Tenancy Problem - Urgent Help needed

[Just4Let]

Hi CL64,

 

 

Should, of course, the guarantor turn out to be as financially solvent as your ex-tenant then this of course would bring you back to the role of the agent who provided 2 such 'suitable' signatories to the letting arrangement that they facilitated in return for payment.

 

Life's funny but with the benefit of hindsight I would do everything over again - only differently!!

 

NPNG

 

Speaking as an agent I must ask

Could the 'suitability' argument be challenged?

'Suitable' is a very subjective utterance is it not?

[Catlover64]

Well - like I said earlier; the agent would have been left with the same impression as me; i.e. the tenant was *apparently* a lone parent with a 2 YO son. I accept that kids will be kids and there might have been SOME damage done, but the scribbles were clearly done by older children who "should've known better" and moreover some of it would've been too high for a toddler to reach. That I guess, is by the bye...The point remains that the tenant DID NOT return the house to me in the same condition she got it in. My husband & I incurred considerable cost & time in putting the property right in order to let it again. We would like to recover those costs as far as practicible.

 

Yes, Just4Let, the utterance was subjective, but NPNG was merely giving his opinion and advice on the matter was he not??? The agent may very well challenge this, but on reflection I think the way to go would be to sue the ex-tenant as well as the guarantor.

 

Your opinions/advice would be gratefully received!

[Just4Let]

A little defensive speaking as an agent.

 

I would definitely head for the guarantor on this occasion.

What credit checks / scores were performed on the guarantor?

Do they own a property?

Was this checked out by the agent?

 

Here's some ammunition for you IF you decide that the agent is part culprit here, we do all of the above as a Guarantor is not worth the paperwork it's written on if they have nothing to sue against. You'll generally find that if they have a house they probably have some equity in it.

 

Letter Before Action for the tenant, copy in the guarantor, give them 7 days to respond if not then LBA to the Guarantor, if 7 days and no response then MCOL for the guarantor. Don't waste your time chasing the tenant!

[Catlover64]

Many thanks Just4Let! I have a copy of the credit check conducted on the guarantor which states his place of work, length of service, length of time lived at his residence, but it does not state whether his house is owned or not.

 

I think both you and NPNG are right. I will write an LBA and copy in her guarantor...Does anyone know where a suitable template can be cannabalised from? .

[no pain no gain]

Hi Just4Let

 

welcome back. Yes, you could argue the suitability card but only if you had a suitable argument.

 

CL64, it is right what you say about the height of the damage on the walls that may have been caused by the tenant's child or the child's friends, however I believe a quick scan of the Minor's Contracts Act 1987 might lead you and Just4Let to understand that the only concerns of a Court establishing liability in regard to a contract are limited only to whether the contract has legal force in Law irrespective of any moral utterances to the contrary. Forgive me for being so blunt but the law of contract and agency generally, unless based on an illegal foundation, will bind the parties to any such agreement.

 

Contrary to what Just4Let says with regard to NOT chasing the tenant (as I am sure Just4Let is right) it would be easier and more advantageous to pursue the 'I can't afford it' tenant. The likelyhood is that you would gain a judgement by default. The default judgement is all that would be required to demand payment from the guarantor. The guarantor in such circumstances, were he to dispute such a demand, would need to place his own financial resources at risk to rebut and challenge such a demand.

 

Anyway, thanks for engaging. I believe this thread is finally expanding to the benefit of many Caggers.

 

NPNG

[Catlover64]

Hi NPNG (excuse the familiarity!! )

 

I hear what you're saying. The bit about the Minor's Contracts Act of 1987 is interesting. I've never heard of this before, and will have a quick google to see what it says. From the little I know of the law, I think the contract IS binding and will stand up in court. If it doesn't, we all know who I'll be going for next!!

 

I'm sending a LBA next week and will cc the guarantor as well. I'll let you know how it goes...

 

We'll give your regards to the ale at the Chateau in Patrick St!!!

 

BTW - if the guarantor is as skint as the tenant claims to be, I'm in trouble!!! And the agent's gonna get it...

[Just4Let]

Hi Just4Let

 

welcome back. Yes, you could argue the suitability card but only if you had a suitable argument.

 

CL64, it is right what you say about the height of the damage on the walls that may have been caused by the tenant's child or the child's friends, however I believe a quick scan of the Minor's Contracts Act 1987 might lead you and Just4Let to understand that the only concerns of a Court establishing liability in regard to a contract are limited only to whether the contract has legal force in Law irrespective of any moral utterances to the contrary. Forgive me for being so blunt but the law of contract and agency generally, unless based on an illegal foundation, will bind the parties to any such agreement.

