Firstly, I suggest you re-read what you quoted in the first paragraph - it doesn't say what you think it says. Secondly, small claims limit is £10k, so seems Shelter's website is out of date. Thirdly, your claim is for a penalty, not a 'small claim', so it's not heard in the small claims track.

The evidence of you staying at your partner's place and him staying at yours is enough to financially link you. The fact that your kids remained at your property whilst you were at your boyfriend's doesn't mean you weren't financially linked. You'll need a good solicitor.

The money judgment was the amount you owed on the day the judgment was given. The redemption amount will have been the amount owed when payment was due. They do not need to be the same, nor will they be as costs continue to accrue.

The Localism Act does apply to the tenancy that recently ended. Your problem here is not whether the law applies, but whether a judge will find in your favour - there aren't any precedents as yet and it is still up the individual judge whether he/she will award a penalty figure for non-compliance. Yes, it all seems straightforward, but it's not. For a start since it's untested, the likelihood is that you will need a solicitor and or barrister once in court. It is fast track, not small claims, so costs to start the case are more expensive. If you win, the LL is likely to challenge it, and you could find yourself tied up in litigation for many months. You may be better off writing to the LL and stating that he has failed to comply with the law, and that unless he returns your deposit in full, without any deductions, you will consider legal action to claim up to three times the deposit as a penalty. If the LL has any sense, he'll cut his losses, return the deposit and you won't be any worse off.

It DOES work like that. If a s8 notice is validly served, indicating a ground 8; i.e. 8 weeks or two months in arrears depending on payment type at the time of service of the notice and on the day of a hearing, then the judge has NO DISCRETION - it is a MANDATORY ground. The only way to stop a tick box mandatory claim is to negotiate with the claimant outside of court and get them to agree to drop the ground 8 and for THEM to tell the judge they are dropping it in favour of a discretionary one. Rorschach you've also gone from 'hundreds of possessions' to 'thousands of possessions' in a couple of posts! Don't give people false hope, it's unfair. OP, if you have received a notice, indicate what type and what grounds, and how much your weekly/monthly rent is, and we'll take it from there.

I'd suggest they need a new possession order. And more importantly I'd suggest you seek legal advice as quickly as possible - your information is brief, but it raises multiple questions, including whether you got independent legal advice when accepting the 25% reduction. See a solicitor - as it involves your home, legal aid may be available (dependent on your income).

s83 notice is just informing you that they intend to seek possession through the courts. You must contact them and explain the situation - as part of the pre-action protocol they are supposed to assist you in any benefit entitlements you may have (though given what you have written there isn't anything they can do at this stage). That said, if there is any prospect of the current benefit fraud investigation being dismissed, then you will be entitled to backpayment of your suspended benefits, which would presumably clear your rent arrears; judges are reluctant to grant possession of secure tenancies when there are benefit issues - I am deducing from the service of the s83 that you have a secure tenancy? In any case, you MUST contact the housing department and explain your current situation. If you have someone who could pay the rent for you in the interim, then you should definitely be asking them for assistance. If not, then if your landlord proceeds to court, you will need to inform the judge about the issues with your benefits - it is very likely he/she would adjourn proceedings until the outcome of the benefit investigation. Incidentally - something which appears to have been missed in the replies from the things you have posted above, is that you readily admit that you have stayed over at your boyfriend's place and that he 'pays for everything when you are there' - that in itself is sufficient for them to say you are financially linked as when he is 'paying for everything' you are still claiming benefits elsewhere - you may not want to acknowledge that, and it may irritate you to have someone point it out, but far better for it to be clear that there is an obvious issue, rather than pretend none exists at all. One hopes you have a solicitor who knows what he is doing in order to reduce any impact on you.

You're not a lawyer, so you don't need to 'incorporate some acts of law' in your request for a reduction in rent (which is compensation). Just write, politely expressing your issues with how the work was carried out, how it affected you and what you expect to receive as a reduction in rent to compensate you over the three week period for not having peaceful and quiet enjoyment of the property, and then wait to see what their response is.

