Taking Landlord to court

[andrewquinn]

I am taking my previous landlord to court because they are refusing to return my deposit. My deposit was never put into a TDS so im also claiming 3x (test cased).

 

I moved into the property in Oct '07 and complained about the state of the front and back door because they were un-secure. There was also numerous dangerous faults with plumbing and electrics which in the end I paid myself to have repaired because of the danger to my children. I am claiming back the monies for the work I had carried out at my expense.

 

I have a letter from the landlord dated Dec 2007 confirming the backdoor needed to be replaced. 14 months later still no work carried out to the backdoor and we were burgled. We are going to claim for our possessions which were stolen because nobody would give us contents insurance because of the condition of the door and the fact the house was considered unsecure. The police also confirmed the property was burgled by the same means whilst the previous tenant lived there.

 

The best part is still to come... the landlord had fitted a new PVC front door in Jan '08 but used half my deposit as a "contribution to the door being installed". I caused no damage to the previous door and had no knowledge of my money being used for this purpose.

 

The house was unsafe to stay in because of criminal activity, the roof of the house was ripped off by two youth and used as missiles at police, drug dealing, etc etc.

 

I have tried settling out of court with the landlord with no joy, so im left with no option.

 

Please could someone advise me if I should use an N1 or N208 court form when filing my claim? Please could someone also go through my particulars of claim I have written and point out any errors or omissions?

 

Thanks in advance.

Edited July 20, 2009 by andrewquinn
update

[andrewquinn]

The applicant makes a claim for part 1 and 2 under the Housing Act 2004 section 214(1)(a) that the deposit of £xxx.00 as required by xxxx Limited for xxx address xxx was not paid in to an appropriate Tenancy Deposit Scheme (in accordance with section 213 (1) of the Housing Act 2004) and/or the applicant did not received the prescribed information concerning which Tenancy Deposit Scheme was to hold the deposit, within 14 days of the defendants receipt of the deposit (in accordance with section 213 (3) of the Housing Act 2004).

1) The applicant asks that the court makes an order in accordance with the Housing Act 2004 section 214 (3) which states the following;

 

(a) "order the person who appears to the court to be holding the deposit to repay it to the applicant"

 

A total of £xxx.00

 

And I understand that the Court Must also do the following;

 

2) The applicant asks that the court makes an order in accordance with the Housing Act 2004. Section 214 (4) which states the following;

 

"The court must also order the landlord to pay to the applicant a sum of money equal to three times the amount of the deposit within the period of 14 days beginning with the date of the making of the order.

 

A total of £xxx.00

The claimant claims interest for part 1 and 2 under section 69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at the rate of 8% a year, from 8/07/2009 to 30/07/2009 of £xxx.xxand also interest at the same rate up to the date of judgment or earlier payment at a daily rate of £xxx.xx.

The applicant makes a claim for part 3 & 4 in that the defendant failed to meet his responsibilities and obligations as a landlord as laid down in law under Section 11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, Defective Premises Act 1972, Environmental Protection Act 1990, Housing Act 2004, The Tenancy Agreement, Duty of Care and other responsibilities given by statute.

3) Despite numerous requests for the repairs listed below to be carried out since commencing the tenancy on 18th October 2007 up to and including 14th January 2008 none of the essential repairs had been carried out by the landlord or his agent. The applicant therefore asks that the court makes an order to reimburse the applicant for the essential repairs to plumbing and electrics carried out at xxx address xxx paid for by the applicant on 15/01/2008.

 

• Leaking waste pipe-work in the kitchen or waste pipe for washing machine.
  
• Broken & exposed Hall ceiling light pendant
  
• Broken Bathroom Baton Light fixture
  
• Broken 2way Gang Socket with exposed wires in back children’s bedroom
  
• Broken 2way Gang Socket with exposed wires in front master bedroom
  
• Missing Surface Box with exposed wires in front master bedroom
  
• Corroded and leaking bath fittings
  
• Garden Tap (mains left sticking out of ground / trip hazard)
  

Electrical works: £xxx.28

Plumbing works: £xxx.43

A total of £xxx.71

The claimant claims interest for part 3 under section 69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at the rate of 8% a year, from 13/01/2009 to 30/07/2009 of £xxx.xxx and also interest at the same rate up to the date of judgment or earlier payment at a daily rate of £xxx.xxx.

4) The applicant asks the court to make an order to reimburse the applicant for the cost of replacing the items stolen during the burglary on 2/12/2007.

Please find enclosed a letter dated 2/12/2007, which was provided to the applicant on 14/07/09, which states 14 months before the applicant was burgled (28/2/2009) that the applicant had been in contact with the defendant regarding the condition of the backdoor and having it replaced. It was confirmed by the police the property was also burgled whilst the last tenant was living at the address by the same means.

xxx address xxx was considered by insurance companies leading up to and at the time of the burglary to be unsecure and as such a very high insurance risk, the applicant unable to obtain any form of house contents insurance for the property.