 

Contrary to what Just4Let says with regard to NOT chasing the tenant (as I am sure Just4Let is right) it would be easier and more advantageous to pursue the 'I can't afford it' tenant. The likelyhood is that you would gain a judgement by default. The default judgement is all that would be required to demand payment from the guarantor. The guarantor in such circumstances, were he to dispute such a demand, would need to place his own financial resources at risk to rebut and challenge such a demand.

 

Anyway, thanks for engaging. I believe this thread is finally expanding to the benefit of many Caggers.

 

NPNG

 

I'd argue that a suitable tenant is one that can be proven to have a good track record (deduced from references, and can afford to pay the rent refer to credit checks)

It may be seen as discrimantory should we use the argument that a tenant is a single mum with children (as per previous posts)

 

I can see where you would go with chasing the tenant and getting an order, my argument is that you may just get a better reponse from your LBA to the guarantor than to spend out on MCOL for the tenant which then you may have to revisit with the guarantor incurring extra expense.

 

Just a thought. . .

[no pain no gain]

Hi Just4let,

 

I hope we haven't got off on the wrong foot, that was certainly not my intention. As you will be aware I am a new contributor to this forum. I have had an opportunity to read many of your posts on varying subjects and I find them to be generally helpful, reasoned and in the round well thought out. I must declare NO bias towards letting agents having myself been an estate and letting agent for some 20 years in Dublin. In addition my daughter is currently an estate and letting agent in London covering some of Londons more sought after locations.

 

However there are, as I am sure you are aware, some very bad apples in this largely unregulated industry (I am sure - as your posts show - you are far removed this sad reality).

 

With regard to Catlover64's agent, he can either produce satisfactory referencing and credit checks or he can't! As you and I both know only too well the fees often charged by letting agents for these services and for producing a template leasing agreement make up a sizable amount of their annual income. These often disproportionate fees in my mind demand that at least the job should be done thoroughly and professionally. This is very often far from the case, if an agent were to run a £10 credit check (as is all they often do) and ask the prospective tenant to provide them with the name and address of a friend or someone who knows them (not a family member) to say something positive and 'nice' about them - this would not in my view or in the eyes of the law discharge the professional duty of care under which they are acting in agency (even on a let only basis).

 

Catlover64's agent is unlikely, on what I know, to have sought bank references (and why not for a lease agreement that amounted before bills, council tax etc etc to £10200 per annum) in addition it seems hardly likely that they sought work references given Catlover64 tells us that the tenant was running an unauthorised, probably unlicensed, childminding business from the property. Of course I am basing many of the above assessments on the limited information that I have and I have no way of knowing in what way the agent presented this tenant to Catlover64. However (once again) what I do know in this case is that the agent who so clearly owed duties of care failed potentially catastrophically to provide a check-in inventory for the property or presumably failed to draw this to Catlover's attention and seek a signed waiver in that regard. Negligence is negligence and it does not sit well with Count Court Judges to hide behind the excuse of 'I was only a little bit negligent but come on gov profit margins and what not'. As I stated earlier this is a largely unregulated industry and has more than its fair share of cowboys.

 

Turning to chasing the tenant, unless the guarantee specifically provides otherwise, the Courts will generally prefer that all reasonable efforts are made of the principal ie. the tenant, before turning your legal weaponry further down the contract chain.

 

My approach to law is a pragmatic approach and it is for this reason that I advised Catlover64 to join the tenant, guarantor and agent to any claim. I fully agree with you that a letter or letters before action is the route to go so as not to unnecessarily incur costs unreasonably to any party. I tend to do this by way of a full, frank and open LBA to all potential parties. I have found it time and money saving and best to include with the LBA a fully drafted claim form including as much evidence that might reasonably be sought to be relied upon at that time. When you then give a reasonable period of time to settle the matter before the claim form is sealed (made live) and served by the Court the parties can be in no doubt of your intentions. Any costs that fall to them in failing to settle the matter at that stage would, were they to lose, fall rightly and squarely at their feet.

