Jump to content

mattfreedom

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

    1
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

1 Neutral
  1. Hi I rent a live/work space which went into receivership earlier this year. At the landlord's request we ignored it for a couple of months, but were then visited by the receivers. They informed us that we should pay no more rent to said landlord - we asked if we could stockpile the rent and then deal with whoever at the end of the period of receivership. They agreed, and begrudgingly, so did the landlord. We have kept hold of all of the rent since then, in a savings account. On several occasions since then the landlord has told us that he is buying back the property from the bank and that we should pay the money into his account. Obviously we have not done this. I'm concerned about our legal footing, because we've been told (again) that the landlord will be closing on the property this week, and that if we refuse to pay all the back rent across then our tenancies become 'null and void' and they will occupy the premises as a right of purchase. We have been told that we should ask for the proof of sale to the individual concerned, the mortgage lender's agreement that the premises are suitable for letting, and a letter from the receivers that all back rent should be paid to the landlord. It has become contact to the point of harrassment - we have received absolutely no documentation other than emails written in poor legalese with 'without prejudice' at the top of them. should we report this to any governing bodies? because of the breakdown in relations we suspect that we will at some point have to pay the money and then we will be evicted over whatever reason springs to mind. the landlord has a history of dealing with tenants this way. we have also been told on the phone that interest on the amount of back rent of some 5 - 10% a day will be added to the charges! on top of this, we have also been told that the receivership of the building was an illegal act and that we should chase it with the receivers. the whole thing seems a mess. if anyone has any legal knowledge that they can impart, it would be very gratefully received. thanks.
×
×
  • Create New...