Neither the back kitchen door nor gate leading to the rear alley were fit for the purpose of providing adequate security against unauthorised entry to the property and as a result of the defendant’s failure to meet their obligations as laid out in law and replace these with a more secure hardware. The defendant’s negligence to carry out even a basic duty of care to ensure the applicant and her children’s safety and the safety of her belongings, a burglar with little force gained easy access to xxx address xxx and stole the items listed below.

XXXXXX

Total: £xxx.64

The claimant claims interest for part 4 under section 69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at the rate of 8% a year, from 28/02/2009 to 21/07/2009 of £xxx and also interest at the same rate up to the date of judgment or earlier payment at a daily rate of £xxx.

The applicant is therefore seeking a judgment from the court ordering the defendant to reimburse them in full for the monies as detailed below Plus court fee and interest:-

Part 1. £xxx.00 (original deposit)

Part 2. £xxx.00 (3x original deposit)

Part 3. £xxx.71 (essential repair works carried out)

Part 4. £xxx.64 (items stolen due to landlords negligence)

 

Total £xxx.35 (Plus Court Fee and Interest)

[Planner]

Theres a sticky on suggested wording for s.214 (TDS non-compliance claims) at the top of the page.

 

You need form N208. This should deal with TDS non-compliance only.

 

Anything else you want to claim for such as stolen items, you should make a seperate N1 claim. However, I would be interested to hear what your intended response to the judge will be when he asks you why you considered certain items to be essential repairs that you paid for and the back door was not? (Just playing devils advecate).

[andrewquinn]

Whilst I do consider the back door being replaced an essential repair it was not a small job. The door and entire frame with window to the side and above needed replacing. It would have cost several hundred pound to have this job done and it is not my responsibility.

 

It was also not my responsibility to have the job done which I did but I considered those essential works to have carried out due to safety and sanity. We have two young children 1 year old and 3 years old. Having exposed live wires in their bedroom is very serious + dangerous.

[Planner]

Whilst I do consider the back door being replaced an essential repair it was not a small job. The door and entire frame with window to the side and above needed replacing. It would have cost several hundred pound to have this job done and it is not my responsibility.

 

It was also not my responsibility to have the job done which I did but I considered those essential works to have carried out due to safety and sanity. We have two young children 1 year old and 3 years old. Having exposed live wires in their bedroom is very serious + dangerous.

 

First part is a good response. I would leave the 'not our responsibility' part out though.

[big kid]

sounds awful andrewquinn - i think im going to end up in the same predicament as you and am only a month into my tenancy - no TDS , admission that they have spent the deposit , are penniless so cannot replace broken door locks and condemned gas fire and faulty lighting, no contents insurance and getting no joy from letters and phonecalls... please let me know how you get on..why do people treat people like this?

[Emma1973]

Go to your local Enviromental Health Team big, they will be able to help you out with issues like the condemned gas fire and whether the house is fit to live in

[big kid]

thanks for your response, will give them a reasonable amount of time ( whatever that is !) and then go to environmental health- am afraid of rocking the boat but if thats whats required to feel safe then so be it - and sorry for hijacking your thread andrewquinn - best of luck with the case- i hope it stops them doing the same to someone else and you get the compensation you rightly deserve

[andrewquinn]

Many thanks for everyone's support I will keep everyone posted. The landlord has been served so 16 days I should know better what is going on....

 

Thanks

[andrewquinn]

Update: 4th August 2009 - Landlord has filed an acknowledgement and has another 13 days to file their defence.

 

They have appointed solicitors to represent them.

[andrewquinn]

Well I got their defense and was somewhat surprised.

 

They basically said they had nothing to do with the house or myself.

 

I did a bit of investigation work and have chosen to carry on with my claim and file my acknowledgment questionnaire. I got a copy of the register of title for the property which shows a company owns the property even though this company was dissolved 5 years before the purchase date of the property. I find this very strange because there is a secured charge on the property. I do not understand how they managed to get a mortgage using a dissolved company name?? It lists the defendant as the c/o address by name and address. So I spoke to the CAB who said in their eyes they are using this dissolved company as a front to in effect try and be untouchable in law.

 

I got the company appointments for the defendant and it lists the guy which did the viewings and out muster on the property as the defendant.

 

The letting agent and the defendant are registered at the same address. They both have the same registered address and company secretary. He is the director of the defendant company and his mum is the director of the letting agency.