 

Just4Let, if I could for a moment hijack Catlover64's thread and ask you whether or not you believe that the practice of placing a deposit that was not previously protected in a tenancy deposit scheme (often only when proceedings were threatened for 3x deposit etc) is fair or lawful. Some County Courts have held that this can defeat the 3x penalty. I know that the decisions to date are only at County Court level and as such are not binding and do not set precedent. I have an argument that has not to my knowledge been forwarded in Court which I believe (I have discussed this matter with Counsel a friend) strongly suggests this practice should not be allowed in Law to subvert the clear intention of Parliament. If I am right and this could be successfully argued at County Court level then subject to the losing party (agents, landlords) appealing this, in my view, would readdress the imbalance. When a deposit is taken in connection with an AST I believe contrary to all the conflicting County Court judgemants to date that irrespective of how badly the Act and its provisions (section 4 Housing Act 2004) may or may not have been drafted when you strip all these arguments aside Parliament's intention was clear - it must be protected within 14 days and the relevant documents and prescribed information be served on the tenant/s and any relevant person.

 

If you would care to share your views with me on this subject perhaps we could start a new thread if there were sufficient interest? We could be a very long time waiting for a tenant to appeal to the Appeal Court (given the costs involved) however if my theory held favour in Law at County Court level then perhaps the ARLA or one of the other professional bodies might seek clarity from the Court/s above. Yes I am on the side of the Law, in particular when it concerns the 'little people' who have no voice and often no wherewithal to hire expensive lawyers whether they have children or not!

 

I am prepared to let my legal genie out of his bottle!!

 

Sorry Catlover64 and Just4Let I needed to get that off my chest I am back on track now!

 

No pain no gain

[no pain no gain]

Hi CL64

 

sorry for hijacking the 2nd half of the posting, but some things just send me into a right 'Paddy'!

 

Hope the first part of the post went some way to helping you because when all is said and done if you feel that you have the moral right to pursue an action-then surely it is all about winning! Phyrric victories should be avoided at all 'costs'.

 

NPNG

[Catlover64]

Hi guys

 

In no way do I wish to be seen as discriminatory, as evidenced by the fact I ACCEPTED the lone parent with a toddler. A lot of landlords wouldn't have looked at her twice! But the fact remains, I did, she damaged my house and is now crying she can't afford to pay for the damage she did!! I don't want to sound hard, but it's not my problem.

 

In all likelyhood, this might well be a pyrrhic victory, as the judge will probably order her to pay £1 a week or something stupid like that....

 

I've found a simple LBA which I will draft and have ready to send in the next week or some and will cc her guarantor as well. I'll put in the LBA the fact I know about the noise problems and the childminding as well.

 

Is this a good idea do you think?

 

The Cat

[no pain no gain]

Hi Cat

 

first, thanks for correcting my abominable spelling (sic phyrric).

 

I would place all relevant matters in any correspondence, always bear in mind that one day a judge may be viewing in its entirety all correspondence that flowed between the parties, this often gives the Court a very clear picture of the conduct of the parties.

 

As I said much earlier in this thread all that is known at this stage to be up for grabs is the £850. I would attempt to persuade your ex-tenant to give up her right to dispute the deposit on the understanding that you would not pursue her any further and then get out of there as far as she is concerned. I do not consider that deductions from benefits is the way forward.

 

As far as the guarantor and agent are concerned that of course would be another matter for you to decide after you get the 'bird in hand'.

 

NPNG

[Just4Let]

Hi Just4let,

 

I hope we haven't got off on the wrong foot, that was certainly not my intention. As you will be aware I am a new contributor to this forum. I have had an opportunity to read many of your posts on varying subjects and I find them to be generally helpful, reasoned and in the round well thought out. I must declare NO bias towards letting agents having myself been an estate and letting agent for some 20 years in Dublin. In addition my daughter is currently an estate and letting agent in London covering some of Londons more sought after locations.

 

However there are, as I am sure you are aware, some very bad apples in this largely unregulated industry (I am sure - as your posts show - you are far removed this sad reality).

 

With regard to Catlover64's agent, he can either produce satisfactory referencing and credit checks or he can't! As you and I both know only too well the fees often charged by letting agents for these services and for producing a template leasing agreement make up a sizable amount of their annual income. These often disproportionate fees in my mind demand that at least the job should be done thoroughly and professionally. This is very often far from the case, if an agent were to run a £10 credit check (as is all they often do) and ask the prospective tenant to provide them with the name and address of a friend or someone who knows them (not a family member) to say something positive and 'nice' about them - this would not in my view or in the eyes of the law discharge the professional duty of care under which they are acting in agency (even on a let only basis).