I just have to say that despite his abbreviations Mariner usually gives sound advice and to be rude to people trying to help really isn't polite. Whilst your deposit was taken pre 1997, the Localism Act captures all existing tenancies in place on 5th April 2012 - so if you're only just about to leave your tenancy, the deposit should have been protected in a scheme, though in my experience thus far, judges are extremely reluctant to find against a LL with such an old tenancy on his hands in relation to non-protection. You can ask for your deposit back in cash, but you cannot demand it in cash. The suggestion for a bankers draft was a good one - or alternatively you could insist on a 2 hour transfer into your bank account (most banks do this now), and simply delay your trip to your new house by a 2 hour lunch/dinner/coffee break whilst you wait to check the money has gone in. If you've been in the property for that long, the inspection may throw up issues your LL will want to withhold some of the deposit for, and any amount that is in dispute won't be paid over immediately anyway, particularly since that leaves the LL with only one option to get any damages paid for: court. LL = Landlord

There are only three instances where the court can consider re-entry after possession has taken place - and for you, based on what you have written, the only one of those three is abuse of process or oppression in the execution of the eviction. I am fairly certain this will be the route that your solicitor will be taking, as the other two simply don't fit. That said there has to be some concrete evidence of that oppression - e.g. you were told the only way to stop the eviction was to pay all the arrears, or you were told not to bother applying for a stay (to be fair you've made lots of stay apps so it's not like you couldn't have gone ahead if you'd chosen to). Your evidence regarding when you paid the debt will be crucial - though again, to be fair, the fact that you paid it does not mean they were not entitled to evict you. Your solicitor will have produced sufficient case law to back up his stance - so with any luck, a judge will allow you re-entry...though this may depend on just how many stays you've had and just how badly you have breached each and every order made since the original was granted. Sometimes judges will say you've had enough chances. The fact that you have a job, and that your employer is willing to pay six months rent up front, is good news (get that in writing on headed paper from your employer to present to the judge - along with a cheque if possible). I don't want to get your hopes up too high, but if your solicitor is any good you'll have a reasonable chance of regaining entry.

My response was based on your posts, so if the whole story isn't here, then how do you expect accurate advice. Still seems to me that the agent/LL is simply trying to get the money he is owed for rent and damage to the property. In your first sentence you say 'old, vulnerable and a house owner', then you state in your next post that he 'assumed you owned a house'. Nowhere in your previous posts did you mention that you did not own a house, even in the first post where you mention what the agent said in his email to you. Guarantors either provide deposits or own property, otherwise their use is negligible. If there is a guarantor it is usual for the claimant to go after that person as that is the person who they will have checked out can afford to pay in the event that things go wrong. There is clearly no point in chasing either your daughter or her ex. You got advice, from me. The fact you didn't like it because it wasn't namby pambying you is immaterial. I won't waste my time further. Pay your debts.

You can apply to stop the eviction in any case, whether you clear the arrears in full or not. You need to submit a stay application on form N244, which you can download on the site, from the HMCS or obtain a copy from your local county court. Once submitted you will receive a hearing date and you can go into the court and explain to the judge why you failed to make payments (hope you have a good reason), and how (most importantly), you are able to afford payments going forward to clear the arrears. You should be making your application now, and in any case not less than five days before the eviction. Judges do not like it when people make last minute stay apps in order to force the eviction date to pass by; they take a dim view of this, so don't do it. Make the application this week. Are you able to offer an amount towards the arrears? How far behind on the court ordered payments are you? Have the arrears increased? When was the SPO granted - date/year?

Raydetinu is correct regarding the separate flats issue. LL cannot, and certainly would not be able to provide sufficient information to a court based on the information that you have given in the thread (most importantly the retrospective attempt at liability for council tax) to prove that the property was 'shared' as opposed to two entirely self-contained flats. Whilst the non-protection claim is likely to end up in the fast track, and it is possible you might need representation if the issue is contested - it is entirely possible for a lay person to navigate it as the issue under dispute is a simple matter of fact. Was the deposit protected? No = Judgment, plus the judge will award 1-3 times penalty. As your LL probably only has the one property, the penalty is likely to be 1, not 3...depends on how serious the judge decides the breach is. Is it worth it? Not in my view - court is unbelievably stressful for those who are not used to it and the impact it has on your well-being and stress levels until it gets into court will not be worth the monetary amount you may get, lowest £1000, most £2000. If your deposit had been much higher than £500, it mayhave been worth the hassle, but you have to consider the initial outlay for the court hearing, plus the potential the LL may not pay and you then having the stress and hassle of taking enforcement action.

