Housing Association trying to evict me for rent arrears

[Lea_HTH]

To answer your question 'can I defend this?', you'll need to state under which grounds the HA are claiming possession.

 

You will have been served notice before court proceedings were started - what does the notice state? Is it a s8, and if yes, under what grounds are they claiming - does it make reference to grounds 8,10 and 11? If not, are they claiming under ground 1 of Schedule 2 (unlikely but just checking)? The difference is material.

 

If you do not have the notice, then look at the court paperwork - check the particulars of claim and look in section 4 - does it make reference to the grounds claimed?

 

In addition, your rent sounds extremely high for social housing - and I am wondering if in fact you have been housed by the HA but via a private rental on an assured shorthold tenancy. Kindly clarify.

Edited December 26, 2012 by Lea_HTH

[Lea_HTH]

If you want accurate assistance, kindly answer the questions you were asked about the grounds.

[Lea_HTH]

We will get there a lot quicker if you just answer the questions: I am repeating them below - if you want accurate assistance, answer them and do not give any further information at this stage as it needs to be established what the baseline for the claim is.

 

1. What notice was served on you? The notice itself will state the law relied on.

2. What do the particulars of claim state under section 4c - or anywhere amongst the particulars...it might be a witness statement instead? It will state what law the claim is being made under.

3. When did your AST start; what does your tenancy agreement state is the start date and the end date of the agreement?

[Lea_HTH]

What is in post 2 is irrelevant until it is established what type of tenancy it is, what length, and whether or not the HA are claiming under mandatory or discretionary grounds.

 

And of course, no offence is intended with the above - it's just that OP needs to focus on the facts in order that accurate advice can be given. Original question was 'can I defend this?' - the answer of which if, subject to mandatory grounds, will be 'no'...if not, it'll depend.

[Lea_HTH]

1. Are you absolutely certain that the only notification you had of your arrears was the letter last week? The notice may have been served on you months ago when you first got into arrears.

 

2. Are you certain that is all that section states? It makes no reference to any of the Housing Acts or any grounds?

 

3. Forget about anyone else - it's you facing possession proceedings. You will need to find your tenancy agreement - it should also make reference under which of the Housing Acts possession can be sought.

 

You're going to have to answer these questions before help can be given to you, otherwise the help provided may be incorrect. There is a very strong possibility if you have an AST that possession is being sought on mandatory grounds, so you MUST answer accurately.

[Lea_HTH]

Hi

 

@ Lea_HTH I have to disagree what is in post 2 is relevant especially if the OP has tried to setup a repayment plan and the HA have refused when it goes to court the OP can use that they have tried on numerous ocassions to setup a repayment plan but the HA have refused so this is one angle I would us as well as advising the OP to continue to make rent payments as normal.

 

If it's a mandatory claim the HA do not have to agree to a payment plan, mandatory grounds are based on what is in fact at the time notice is served, and what is in fact at the date of the hearing - that's the point behind finding out precisely what the claim against the OP is. So whilst you may think it's relevant, until it is established that the OP is NOT facing a mandatory ground, anything but that is irrelevant.

 

It is only until the facts are established as I think that there is great potential to mislead the OP into thinking that the claim is capable of defence, when it may not be. The OP is probably under a great deal of stress, so keeping to the facts at this stage to establish what, if any, defence may be available (which requires details of the grounds claimed under), is preferable.

[Lea_HTH]

No one is thinking you're evading questions - the point of asking them is to establish the actual facts of the matter. You will need to give the information in order to be advised correctly. There is no point telling you that everything will be fine and can be sorted out if you end up posting that you are facing a mandatory claim.

 

Is the HA named on the claim form as the claimant?

[Lea_HTH]

In part 4, can you type out EXACTLY what it says in the particulars please?

[Lea_HTH]

Better still, scan the PoC, redact any personal information (including the court number) and post up a link. I'd like to see it for myself.

[Lea_HTH]

If that is genuinely all that the PoC states as the grounds, then the claim is defective.

[Lea_HTH]

First, the particulars of claim are defective. The CPR states that the grounds relied on must be specified, and they are not. It is likely the judge will allow the HA time to amend the PoC and reserve on you.

 

Second, if you state you did not receive the notice referred to in the PoC, then you MUST inform the judge of this - the judge does have jurisdiction to dispense with the service of notice if he deems this necessary in the interests of justice. My view is a social landlord should not be allowed to claim service of notice was not required.

 

The above two points are technical issues - they are unlikely to mean that the claim will be struck out, particularly given the level of the arrears. But they may mean a slight adjournment for the amendment to take place. Do not rely on this - the judge does have discretion to dispense with both points at the hearing.

 

You are going to have to phone the HA tomorrow and ask them what grounds they are claiming under. It is impossible for me to guess (well, I could, but it would be foolhardy to give advice on a guess), and frankly, impossible to give accurate advice without knowing the specifics.

 

Your arrears are substantial, amounting to over 8 months worth of arrears. On an AST that would usually mean a mandatory claim for possession, however the HA may be lenient enough to only use discretionary grounds, in which case if you can put together a reasonable proposal to repay the arrears, they may consider this. But until we are clear what grounds they are claiming under, any advice is tenuous at best. (In the interim, if you find your way over to the repossessions forum, you can download a copy of the income and expenditure form to fill in.)

 

Can you phone them tomorrow and ask them what grounds they are claiming possession on and whether they can forward you a copy of the notice they claim they sent (they will have to provide a copy to the court, so it should be no issue to provide you with another one - remind them that the court expects them to provide you with a copy of all evidence they intend to rely on in court).

[Lea_HTH]

Highly unlikely at this stage Surfer01. The HA, like all other social landlords, will be extremely reluctant to move any one in arrears from one property to another. This is because the arrears relate directly to the property that the tenant is in, and creating a new tenancy for another property means that they lose their 'security' and ability to evict for non-payment. A tenant could, if allowed to move and take up a new tenancy, simply stop paying towards the arrears and apart from the usual enforcement action for any other debt, the LL would have no power to evict from the new property (if all rent is paid and up to date). Hence, the likelihood of being moved whilst arrears are as substantial as the OP's are slim to none.

 

The rent is very high, and the OP may have found she was entitled to some HB, or LHA, but clearly made the choice not to make an application at all, which has contributed to her position and the level of arrears.

[Lea_HTH]

OP said she chose not to apply for HB as she felt the forms were intrusive. One can only assume this was a constant opinion throughout (i.e during ill health) and not only when the HA told her to claim 4 months ago (see post 1).