 

The letting agent told me they are the owner/landlord, the managing director of the defendant also told me in person he owed the property. It is general local knowledge he owns the property through his business yet they have actually said they have no connection whatsoever with me or the property. I have already proven they have a connection with the property because they are listed as the c/o address on the register of title.

 

The CAB told me that the judge will probably wonder why they if they are listed as the service address why they would claim to have nothing to do with the property. They also stated he would not look favorably on them getting a solicitor to defend them in something which is apparently an open shut case in the eyes of their defense.

 

I know these con artists own the property and are just trying to get out of paying using a loop hole but it is horrible to think people operate like this.

 

Any advise?

Edited August 26, 2009 by andrewquinn

[Kentish Lass]

You say it shows a charge against the property - does it not show who the mortgagee is?

 

Perhaps, as a concerned citizen, Mickey Mouse should write to the mortgagee and say that in the process of trying to sort out a financial problem involving said property, MM had discovered that they (the mortgagee) had apparently given a mortgage for the purchase of this property on [date], when in fact the company to which they had lent the money had been dissolved 5 years previously. And MM felt it his duty to inform them of this fact.

[andrewquinn]

You say it shows a charge against the property - does it not show who the mortgagee is?

 

Perhaps, as a concerned citizen, Mickey Mouse should write to the mortgagee and say that in the process of trying to sort out a financial problem involving said property, MM had discovered that they (the mortgagee) had apparently given a mortgage for the purchase of this property on [date], when in fact the company to which they had lent the money had been dissolved 5 years previously. And MM felt it his duty to inform them of this fact.

 

Yes it does show who has a secured charge on the property, do you think it is worth writing to them?

[Kentish Lass]

I doubt it will help your case in any way, but might make you feel better!!

[andrewquinn]

I was given a date at the end of November for a prelim hearing. In the meantime the defendant’s solicitors filed an application to have my case struck out. I am in court on Friday this week in relation to the strike out.

 

The defendant has not put any new information into the court. They are still claiming to have nothing to do with myself or the property at all. They are listed as the service address on the deed of title for the property... i.e. Sample Ltd care of Defendant, Defendant address.... the only problem is that Sample Ltd is incorporated in Ireland and was dissolved 5 years prior to the purchase of the property.

I contacted the defendant's solicitor to try and clear up why they are listed on the deed of title and they said they would not comment.

The director of the defendant's was the person who showed us round the property and claimed he owned the property. The letting agent told us we would have to take the defendant to court as they are merely the letting agent. The other problem is the letting agent and the defendant are the same company just different names... they have same secretary, directors, etc.

This whole case from start to finish just smells of a big [problem] and im hoping the judge will see through their bull. Could someone give me any advise? Also what can I expect to happen on Friday? Will we be cross examined,etc?

[DisgruntledTenant]

I was given a date at the end of November for a prelim hearing. In the meantime the defendant’s solicitors filed an application to have my case struck out. I am in court on Friday this week in relation to the strike out.

 

I'm not a lawyer, but I think you should apply to have your landlords defence struck out on the grounds it has no real prospect of success, much like he is trying to do to you.

 

Seems to be an open and shut case that he is the Landlord. Presumably you have emails from him acting as the Landlord?

 

From the Act:

references to a landlord or landlords in relation to any shorthold tenancy or tenancies include references to a person or persons acting on his or their behalf in relation to the tenancy or tenancies

Seems pretty clear, with all the other informaiton that you have provided, that there is no way he can argue that he wasnt the landlord. And judges arent stupid!

 

Let us know how you get on and good luck!

[andrewquinn]

Have I got time to do that before Friday? Ive not really got any idea how to try and get their defense struck out. I can try and use their application as a template? Anyone know what the court fee is?

[andrewquinn]

I am very mixed about how court went the other day. Our case was not struck out but the judge told me to get some legal advise before the alloc hearing at the end of November.

 

The defendant never turned up to court just his solicitor. He came to court with a copy of the office copies and a copy of our tenancy agreement we signed. He quoted some laws from the housing act but kept getting the landlord and tenant act and the housing act mixed up.

 

Could someone point me in the direction of the act which states "references to a landlord or landlords in relation to any shorthold tenancy or tenancies include references to a person or persons acting on his or their behalf in relation to the tenancy or tenancies "

 

We were never given a copy of the tenancy agreement, it was always "in the post" and then I forgot about it. I find it very strange that the defendant who claims to have nothing to do with the property or myself have access to a copy of the tenancy agreement and I also find the letting agents breach of data protection interesting too... are tenancy agreements covered under the DPA?

 

The defendant also showed the judge some information about the company who are apparently our landlord stating they are Guernsey. I have just searched the Guernsey companies house with no company in that name or previous name listed. I really am at a total loss!!!

