Landlord Receiving Two Lots Of Rent For One Property

[Avesovum]

Hi,

 

I posted about this a quite a while back.

 

Here is the short story:

 

I leased a shop with a 2 year break clause.

 

I made a huge mistake in the location of the shop for my business and it failed 5 month later.

 

I told the landlord of the problems I was having and he replied, if you go under you will still be liable for the rent upto the 2 year break clause; which is fair enough. As i had no money coming in to pay the monthly payments on the lease the landlord decided to take me to county court.

 

The court awarded the landlord payments of £90 per month until the full amount of the lease is paid = £16000 + Interest which will take me 14 years to pay off, and the court also placed an interim charge order on my house.

 

The landlord also still has £1900 deposit belonging to me and fixtures and fittings worth £4000.

 

Now i have found out that the landlord has re-let the premises with my fixtures and fittings and receiving rent from the new tennant and also receiving the £90 monthly payment from me.

 

My question is?

 

Is this legal, and if not what can i do about it?

 

Regards

[TheChancellor]

That's an interesting one - wait for Mr Shed !

 

So you are saying that - in effect - because you are paying the landlord you are still renting the place?

 

If you were you would be liable for all the associated expenses (rates, etc) but I'm not sure if you could ask for the second rent to offset the losses LL thought he was going to suffer upto the break clause?

[Avesovum]

That's an interesting one - wait for Mr Shed !

 

So you are saying that - in effect - because you are paying the landlord you are still renting the place?

 

If you were you would be liable for all the associated expenses (rates, etc) but I'm not sure if you could ask for the second rent to offset the losses LL thought he was going to suffer upto the break clause?

 

In theory yes i am still paying the landlord for still renting the place. IMO

 

And yes he thought he was going to suffer upto the break clause.

[callumsgran]

This is very interesting i will watch with interest.

 

Is it legal?

 

IMO no, but then i'm no expert

 

Depending on what sort of business it is then i wouldnt have thought there would be much to pay in rates etc

 

£16,000 seems a lot of money to me and this new tenant is making use of your fixtures flaming cheek!

[Aequitas]

Unless I am missing something, something has gone radically wrong here. I do not see how:

 

(a) You can be required to pay rent for a future period and not be entitled to possession.

 

(b) The landlord can be entitled to be paid rent twice for the same period in respect of the same property.

 

I think you need to see a landlord and tenant specialist lawyer.

[MrShed]

Wholly agree with Aequitas.

[onlynameleft]

Reletting the property to someone else acts as a surrender by operation of law of your lease (even if it had not been determined earlier). At that point (if not before) your rights of occupation would cease but so would your obligation to pay rent and outgoings for any period after that point.

However, on the basis that I have never come across a court order that would oblige the tenant to pay all future rent due under a lease to the landlord I agree with the two posts above. You need to get this Order set aside or varied.

[Avesovum]

Reletting the property to someone else acts as a surrender by operation of law of your lease (even if it had not been determined earlier). At that point (if not before) your rights of occupation would cease but so would your obligation to pay rent and outgoings for any period after that point.

However, on the basis that I have never come across a court order that would oblige the tenant to pay all future rent due under a lease to the landlord I agree with the two posts above. You need to get this Order set aside or varied.

 

Hi thanks for that,

 

What sort of wording would i use on the court form to have this set aside or varied and what forms do i use.

 

Thanks

[TheChancellor]

Hi thanks for that,

 

What sort of wording would i use on the court form to have this set aside or varied and what forms do i use.

 

Thanks

 

Hi AS

 

Do you have the written details on the CCJ to hand?

 

I presume you are also saying that your £1900 deposit wasn't taken into consideration when the total was claimed?

 

Did you offer any Defence at court?

[Avesovum]

Hi AS

 

Do you have the written details on the CCJ to hand?

 

I presume you are also saying that your £1900 deposit wasn't taken into consideration when the total was claimed?

 

Did you offer any Defence at court?

 

I do have the written ccj but will have to dig it out.

 

No the deposit wasnt even mentioned, and when i tried to mentioned it in court the judge said: that is another issue and i havnt got time to deal with that now.

 

Yes i went to court personally and did offer defence but it went in one ear and out of the other with the judge.

 

Thanks

[TheChancellor]

I do have the written ccj but will have to dig it out.

 

No the deposit wasnt even mentioned, and when i tried to mentioned it in court the judge said: that is another issue and i havnt got time to deal with that now.

 

Yes i went to court personally and did offer defence but it went in one ear and out of the other with the judge.

 

Thanks

 

 

Q for Mr Shed or ONL

 

How would this situation normally be resolved?

 

As I understood it (certainly with an AST) once there are a certain level of arrears (usually 2+ months?) the landlord is entitled to issue Notice and terminate the agreement early (at the end of the Notice period).

 

He can then claim for rent upto the end of the Notice period + any arrears + possibly interest but the Agreement is then terminated and no further obligation exists with the tenant.

 

Is this not correct?

[onlynameleft]

Q for Mr Shed or ONL

 

How would this situation normally be resolved?

 

As I understood it (certainly with an AST) once there are a certain level of arrears (usually 2+ months?) the landlord is entitled to issue Notice and terminate the agreement early (at the end of the Notice period).

 

He can then claim for rent upto the end of the Notice period + any arrears + possibly interest but the Agreement is then terminated and no further obligation exists with the tenant.

 

Is this not correct?

 

Depending on the type of tenancy there are various ways to determine it. With commercial tenancies there's often no need for proceedings. If the lease allows it, where there are rent arrears, the landlord can simply re enter and change the locks. But the point is that the landlord cannot have his cake and eat it; i.e. he cannot enjoy the right to receive rent from one person while at the same time have the right to occupy exclusively himself and/or relet the premises elsewhere simultaneously. Once he relets it any obligation for the previous tenant to pay rent is over.

I couldn't comment on what application would be needed without seeing the wording of the order. But it is the Order I don't understand. I can't ever imagine a situation where the court could grant an Order obliging me to pay all future rent without a concomitant right to occupy for that period; what is the consideration for the rent in this case? That is why I think the OP needs a meeting with a real live lawyer and not a message board.