Firstly, forget the 'advice' you were given regarding possible non-protection of the deposit as a 'get out clause'. You stated your daughter's tenancy ended (or she left) at the New Year - 2012, this was before the Localism Act had an effect on the deposit rules. Prior to that, the end of the tenancy meant the deposit no longer needed to be protected. If you are a guarantor on the tenancy agreement (one presumes you did in fact sign and agree to be guarantor), then you are jointly and severally liable for the debt. Having read the thread, I think your anger is misplaced and should be directed at your daughter and her husband for landing you in this mess. The agent/LL are simply trying to recover their losses and are entitled to do so. If you have a genuine dispute - i.e. you don't think the rent is owed, you don't think the damage was caused etc, then put that in writing and provide proof. I am afraid the agent/LL is actually accurate in the statement that the court will look at the 'offer' made and the fact that no payments were actually made, and take that into consideration in making his/her judgment. The bottom line here is that you own property, so I'd suggest you try to resolve this without court if at all possible, because non-payment after judgment will almost certainly lead to enforcement action which could ultimately end in a charge on your property. You've left this for well over a year now - in that time the £100 a month offered would have cleared the debt, so the lack of payment shows a lack of interest in resolving the issue. I expect you, your daughter and her ex thought it had all slipped away into the ether. Time to get your heads out of the sand. If this seems harsh, it's meant to be a firm reality check. Your ability to prove that it was not your daughter that caused the damage has dissipated with time, so unless she has photos of how pristine she left the property, the agent/LL's evidence is not going to be able to be refuted effectively if this goes to court. You've been working over a year now - perhaps you can find the amount they are offering to accept in F&F and pay that. Oh, and the agent/LL clearly hasn't been a 'bully' as he's left it this long due to his own health problems and now he's fit again he is simply trying to reclaim what is his. Wouldn't you do the same?

The most important question here is 'on what date was the possession order granted'? You defended the possession proceedings, so one presumes you were in court that day so you should know the exact date.

Obviously I should have been clearer re deposit being used to off-set rent. It cannot be used to off-set rent during the tenancy - only AFTER it has ended, which is NOT what OP was suggesting she would do. Since these types of dispute usually end up in court, it is for the judge to decide whether the deposit should be released (if in a scheme) to off-set a money judgment for outstanding rent. Shelter website also quite clearly states AFTER.

I didn't ask a question. The OP should not withhold rent as it is a breach of her contract and doesn't make her situation any better. She is assuming the LL will withhold her deposit, but hasn't actually asked him about it, or asked him to put it in a TDS (which would solve the problem of him not being able to keep it in its entirety). If the OP ends up having to ask the local authority for housing assistance, then having withheld rent (and probably have that added to the claim when it is issued), will not assist her. I give the same advice onlinne than I would give to a client (albeit for free!), and I cannot condone telling people to do the wrong thing, particularly when that wrong thing might be detrimental to them.

I am afraid you cannot withhold rent as that is a breach of your contract. A deposit is not for the off-set of rent, it's a deposit held as security. The law sees them as two entirely separate things. Only the court has the power to off-set any rent arrears against a deposit held. If you want to leave at expiry of the s21 notice, you have to serve notice on your LL - if you are in a periodic tenancy that is usually one month's notice ending on the day before the rent is due. You would be far better off negotiating with your LL about this, since you obviously want to leave too. Tell him you will be out on the date he wants you to move and you expect to have your deposit paid back in full, minus any reasonable deductions (that is, after all, what the deposit is for). In relation to taking him to court for non-protection, that'll cost you quite a bit in fees to start the process as it is not dealt with in the small claims track. You state you used your entire savings for the deposit, so it's unlikely you can spare the additional 1k on court fees. Is it worth the stress? You clearly are having a bad time at the moment, and being pregnant isn't easy at the best of times, so you probably don't need any additional stress such as this. As a side note, if the LL won't play ball, you can still sue him up to six years after you move out for the return of the deposit, so don't worry too much.

