As a secure tenant, you are more likely to end up in the result Ell-enn has mentioned, provided you present your case as she mentions (i.e. proof of employment, offer of overpayment moving forward etc, combined with your recent sizeable reduction in arrears).

Can you post the full wording of the eviction notice, having removed any personal items? And when did you originally move into your property?

And of course a suspended possession order is always possible (and potentially quite likely, due to the reasons Ell-enn has stated above).

It also very much depends upon the type of tenancy you have. There is ALWAYS point in going to such a hearing.

Well, hold on - it is at the end of the day only my opinion. Of absolute key relevance is the grounds listed on the notice of intended possession.

Stranger things have happened, but in my opinion the court effectively has its hands tied here. Although any court, with discretionary or mandatory grounds, is likely to take into account extreme hardship cases. When was the notice of intended possession served also?

For your information. I assume that you are an assured tenant? What was the exact wording of the notice of eviction?

Its OK its now the little star at the bottom of each post And you are welcome, please come back let us know how your daughter gets on.

Presuming you are an assured tenant, and also presuming that the eviction is under Section 8, grounds 8, 10 and 11, then I am afraid I see no other result than possession order being granted. Should the arrears stand at greater than £544 at the time of the hearing, the court is obligated to grant possession - there is zero discretion for the courts in this case. I'm sorry I have no better news.

I would advise that if your daughter goes into this, she at least goes into it eyes wide open. Its not neccessarily a bum deal, but she mustnt think it is a tenancy, because it is not. I would advise that bearing in mind that your daughter would have zero security, this should be compensated by paying less to friend A than half the rent. The "proper" way to do this would be to approach the letting agency and ask them to either perform a formal assignment of tenancy or, more likely, ask them to mutually terminate the previous tenancy and create a new one with your daughter on the agreement. If they went down this avenue, then the letting agent MUST (and it is in your daughters interests for them to do so) perform a full check out and check in, and return deposits then re-take deposits. I realise this sounds like a faff, but it prevents massive mess later.

Oh and as a legal point of note... Doesnt case law mean that obstruction of a public highway is only obstruction if it is "unreasonable"? Scott v Mid-South Essex Justices and Keskin [2004]

Well done. First read of this thread, but irrespective of the rules pat and G&M state above, it would have been grossly unfair had you been fined for this. Common sense prevails.

1) Yes. 2) Of course - friend A is entitled to make an agreement (or not) with anyone she sees fit. 3) Major - your daughter would be a lodger of A basically, and have no security of tenure. How long is left on the fixed term of the tenancy, if any?

What is the monthly rent (or weekly)?

Primarily because an AST can only be given to someone as their primary residence - it is unlikely their staff will have this location as their primary residence.

She does have a responsibility to claim from insurance if she is able, which would leave you only liable for the excess. However, the wording in the TA opens things up to interpretation as well..

Now that is different. She doesnt WANT to claim, or she CANT claim?

It didnt come out quite as expected - I meant dilapidations at the end of the tenancy. I fully disagree that scenarios like this are what the deposit is intended for, its not.

You are a lawful subtenant ONLY if the original TA between owner and your landlord did not explicitly prevented subletting. In any event, you cannot be evicted until "your landlord" is lawfully evicted.

Landlord will lose. Items 1, 3 and the additional info you provide totally kybosh any claim from him.

What is the monthly rent?

No, she cant only claim it from the deposit - the deposit is there for post-tenancy dilapidations.

If you have not used available locks, then this will be seen as negligence on your part, and as such liability for the cost incurred as a result of this is your own. I sympathise (I dont use all locks, and I doubt the majority do) but that is the legal position I am afraid. It is a direct result of your failure to use all of the locks that the landlord cannot claim from insurance.

As mentioned above, your post talks about damaged locks, but then replacement doors. Are the doors themselves damaged? Unfortunately, it is due to your negligence in effect that the cost has been incurred, and as such I would see it as being the responsibility of the tenant.

In the current climate, I think you would struggle to get a mortgage even on the council property unfortunately, given your salary and especially (unfortunately) your age. Whats your credit history like?