Jump to content

Ediej6

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

    32
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

About Ediej6

  • Rank
    Basic Account Holder
  1. A Periodic Tenancy stays in existence until one party terminates it, so you can carry on with this rolling contract indefinitely. Your Landlord will have to serve notice on you of 2 months (rent periods) and you will have to give one months (one rent period) notice to quit (although if you pay 6 monthly this will still be two rent periods for you and one rent period for the LL i.e. 1 year for you and six months notice for them). Your Landlord has to serve a Section 13 notice on you if they want to increase the rent at any time under this Periodic arrangement. If you are both happy with it, then you are safe to leave it, as the same terms and conditions apply as in the original Tenancy Agreement. It will save you both a further fee from the Agent for a new Tenancy Agreement that you don't really need!
  2. You can deal direct with whoever has your deposit. This is usually the DPS or the TDS (you should have some paperwork provided by the Agent which will tell you). They will ask the Landlord if they want to make any deductions from the deposit. You can request the deposit returned in full at the same time. They will usually release any undisputed amounts to you fairly quickly but they will then send any dispute to an adjudicator and they will need evidence from you and the Landlord about the condition of the property when you moved in and out. Remember, you are entitled to fair wear and tear without any deductions. Having photos and a detailed record will help your case and any receipts for cleaning etc. Send copies of this to the Deposit people. I wouldn't wait to be asked once you know there is a dispute. You do not need to take anyone to court until after this process is completed and you are unlikely to win a claim if the Deposit people side with your Landlord, so save your court fee and don't bother. If your case is a good one, they should release all your money. It may take time though, sometimes several months but you are wasting your time making any court claim until you have exhausted this avenue, that is why it exists, to protect your money.
  3. You are entitled to "quiet enjoyment" of the premises in law. The LL and/or her representatives cannot enter into the flat without your permission unless it is an emergency.As you have such a short time to go until the end of your tenancy, I would put it down to experience and move. You are entitled to leave on the end date without giving any notice, so I would just go and not tell her. But don't stay even one day longer or you will be required to give a minimum one months notice/or pay for a months rent, as technically you will be in a Periodic Tenancy after your end date has expired and you have to give notice to end this.No, she cannot kick you out early either and if she hasn't served proper notice on you (2 months), even though your tenancy is about to end, she cannot kick you out at all! Threats to kick you out are criminal under the Criminal Law Act 1977.Protection from Eviction Act 1977 means she needs a court order to get you out if you refuse to leave.The law is very much on the side of the Tenant but unless you stand up to her or report her to the police, she may try to get away with it. Go to the CAB for further advice.
  4. It's too late now that planning has been granted. All you can do is make sure they do not breach any conditions imposed on their grant of planning approval and get the council enforcement officer out if they step out of line.I urge people who have an objection to speak to their local councillor early on. They will know what is a valid planning objection and what is not and can advise you. Just not liking what a neighbour is proposing is not good enough to stop an application, as has been said above, you have to follow their guide lines and point out where the development breaches them. Local councillors often have the power to insist that a contravertial application goes before the planning committee and is not decided as delegated authority by a faceless planner. You then have a right to speak (albeit very briefly) and pursuade the councillors to agree with you.
  5. If you have purchased this property then your solicitor should have asked questions about disputes and unpaid bills and any arrears should have been deducted from the monies paid to the previous owner/occupier when you purchased, so that you got the property debt free. Go back to your conveyancing solicitor and ask what this is all about and get them to sort it out, that is what you paid them to do! If there is a debt which you are now liable for (I am not saying that you are) and they have missed it, then you have a claim against your solicitor!
  6. All you can do at this late stage is go to court and take all your paperwork with you showing how much you get and how much you have to pay out each month and why you cannot pay any more than you have offered.If you have made arrangements with other creditors and these are being paid regularly, this will all be to the good and you can point to these as examples of how you are being reasonable and paying your way.A half decent judge will assess all of this and will make a decision based on the facts you present, not on what the council wants.It seems unfair for the Council to insist that they take priority when you have obviously tried to be fair to all your creditors. When you get to the court find out where the clerk is and make yourself known to him/her, they need to cross you off the list as having turned up. If you can get a summary of your debts and payments onto a single piece of paper and give this into the clerk to the court before the hearing it can be put in front of the judge as extra info, with any luck the judge will look at it before the