If they have come to an agreement with you to repay the arrears over less than a year, they really ought to be foregoing the possession hearing. You should be asking the judge to adjourn the proceedings on the basis that you have substantially reduced the arrears and have made and kept to an offer which the mortgagee has agreed to. Therefore the possession hearing could have been vacated. You should invite the judge to adjourn the hearing on terms of current monthly instalment plus £200 per month towards the arrears - pointing out that will clear the arrears within a year, and also pointing out that the property is up for sale, has equity in it, and the mortgagee will not be prejudiced by not having an order. If you are worried about the money judgment affecting yours and your siblings credit files - the missed payments will already have done that. A money judgment becomes a county court judgment on the date the judge sets for payment. So if the judge gives an outirght order for 56 days and a money judgment for the full sum, on day 57 the money judgment becomes a CCJ. If a suspended order is granted - the money judgment is usually suspended on the same terms, so it does not become a CCJ until you miss payments and the date for possession has passed. (Even though the order is suspended, a date for the possession is still given by the judge.) Forgot to add that you can ask the court to adjourn the hearing until your return. Make sure you file your defence and request 1. an adjournment on terms of CMI plus £200, or 2. In the alternative, an adjourment for you to return to the country to attend the hearing in person. Make sure you point out the things I mentioned above. If your siblings are also on the mortgage, one of them could attend - though perhaps you don't want them to know?

Bless. I am sure that made you feel a bit better - though it doesn't change the fact that I am right.

You won't be entitled to housing benefit as that is for rented properties. You may, however, be entitled to claim the DWP statutory mortgage interest support IF you are entitled to claim JSA. But that is not payable until 13 weeks after you sign on and will only cover the interest rate on your mortgage up to a maximum interest rate of 3.67%. So in combination with that you will have to ask your mortgage company to put you on interest only if you have a repayment mortgage or find the shortfall between what the DWP will pay and what the monthly instalment is. If your interest rate is above the level indicated, then the money you can claim will not cover even the interest only element of your loan, so there may be a shortfall to find even if you are entitled to SMI. That said, if you return to court with details of your applications to the local authority for financial assistance with the arrears, and your claims for benefit, the judge may decide to stay the eviction until it is clearer about what you will be able to afford. But the judge will take into consideration whether or not your property has any equity in it, as if it doesn't, then the mortgagee will be unduly prejudiced by a delay and their security will be at risk. If there is equity - even as little as 20-30k, it is arguable that a 13 week wait for SMI to come through won't make a massive difference to them.

Well, unless you have deliberately LIED and MISLED the forum with the information you've provided in your many posts, then I think the facts are as you stated them. I inferred from your terminology - which is precisely what the LVT would do. Perhaps you don't know the difference between 'assuming' and 'inferring'. Fortunately I do. Pay your own debts. If you'd done that in the first place you wouldn't be facing a paltry £60 charges sum.

No idea why you are repeating stuff that I already addressed. Your assumption about my reading is about as silly as your assumption that the LVT will be interested in such a trivial non-issue. My comment was not harsh - it was straightforward and to the point; you have clearly wasted more time trying to 'fight' this, probably in terms of emotion, irritatoin, anger, upset, not to mention actual hours, than is worth £60 lousy quid. I would not be in the same situation - it wouldn't be worth my time to quibble over £60 IF I had been too lazy to pay my bills. Just to reiterate, there is no principle involved other than that they are entitled to the ground rent and entitled to reasonable costs in pursuing non-payment (well, one deduces there is actually a clause that states they are because you neglected to respond to that element of my post - I can infer from that, just as I infer from the terminology of your initial post that you did in fact receive invoices).

The above implies you received invoices, just not in the format you believe complied with the law. You can read - so either the clause is in your lease, or it's not. If it is, then pay the £60, if it's not, pay the ground rent and tell them to sue you for their alleged admin fees. Though to be fair, if they sent you three invoices (and you imply above that they did in fact send some form of invoice) and then sent you a letter before action, a charge of £60 is fairly reasonable (albeit they reduced this from the original £120). To answer your latest post - the LVT won't take kindly to having to deal with the value of a dispute such as this. £60 is not a large amount to pay for four letters/invoices. I don't think there is a 'principle' involved - it's just you being awkward and you must have surely spent far more time than was worth £60 on the matter. (As have I writing this response!) Pay the £60 and move on.

OP - all is not lost. Contact the local authority as I suggested, and then as Ell-enn suggested come back here for a bit more help. It is entirely possible for you to appeal the decision, however you will have to show proof of affordability, which the judge at your recent hearing clearly decided was an insurmountable issue.