Jump to content

45002

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

    2,019
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    6

Posts posted by 45002

  1. On 05/03/2020 at 01:18, stu007 said:

    Can I just point out this is Raven1 Topic.

     

    fistship if you wish advice do not ask on Raven1 Topic start your own Topic for advice

     

    Stu007

     

    Could I ask you why two URL in post  #9 to UK Government website redirect back to CAG, really annoying !!!!!

     

    I had to post again in post #10 using tinyurl to get to the correct website.

     

    Look forward to hearing from you, Thank you in advance.

     

    ,,,

  2. 10 minutes ago, firstship said:

    Moved in June 1997 AST 6 months, we have had previous discussions on this under my heading "Rent in Advance" to which you replied

    FS

    Cant remember previous discussions unless you post a link

     

    You have a Assued shorthold tenancy https://england.shelter.org.uk/housing_advice/private_renting/assured_shorthold_tenancies_with_private_landlords

     

    and Not a Assued tenancy.

     

    You moved in Pre 2007 legislation and depoist would not coved by that act of parliament, IMHO.

     

     

  3. firstship.

     

    Do you have the exact date you 1st moved in ?

     

    Raven 1 is Pre 2007 legislation and depoist would not coved by that act of parliament, IMHO.

     

    Assured Tenancy. AT.

    http://england.shelter.org.uk/get_advice/private_renting/private_renting_agreements/assured_tenancies

    If you moved in between 15 January 1989 and 27 February 1997 and your landlord did not give you a notice (section 20) saying that you have an assured shorthold tenancy

    About 3/4 down this page http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1988/2203/schedules/made


    FORM No. 7
    Housing Act 1988 section 20 Notice of an Assured Shorthold Tenancy.

     

    Then it would be a Assured Tenancy.

    If one of theses notices was served on tenant when the tenancy 1st started and LL would have to prove this in court, Its a AST and LL can use a s21 notice

    http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/50/section/20


    1988 Housing act
    Section 20
    (2)
    (b) is served before the assured tenancy is entered into.

     

    If a LL gets a Assured Tenant to sign a AST, Signing a AST does not take way the rights of AT.

    Read case law Kahlon v Isherwood.

    http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2011/602.html
     

  4. 19 hours ago, BankFodder said:

    @45002 I have the impression from the initial post that KFC moved there first and the business moved in afterwards. Of course that will be very helpful to any complaints or action they want to bring

     

    Thanks, I missed that bit.

     

    While I can understand the concerns of the OP,  they need to tread carefully.

     

    The OP needs to be aware that the LL could issue a Section 21 notice to the tennnat and this may not be covered by revenge eviction...

     

    IMHO

  5. 2 hours ago, marksheff said:

    @bankfodder . it was refunded via paypal . the balance is still showing pending and as been since the 9th oct i've always thought it was instant, not been in touch with ebay yet, as there is still the first case up and running, just to add i dont have her address, i've not replied to the last two emails as i've said i will let ebay step in. thanks 

     

    I had slimmer problems to you and it explains below why still showing as pending.

     

    https://www.paypal.com/uk/smarthelp/article/where-is-my-refund-faq1212

     

    .

    • Like 1
    • Thanks 1
  6. 3 hours ago, mmfhater said:

    Update 

    Ico and tpos are both useless Martin quinn has said to them that the signature on the tenancy agreement is diffrent and neither have asked for proof 

    The police have not given me an update on the supposed burglary or speakers that went missing that the man n van was meant to deliver  even after asking 9 times so now I'm trying to put pressure on them to tell me why they wont 

     

    I'm also going to try and get him under the Protection from Eviction Act 1977 as what he has done is a criminal offence

     

    Criminal action under 1977 act would have to be brought by Local council assuming this is in E&W, under Part III, Supplemental Provisions, 6 Prosecution of offences 1977 act.

     

    If not Sue for them damages as posted on 14/05/2019  post #3

    •  
  7. Original tenancy agreements

     

    I wonder if mothers rent was registered under 1977 Rent act

     

    https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1977/42/section/87

     

    If it was they may copies of the original tenancy agreements on file along with the registered rent details and application forms which would be very usefully to the Son.

     

    Their would have to be a paper search as on line records only go back as far 2008

     

    https://ebusiness.voa.gov.uk/err/

    or

    https://www.tax.service.gov.uk/check-register-fair-rents/search

     

    The rent service know comes under VOA https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/valuation-office-agency

     

    For E&W, Slightly different in Scotland and NI.

     

    ...

  8. 13 hours ago, tallorder said:

    No notices were posted

     

    The mother passed away October 2018 and locks changed late June 2019

     

    The son has contract work, which is still continuing this month

     

    He and I have tried daily to call but never get to first spot on queue before other constraints take over

     

    No idea about county court, but very doubtful as it seemed to happen after boiler safety check 

     

    Is being told to call the HA and last email reply was talk of not being tenant so can’t discuss arrears and advise not paying further rent. They want to arrange collection of belongings and (then?) issue Notice to Quit

     

    It’s all getting a bit much for them, so he’s taking a sick day to go to CAB Today. He’s due overseas next Monday until September.

     

    So No notices posted and know they want to issue Notice to Quit after the HA already taken possession illegal IMHO !

     

    Have you told us every think ?

     

    12 hours ago, king12345 said:

    As i said previously the son is not considered a tenant because he's not registered there.

    Nothing he can do imo rather than collect his stuff and find another place.

    Unless he's ready to break the lock and enter the property, at risk of being arrested.

     

    Rachmanism spring to mind reading someone posts

     

    No one ever suggested until till know that the son breaks in !

     

    12 hours ago, Raven1 said:

    Wouldn't he be faced with court action to claim back decades of over paid housing benefit which was claimed as a single occupier by his mother?

     

    If he managed to get back into the property that is - or maybe even if he didn't having drawn attention to what is in fact benefit fraud on a grand scale.

     

     

    But OP posted this below so where does benefit fraud on a grandscale come from ?

     

    Quote

    She had been advised by the council previously that it would be best to pay for a single occupant, even though they were aware of her son

    as Posted  on June 24

     

     

    2 hours ago, king12345 said:

    I said that in my other post, but someone here thinks that it's ok to do that and than claim full tenancy rights.

     

    Someone still  does Not understand  How to obtain lawfully possession of a property and  Succession rights !

     

     

    ....

  9. Hello tallorder

     

    Did the HA post any notices through the door or stick on the door a notice saying they where going to take possession of the property, before they changed the locks ?

     

    Do you know or can you find out, how long it was from the mother passing away till HA change the locks ?

     

    Someone needs to contact local county court or by telephone and find out did the HA had a valid possession order or not when they change the locks ?

     

    And what did happened to All the mothers belonging ?

     

    Cheers...

  10. 6 hours ago, ericsbrother said:

    problem is all the "can"'s and "if"'s dont apply to this individual. The law doesnt say the tenancy will automatically pass to someone who doesnt live there.

    It is all very well quoting an organisations guides but of no real use when they arent applicable. it still goes back to the fact that he was never registered as a tenant or joint tenant.

    The person had plenty of opportunity to correct the shortfalls in his situation but didnt

     

    Another person who doesn't a clue on lawfully possessions  and succession rights,  I never said "tenancy will automatically pass to someone who doesn't live there"

     

    See what OP has to say anyway, if they reply.................................

     

    Good afternoon.

×
×
  • Create New...