hearing and will form a view. Give a copy to the council solicitor as well, because they are entitled to disclosure of what you want to put in front of the court. The council solicitor will usually make themselves known to you in the waiting area. They may even want to talk to you about making a deal before you go in. If you are sure about your figures then stick to your guns, do not be bullied by these people. They have decided to drag you there, so it is up to them to come up with a good reason why your offer was not good enough. Reherse your arguments about why you cannot pay any more than you have offered (make notes and refer to them), be very polite to the other side and only speak to the judge when he/she addresses you directly (call him Sir/Madam - you would be surprised how far common courtesy will take you in these situations). Do not worry about going in and not knowing what to do, the judge will help you as you are a layman and do not have a solicitor. If in doubt say you do not understand and are not used to court rooms, they are supposed to guide you in these circumstances. If, at the end, the council solicitor asks for costs against you, point out that you tried to negotiate with them but they refused. Hopefully the judge will think they have been a bit hasty and won't give them any leeway. In the happy event that you are told you can get costs against the council, you can ask for £50 for your lost day from work plus your travel costs. This may not happen but it is worth working out what these are just in case you get lucky.I hope you get a judge with some common sense. Good Luck.
  7. Sometimes the only way to make them do anything is to be proactive. I would withold the rent and write a letter to the Agent stating all the problems that the Tenant has encountered and therefore why they feel they have been overcharged for the property. If the Tenant calculates what they feel they should really having been paying, say £100 less pcm, then work out what is left to pay to the end of the term and pay that amount only in monthly instalments. This way the Tenant is only discounting the rent by a fair proportion due to the lack of facilities that were promised and the Landlord would be hard pushed to claim they just are not paying their rent. Also ask for the official complaints procedure for the Agent and write to them with your complaint asking for compensation. Then write to ARLA (Association of Residential Letting Agents) if they are a member with your complaint. Agents who are members hate the thought that they may lose their membership of ARLA. The Landlord then has several options open to them but the last thing they want is a tenant who doesn't pay, the emphasis will be on the Agents to sort this out with the Landlord and either fix the problems or accept a lower rent. It is normal practice for a Landlord to offer compensation of a lower rent for problems in the property until they are fixed. The Tenant has the option to give notice, or accept the property with the repairs done at the full rent in the future, or take the property at the lower rent without the repairs. It is just not acceptable to treat Tenants in this way and if the Landlord were to 'play hard ball' and try to reclaim the unpaid rent through the courts, then the Tenant would have a good counterclaim for compensation. If the Deposit has not been registered then the Landlord cannot serve notice on the Tenant until it is, so the Tenant can stay in the property if they wish. If the Deposit is not registered before the Tenant leaves then they can claim 3 x times the deposit in compensation. If the Deposit is registered (the Agent should be able to tell the Tenant this and should have notified them where it was registered/who holds it at the start). The Landlord cannot take any monies from the deposit without the Tenants agreement or the adjudicator of the Deposit Scheme deciding in their favour. I suspect that the amount of £200 for the fumigation is the concession the Landlord has made for allowing the cats in the property and I expect this will have to be paid at the end of the term. However, ask for a copy of the invoice for the fumigation because if the Landlord just pockets the money and does not do the work, this can be complained about too. Renting is fraught with problems but a Tenant who looks like they won't put up with any nonsense and asks for compensation for any problems, is far more likely to be well treated than one who suffers in silence. FYI: I used to run a Lettings Support Centre for one of the largest chains of Estate Agents, so I have seen what goes on and how some Landlords will just refuse to spend any money and do not care about their Tenants living conditions. This leaves the Agent in a very difficult position but they still have a duty of care to the Tenant, even though they are employed by the Landlord. Always try to chose an Agent who is regulated by ARLA, as at least then you have someone else to complain to and the Agent should adhere to certain minimum standards.
  8. Almost certainly collecting on behalf of Barclays.
  9. If she doesn't secure your deposit it makes any notice she may give you invalid until she does so!!! She is daft not to but perhaps does not realise the implications. Perhaps you should send her some info which explains the pitfalls for Landlords if they don't do this? There is loads available on the internet. It might sort this out without you having to risk a court fee?
  10. I was not expecting anything back but I was not expecting to have to pay the whole 12 months insurance when I have only had 8 months cover.
  11. I can see the workings of this however, as I pay extra for the monthly arrangement, I would have thought this would cover the credit side of it. Plus they sa in their terms and conditions that the % they require for cancellation is for admin. This cannot be right surely?