 

Catlover64's agent is unlikely, on what I know, to have sought bank references (and why not for a lease agreement that amounted before bills, council tax etc etc to £10200 per annum) in addition it seems hardly likely that they sought work references given Catlover64 tells us that the tenant was running an unauthorised, probably unlicensed, childminding business from the property. Of course I am basing many of the above assessments on the limited information that I have and I have no way of knowing in what way the agent presented this tenant to Catlover64. However (once again) what I do know in this case is that the agent who so clearly owed duties of care failed potentially catastrophically to provide a check-in inventory for the property or presumably failed to draw this to Catlover's attention and seek a signed waiver in that regard. Negligence is negligence and it does not sit well with Count Court Judges to hide behind the excuse of 'I was only a little bit negligent but come on gov profit margins and what not'. As I stated earlier this is a largely unregulated industry and has more than its fair share of cowboys.

 

Turning to chasing the tenant, unless the guarantee specifically provides otherwise, the Courts will generally prefer that all reasonable efforts are made of the principal ie. the tenant, before turning your legal weaponry further down the contract chain.

 

My approach to law is a pragmatic approach and it is for this reason that I advised Catlover64 to join the tenant, guarantor and agent to any claim. I fully agree with you that a letter or letters before action is the route to go so as not to unnecessarily incur costs unreasonably to any party. I tend to do this by way of a full, frank and open LBA to all potential parties. I have found it time and money saving and best to include with the LBA a fully drafted claim form including as much evidence that might reasonably be sought to be relied upon at that time. When you then give a reasonable period of time to settle the matter before the claim form is sealed (made live) and served by the Court the parties can be in no doubt of your intentions. Any costs that fall to them in failing to settle the matter at that stage would, were they to lose, fall rightly and squarely at their feet.

 

Just4Let, if I could for a moment hijack Catlover64's thread and ask you whether or not you believe that the practice of placing a deposit that was not previously protected in a tenancy deposit scheme (often only when proceedings were threatened for 3x deposit etc) is fair or lawful. Some County Courts have held that this can defeat the 3x penalty. I know that the decisions to date are only at County Court level and as such are not binding and do not set precedent. I have an argument that has not to my knowledge been forwarded in Court which I believe (I have discussed this matter with Counsel a friend) strongly suggests this practice should not be allowed in Law to subvert the clear intention of Parliament. If I am right and this could be successfully argued at County Court level then subject to the losing party (agents, landlords) appealing this, in my view, would readdress the imbalance. When a deposit is taken in connection with an AST I believe contrary to all the conflicting County Court judgemants to date that irrespective of how badly the Act and its provisions (section 4 Housing Act 2004) may or may not have been drafted when you strip all these arguments aside Parliament's intention was clear - it must be protected within 14 days and the relevant documents and prescribed information be served on the tenant/s and any relevant person.

 

If you would care to share your views with me on this subject perhaps we could start a new thread if there were sufficient interest? We could be a very long time waiting for a tenant to appeal to the Appeal Court (given the costs involved) however if my theory held favour in Law at County Court level then perhaps the ARLA or one of the other professional bodies might seek clarity from the Court/s above. Yes I am on the side of the Law, in particular when it concerns the 'little people' who have no voice and often no wherewithal to hire expensive lawyers whether they have children or not!

 

I am prepared to let my legal genie out of his bottle!!

 

Sorry Catlover64 and Just4Let I needed to get that off my chest I am back on track now!

 

No pain no gain

 

 

Off on the wrong foot?? Not a chance!

You'll see my posts are made to give advice, if I think I can help, but I also like to play the role of devil's advocate on occasion to make people think.

 

I do this for 2 reasons.

1) There's a lot of Landlords out there who have 'mountains of experience'

who in fact have none or very little. This industry has changed hugely over the last few years but many experienced LL's haven't or choose to not keep up to date with legislation and this can be their downfall if they are not correctly advised.

I pick up lots of work this way!

e.g.1 Only last week I spoke to a seasoned Landlord, owns 20+ houses and has done so for many years. I asked about the EPC and they told me "this had been done last year, the gas fitter did it when he serviced the gas fire!!! " Point made.

e.g.2 A few weeks ago I spoke to a Landlord who was until recently also a letting agent for NINE years who had served a S21 giving a months notice!!

 

I come across examples of this DAILY trust me.