 

I have put the apparent landlord company name into google and it only comes back with the listing I had found with the dissolved company in Ireland as listed on the office copies and a planning application... interestingly the planning application is dated in 2007 and was for work to be done on the registered offices of the defendant. Im going to get the office copies for the registered offices for the defendant and if it lists the defendant as the owner why would this apprent blag company be having work done on it.

 

Is it a legal requirement if you want to put Limited or Ltd after your company name it has to be registed/incorporated?

[andrewquinn]

I am tempted to amend my listing to the apparent company name but I have a sneaky feeling getting the judgement enforced against them will be impossible because they dont seem to have any existance!

[Kentish Lass]

I am very mixed about how court went the other day. Our case was not struck out but the judge told me to get some legal advise before the alloc hearing at the end of November.

 

I think that the judge realises that this is not a simple case and that you may be way out of your depth and thus do need legal representation. It sounds as if the LL's solicitor is not sure what he is doing, but this may just be your interpretation of the proceedings.

 

The defendant never turned up to court just his solicitor. He came to court with a copy of the office copies and a copy of our tenancy agreement we signed. He quoted some laws from the housing act but kept getting the landlord and tenant act and the housing act mixed up.

as you have said, how do they have a copy of the signed agreement if they are nothing to do with it??

 

Could someone point me in the direction of the act which states "references to a landlord or landlords in relation to any shorthold tenancy or tenancies include references to a person or persons acting on his or their behalf in relation to the tenancy or tenancies "

 

It is in the tenancy deposit legislation:

Letting Agent Or Landlord Responsible For Securing Deposit Into A Tenancy Deposit Protection Scheme?

 

We were never given a copy of the tenancy agreement, it was always "in the post" and then I forgot about it. I find it very strange that the defendant who claims to have nothing to do with the property or myself have access to a copy of the tenancy agreement

 

Agreed

 

and I also find the letting agents breach of data protection interesting too... are tenancy agreements covered under the DPA?

Not sure what you are talking about here. Letting Agent works for LL and therefore LL is entitled to see any documentation involved in his letting of the property.

 

The defendant also showed the judge some information about the company who are apparently our landlord stating they are Guernsey. I have just searched the Guernsey companies house with no company in that name or previous name listed. I really am at a total loss!!!

 

I have put the apparent landlord company name into google and it only comes back with the listing I had found with the dissolved company in Ireland as listed on the office copies and a planning application... interestingly the planning application is dated in 2007 and was for work to be done on the registered offices of the defendant. Im going to get the office copies for the registered offices for the defendant and if it lists the defendant as the owner why would this apprent blag company be having work done on it.

 

Is it a legal requirement if you want to put Limited or Ltd after your company name it has to be registed/incorporated?

 

I seriously agree with the judge that you need legal representation here - and you need someone who knows what they are doing.

 

I think you have to seriously consider whether to continue with this course of action. I know you will feel angry and aggrieved at the way you have been treated, and will want to see "justice done" - and get your money back. BUT this could turn into a far bigger battle than you originally anticipated.

[DisgruntledTenant]

Could someone point me in the direction of the act which states "references to a landlord or landlords in relation to any shorthold tenancy or tenancies include references to a person or persons acting on his or their behalf in relation to the tenancy or tenancies "

 

From the Act...

 

Housing Act 2004 (c. 34)

 

See Section 212(9)(a)

[andrewquinn]

Not sure what you are talking about here. Letting Agent works for LL and therefore LL is entitled to see any documentation involved in his letting of the property.

 

That is what I mean... the letting agent have provided them with a copy of the tenancy agreement but in the 2nd breathe they are stating they are nothing to do with me or the tenancy or the property. If this is the case... have the letting agent broken DPA by supplying the defendant with a copy of the tenancy agreement?

[andrewquinn]

I think that the judge realises that this is not a simple case and that you may be way out of your depth and thus do need legal representation. It sounds as if the LL's solicitor is not sure what he is doing, but this may just be your interpretation of the proceedings.

 

He kept calling it the landlord and tenant act 2004. I have never heard of this?

[Kentish Lass]

He kept calling it the landlord and tenant act 2004. I have never heard of this?

 

did you try putting "landlord and tenant act 2004" into Google?

 

Also see post #21 above.

 

I think this is why judge thinks you may need help from a solicitor - it is not a simple case and you could tie yourself in knots trying to sort it all out.

[andrewquinn]

did you try putting "landlord and tenant act 2004" into Google?

 

Also see post #21 above.

 

I think this is why judge thinks you may need help from a solicitor - it is not a simple case and you could tie yourself in knots trying to sort it all out.

 

Yes but he was quoting the housing act 2004 when stating it was the landlord and tenant act 2004. IS it the same thing?