  12. I am assuming the V5 has the address of the registered keeper onit? Have you tried writing to them telling them to collect their property from your driveway?
  13. I took out insurance for my car in March this year. I chose to pay monthly premiums for which privilege I pay slightly more. I have now sold my car and wanted to cancel the insurance, as I no longer need it. When I rang the insurers they stated that I would still owe them money, in fact the whole of the rest of this years premium, as they will charge me an 'administration fee' which is the equivalent of the balance of the premium. I am sure this cannot be right? My premiums have always been paid on time and by direct debit, so I am uptodate with the payments. I would expect to perhaps pay a small fee for admin for the cancellation but I am sure that charging a percentage of the premium like this for early termination is a penalty charge and not an admin fee. I do not think this is a fair charge and so should surely come under some legislation regarding unfair terms or such? Does anyone know how I counter this as I am sure they will pursue me and place a default on my credit file if I cannot sort this out swiftly.
  14. Check out the Partnership Act 1980 clauses 5, 6 & 8 5.Every partner is an agent of the firm and his other partners for the purpose of the business of the partnership; and the acts of every partner who does any act for carrying on in the usual way business of the kind carried on by the firm of which he is a member bind the firm and his partners, unless the partner so acting has in fact no authority to act for the firm in the particular matter, and the person with whom he is dealing either knows that he has no authority, or does not know or believe him to be a partner. 6.An act or instrument relating to the business of the firm and done or executed in the firm-name, or in any other manner showing an intention to bind the firm, by any person thereto authorised, whether a partner or not, is binding on the firm and all the partners. Provided that this section shall not affect any general rule of law relating to the execution of deeds or negotiable instruments. 8.If it has been agreed between the partners that any restriction shall be placed on the power of any one or more of them to bind the firm, no act done in contravention of the agreement is binding on the firm with respect to persons having notice of the agreement. So get it written into a Partnership Agreement that both signatures are needed to bind the Partnership.
  15. Yes this is all very well in principle and I know of the case law concerning husbands enjoining wives in debts which are not in their best interests (I have the misfortune to have a law degree and studied this ad nauseam) but I can assure you that the judge was more than happy to hear the claim of the credit company against me based upon the premise that I was once a business partner of my ex husband and therefore could be bound by his sole signature on behalf of our partnership. The credit company made the mistake of not getting both signatures, it happens, but their error did not stop them from trying to claim from me. One of my points in court was that if I had known of the agreement I could have cancelled it within the cooling off period, as was my right under the Consumer Credit Act but as I had never seen it and so not signed it, I had been denied my rights and therefore they could not rely on the CCA to collect this debt from me. I also never received any default notice, as the first name on the account was my ex husbands and he was redirecting all his post, so the default notice never got delivered to my address, or I may have been aware of it in 2006. I therefore contended that the default notice had not been served correctly either and was invalid. I did do quite a lot of digging and cannot remember exactly where I found the rules for the default position of 'if no partnership agreement saying otherwise, then either partner can sign for the partnership' but I assure you it is the case, as I was quite surprised and alarmed by this. I was still married to my ex at the time he took out this credit agreement but we were estranged. The credit was to pay for commercial insurance for a business based at our marital home. I still lived in the house but he was still entitled to use the premises (a farm) for his business until we had sorted out our financial separation. To have tried to kick him off my property (yes it was in my sole name) would have meant a claim against me from him for restricting his ability to earn a living, so you see I had no choice but to let him continue at the time. Anyway, back to the crux of the matter; it all seemed to hinge on whether my ex and I were estranged at the time he took out the credit and if I obtained any benefit from the insurance or if I would have agreed to it as his business partner so it was reasonable for him to sign on my behalf. The fact that I was full time employed elsewhere and had been for some time, so it did not look like I was ever in business with him helped to convince the judge. The judge also asked me quite pointedly if I had ever been in business with my ex and once he had made the decision that I was telling the truth and had not, he dismissed their claim. Had I been in a business partnership with my ex at some point, no matter how loosely or how little paperwork there was to support this, I believe the decision would have gone against me. If you are saying that this would be incorrect in law then someone needs to explain that to the judge (who was a very experience District Judge). I will try to find the legislation which refers to the default position on a partnership, as I think this is important for others who may not realise the implications of not having a partnership agreement if you are in business with someone else and what they can get you into without your knowledge!
×
×
  • Create New...