 

2) I agree with NPNG on this I can see, that there are people out there

mainly tenants that have no idea about Landlord tenant law and have no voice when it comes to rights etc because as we all know advice costs money. I advise tenants when they call about housing law and their rights because a) of course I want to 'steal' them from their current LL/LA and b) I hate it when tenants get down-trodden by unscrupulous agents or Landlords so advise accordingly where I can within the parameters of the Law.

 

Suffice to say I work within the Law and try my best to keep up with new legislation, I'm not a lawyer and have never studied law at any level but a sensible head and reasoned approach (and of course the odd phone call when I'm stuck) have stood me and the company in good stead over the last few years.

My aim in this industry is to give a fair and professional service for a fair price and to date I believe that I do.

What I LOVE doing is getting the 'BAD GUY', be it a Landlord, a tenant or another agent (as you will see from my previous post above)

 

Back to the case, This agent obviously has the opportunity to produce such effects and of course if he can't then yes, I agree you have been done a disservice and of course have a claim against him. Whether this would be successful or not (I've heard lots of agents trying to wriggle out and they come up with some 'beauts')

The lack of a check-in inventory is scandalous (saying this, we provide this, plus a photographic inventory, within our charge structure, where other agents charge separately for this)

I heard a LA wriggle out of this the other day, saying that it WAS offered but the LL wished it not done because their charge of £75 could not be met. I have no idea who was in the wrong here.

You are right, this industry has plenty of cowboys and long may they stay (in my area) because slowly we are putting all these other agents to shame, and some out of business, and the LL's are "walking with their feet" (generally in our direction)

 

Onto the tenant, guarantor claim.

I tend to put a 'statement of account' together for all parties giving them the exact breakdown of what we will be claiming.

(maybe a nice tip for CL64 here is to take off a bit in the LBA for quick payment i.e. total requested £2500, we will accept £2250 if this account is settled in 7 days, this sometimes works)

 

oops I think this is what you'd suggested above but it's something that we always do.

 

Ok that's enough for now and NPNG you've touched on one of my favourite topics in the latter part of your message but let's do that one again. haha

[Catlover64]

Ah Just4Let - I'm so glad you and NPNG are friends again!! , and very glad this has opened up a nice little debate.

 

I think this is a good idea to knock something off the total amount owed for swift (not that I think it will be...) resolution. I'll take off 10-15% off the amount owed if settled in 7 days, and see if that works. It will look better if I have to produce that in court, and I want to be seen as being fair.

 

Thanks again guys!

 

The Cat

[no pain no gain]

Hi J4L (please excuse the familiarity but I have a feeling that we will soon all be family!)

 

I thought the example (which I am sure was factual) regarding the energy performance certificate was great! Am I right in thinking that an agent who promotes a property without providing an EPC would at point of offer be operating outside of the regulations ie. unlawfully?

 

As stated previously I have been an estate and letting agent albeit many moons ago, back in the days when we used to make the rules up as we went along!.......were they the good old days when we were regulated by our moral compass? If a finance company were offering credit on a £15000 vehicle payable over a 12 month period I think that their referencing, credit check and guarantor policies would be pretty stringent and professionally carried out on behalf of 'The Creditor' wouldn't you agree?

 

NPNG

[Just4Let]

Hi J4L (please excuse the familiarity but I have a feeling that we will soon all be family!)

 

I thought the example (which I am sure was factual) regarding the energy performance certificate was great! Am I right in thinking that an agent who promotes a property without providing an EPC would at point of offer be operating outside of the regulations ie. unlawfully?

 

As stated previously I have been an estate and letting agent albeit many moons ago, back in the days when we used to make the rules up as we went along!.......were they the good old days when we were regulated by our moral compass? If a finance company were offering credit on a £15000 vehicle payable over a 12 month period I think that their referencing, credit check and guarantor policies would be pretty stringent and professionally carried out on behalf of 'The Creditor' wouldn't you agree?

 

NPNG

Oh it was completely factual.

You are correct, although the idea of (and this is aside of the law) is that a tenant can make an informed choice when choosing a property as to which is going to be the most efficient for running costs etc.

I do have to be fair, although I have performed one on EVERY single dwelling since the regulations came in in October I've NEVER been asked once by a tenant if there's one on the property or to view it, so a complete waste of time and money if you ask me but I'm told that this is just one of the governments promises to Brussels that all property will have one by 2010.

Back to the law, this is governed by the Trading Standards and we know what their powers are don't we so there's not too many rogue LL's or agents that are at all worried about this.

 

I totally agree with your point re the finance on a car etc.

