlord wrote to us to say he had retained our deposit to mitigate his losses.

Then about a 2 months later (a month ago) we recieved a letter from Daniels Silverman requesting nearly £4k from our landlords company.

We subsequently requested clarification of the alleged debt, and recieved a copy of our rental agreement as 'proof'.

the points i would like to clarify (if possible) are:

1. was the rental agreement legal in the first place as his signature was a photocopy, and he was not present at the signing?

2. the rental agreement was with the landlord as a private individual and not with his company. we have checked the land register for the house, and it is regestered with him as a private individual. therefore can we refer this to trading standars/the police as fraud (claiming goods etc by deception)?

3. as we pointed out our intentions to leave early when we signed, and as we tried to mitigate his losses, have we got grounds to claim he is being unreasnoble?

4. the amount he is asking for is plain wrong, given that he retained our deposit, and we have since found out that he now has people occupying the property. by our rekoning the maximum alleged amount he could claim for is 2 months (6 months left on contract, minus one month deposit, minus 3 months as he now has new tenants).

5. i have heard that we can dispute the debt with daniels silverman and they have to leave us alone - how exactly do we do this?

there are probably other things to add, but this will do for now.

any help will be greatly recieved as this is creating an extremely horrible situation for our family.

thanks.

[Aequitas]

1. was the rental agreement legal in the first place as his signature was a photocopy, and he was not present at the signing?

Yes. This is because an agreement to create a tenancy for three years or less does not need to be in writing. What has happened is this: you agreed the terms of the tenancy and they were recorded in writing; you paid rent and took possession; a tenancy arose; the terms of the tenancy are as recorded in writing.

2. the rental agreement was with the landlord as a private individual and not with his company. we have checked the land register for the house, and it is regestered with him as a private individual. therefore can we refer this to trading standars/the police as fraud (claiming goods etc by deception)?

No.

3. as we pointed out our intentions to leave early when we signed, and as we tried to mitigate his losses, have we got grounds to claim he is being unreasnoble?

The point is that the terms of the tenancy as recorded in writing say that you took the property for a year. You should have put it in the terms you signed. I think you will have trouble persuading any judge that you did not mean what you agreed to. There is no question of being misled by the landlord - you just told him what your intentions were: I am signging up for a year but I may leave early.

4. the amount he is asking for is plain wrong, given that he retained our deposit, and we have since found out that he now has people occupying the property. by our rekoning the maximum alleged amount he could claim for is 2 months (6 months left on contract, minus one month deposit, minus 3 months as he now has new tenants).

A landlord has a choice - preserve the tenancy or re-enter; he cannot re-enter and relet and claim two lots of rent for the same period. As soon as the landlord took back control of the property your tenancy came to an end and with it the liability to pay rent from the day of re-entry.

5. i have heard that we can dispute the debt with daniels silverman and they have to leave us alone - how exactly do we do this?

Not quite sure what you mean by that.

[rogertdog]

hi,

many thanks for that, just a bit more clarification if possible

2. the rental agreement was with the landlord as a private individual and not with his company. we have checked the land register for the house, and it is regestered with him as a private individual. therefore can we refer this to trading standars/the police as fraud (claiming goods etc by deception)?


No.

why is that?


4. the amount he is asking for is plain wrong, given that he retained our deposit, and we have since found out that he now has people occupying the property. by our rekoning the maximum alleged amount he could claim for is 2 months (6 months left on contract, minus one month deposit, minus 3 months as he now has new tenants).


A landlord has a choice - preserve the tenancy or re-enter; he cannot re-enter and relet and claim two lots of rent for the same period. As soon as the landlord took back control of the property your tenancy came to an end and with it the liability to pay rent from the day of re-entry.

can you point us to where this is found in law, ie the paragraph etc of which act (housing act etc). so basically we can write to him saying we dispute the alleged ammount owed as he has re-entered the property?


5. i have heard that we can dispute the debt with daniels silverman and they have to leave us alone - how exactly do we do this?


Not quite sure what you mean by that.

if we write to daniels silverman saying we dispute this debt and are writing to the landlord directly, and they must freeze all action and remove any credit markers etc as per fair trading rules?

[Aequitas]

many thanks for that, just a bit more clarification if possible

2. the rental agreement was with the landlord as a private individual and not with his company. we have checked the land register for the house, and it is regestered with him as a private individual. therefore can we refer this to trading standars/the police as fraud (claiming goods etc by deception)?


No.

why is that?

You seem to be saying that the agreement was with an individual and that the property is registered in the name of the same individual, but I have assumed that that is not what is meant. It is not unusual for this sort of thing to happen, particularly with short term lets - I have even seen agreements which state that the landlord is the agent. I don't think anything can or should be read into it. Besides, it rarely helps a civil case if you try to drag the criminal law in - it often suggests desperation.

4. the amount he is asking for is plain wrong, given that he retained our deposit, and we have since found out that he now has people occupying the property. by our rekoning the maximum alleged amount he could claim for is 2 months (6 months left on contract, minus one month deposit, minus 3 months as he now has new tenants).


A landlord has a choice - preserve the tenancy or re-enter; he cannot re-enter and relet and claim two lots of rent for the same period. As soon as the landlord took back control of the property your tenancy came to an end and with it the liability to pay rent from the day of re-entry.

can you point us to where this is found in law, ie the paragraph etc of which act (housing act etc). so basically we can write to him saying we dispute the alleged ammount owed as he has re-entered the property?

It is quite simply the common law. The landlord's solicitors know this.


5. i have heard that we can dispute the debt with daniels silverman and they have to leave us alone - how exactly do we do this?


Not quite sure what you mean by that.

if we write to daniels silverman saying we dispute this debt and are writing to the landlord directly, and they must freeze all action and remove any credit markers etc as per fair trading rules?

No, the landlord has instructed his solicitor to deal with the matter - he can decline to deal with you personally. Fair trading rules don't come into it. The landlord is entitled to sue if he thinks he is owed money.