Unfortunately many LL's are 'gambling' with their properties, many of which are worth in excess of £100k and I can't see why they do this.

It's only when we point this out to them that they stand up and take notice!!

[no pain no gain]

Hi,

 

bang on the money there Just4Let. EPC's have even less effect and impact than HIPs (home information packs for those who don't know) just more EU bureaucracy loved by nobody but the bureaucrats themselves and of course the polar bears!!

 

Regarding Trading Standards, I fully agree with your observations, I was wondering how they are going to repopulate their ranks given that they have become completely impotent!

 

Would these be the same Trading Standards that police such people as the debt collection industry - tens of thousands of complaints a year regarding this industry - many suicides as a result of their often unlawful harassment. Yet how many prosecutions do they bring notwithstanding the OFT advice guidelines and regulations governing such matters?

[no pain no gain]

Hi all,

 

as some of you will know my foot is out of plaster as of today, so back to the day job from tomorrow. Will not have much time to spend Cagging. Will log in every few days. If you need my help PM me.

 

Best of luck,

 

No pain no gain

[callumsgran]

Aww you will be sorely missed

Some of our 'resident' experts seem to be not frequenting the forum so much these days so your input has been invaluable to some if not many

Dont be a stranger, come back and see us all ya hear?

[no pain no gain]

cheers callumsgran,

 

the little pepole do matter!!

 

Fight The Good fight!!

 

No pain no gain

[Catlover64]

Awww NPNG - I'll miss you even though it's good news about foot being out o plaster!

 

Anyway - wanted to pick your brains before you go if poss. You mentioned an 'open' LBA for my ex- tenant. What does that mean? Am slightly confused...

 

Thanks

 

The Cat

[no pain no gain]

Hi Cat,

 

thanks for PM:D Yes of course I would be only too happy to run my beady legal eye over your Letter Before Action.

 

As you know I have recently returned to the day job and as such do not have as much time to CAG as in past weeks. However I have always felt that your thread has abundant potential to develop areas that would help not only you but many Caggers, for that reason (but especially for you) I will stay with this thread to the bitter (sweet;)) end!!

 

I am currently approaching the end of a long civil dispute with an international blue chip company reresented by internationally renowned litigation executives who recently in Court described me, to the amusment of the Judge, as "an unorthodox nightmare in motion who twists the rules to his own advantage" - what a compliment!! I tell you this not to impress you but hopefully to give you some comfort should, as is possible, your matter proceed to litigation.

 

I will re-read your whole thread to bring myself back up to speed.

 

Always nice to hear from you,

 

let battle commence:D!!

 

Regards

 

NPNG

[no pain no gain]

Hi Cat,

 

must keep this short as I posted reply on wrong thread silly me!!

 

Cat, your letter before action is generally very good you should post it for the benefit of other Caggers.

 

If you would not be too offended I will post my version of the letters that I would write at this juncture using my first hand experience of such matters.

 

As I said in my wrongly posted post(!) I have back to back appointments throughout the day but will do some drafting during my breaks and will post after tea.

 

Must rush.

 

Regards

NPNG

[no pain no gain]

Hi Cat,

 

sorry for the delay with promised docs but had a very late night!! If I were me I would sack myself, but alas I can't afford to!

 

Back to the serious stuff. I hope what I have produced for you will give you some guidance. Always bear in mind that one day a judge may be reading (between the lines) everything written in regard to disputes which they are trying. From my experience they get very bored and sometimes annoyed with unnecessary piffle.

 

CLARITY, BREVITY AND SIMPLICITY ARE THE ORDER OF THE DAY, or as I like to refer to it PSYCHOLOGICAL WARFARE!!!

 

Again always bear in mind that he who asserts must prove. Never do any more or less than is necessary to get your case home. In your case there was a breach/s of contract and that person/s is liable full stop.

 

NPNG

CAT 1.doc

CAT 2.doc

CAT 3.doc

[Catlover64]

NPNG

 

You're a gem! Thanks very much for these which I shall keep for future reference.

 

I'll keep you posted!

 

The Cat

[Catlover64]

Back again!

 

I have written an LBA to my ex-tenant, and cc'd her guarantor with copies of the correspondence between us. Both have gone via recorded delivery since 19th June, but have not yet received word they have indeed been delivered.

 

Looks as though this will go 'all the way', so wanted to ask while I'm waiting:

 

When filing court action, should I use MCOL or an N208? Does anyone know??

 

TIA