Friends being told to leave their property and slanderous comments made to them!

[jim2007]

Hi

 

A friend of mine (tenant) received an email today from their Letting Agent which was meant for the Landlord.

 

In the email it stated:

 

I think she is looking to buy your house for buttons!!! With his winnings from Cage Fighting no doubt!!!

 

Lol...

 

There is no lease so we can give her a months notice, but i'll double check this info

 

Think they brought slugs back from their seaside trip!!!

 

Did I mention, my opinion is they are from travelling stock!

 

They have 2 small children and have been asking the agent to fix issues they have been having with slugs for 3 weeks now and were blatantly mocked and slandered for no reason as she was caught out with the email going to the wrong person!

 

They are on a rolling contract atm

 

What rights do they have in light of these comments?

 

Any help appreciated. Thanks

[abc123def]

If they are on a rolling contract I am fairly sure (someone will confirm) that the agent/LL needs to give them 2 months notice to leave. It is the tenant that can give 1 month notice to leave. I would think an agent ought to know that?! Certainly that's been the case with all my tenancies that went on to rolling contracts.

 

Much as that was not at all nice to receive that email, what rights do you feel have been broken? If they are from Gypsy/Traveller families then they are protected as a Race and those comments could be deemed to be Racial hatred and a crime might have been commited. However I doubt the police would take action apart from warning them and keeping it on file, and if they are not from G&T culture then they couldn't pursue that anyway. Personally I would give that agency a wide birth in the future, it is totally unprofessional. I would embarrass them too by going in to the office in person with a copy of it. Might make sure there were other prospective tenants in there when I did so too!

[jacktheband]

Would also suggest contacting the local paper. Although there might not be any legal recourse, the local rag might publish an article to name and shame the letting agency regarding how they talk about their customers.

[ericsbrother]

do you use twitter or facebook? repost including the details of the sender and recipient and see if they like it.

[Steve__M]

If it were a big agent with a rogue member of staff, I'd bring it to the attention of the manager.

 

If it is a small one or two person band, I'd potentially refer to trading standards because of the potentially racist comment.

 

The question for the tenants is whether the agent is stirring up the landlord, or whether the landlord was already inclined to issue notice. Because if notice is given, this email won't help defend your tenancy. A landlord friend of mine was (wrongly) accusing him of harassment recently, so I looked into this.

[jackieandwayne]

Exactly this happened to a colleague of mine when i worked for a HA. He e-mailed derogatory remarks about a tenant to a colleague and the tenant also got a copy! He was sacked the next day from a £36,000 a year job. I think that is disgusting what you have read, and you ought to complain in writing to the owner/manager of the agency.

 

 

They will have to give you 2 months notice if they want you out. I expect, if you dug your heels in and it went to court, when the judge reads that e-mail, he will feel inclined to grant you an extra 42 days for hardship and put a spanner in their works.

[jackieandwayne]

And I also hope that you ARE from a travelling background, that'll be a few more spanners for them to deal with. Rude swines.

[Lea_HTH]

The statement wasn't published, so almost certainly not actionable. A complaint can, and should, be made to the agency though.

 

The statement in the email would not qualify the OP for an additional 42 days as it does not amount to exceptional hardship in law. Judges can't just make it up as they go along.

 

Two months notice is required to end the periodic tenancy.

 

OP can take steps to clear the slugs themselves - it's not difficult.

[SabreSheep]

I disagree.

Although you would have to prove detriment the statement was sent form one person to another. That alone means the statement has been published to a third party and even then it has caused emotional harm to you to some degree as you have received it in error.

 

My understanding on this area of law is limited however as it all changed in 2009 i Believe.

 

ALSO side note.

You do not have to belong to a minority to rightfully take offense to a racist or other discriminatory comment.

[Sparks_]

Hi

 

A friend of mine (tenant) received an email today from their Letting Agent which was meant for the Landlord.

 

In the email it stated:

 

I think she is looking to buy your house for buttons!!! With his winnings from Cage Fighting no doubt!!!

 

Lol...

 

There is no lease so we can give her a months notice, but i'll double check this info

 

Think they brought slugs back from their seaside trip!!!

 

Did I mention, my opinion is they are from travelling stock!

 

They have 2 small children and have been asking the agent to fix issues they have been having with slugs for 3 weeks now and were blatantly mocked and slandered for no reason as she was caught out with the email going to the wrong person!

 

They are on a rolling contract atm

 

What rights do they have in light of these comments?

 

Any help appreciated. Thanks

 

Are you looking to buy the house? If not it looks like the letting agency is trying to stir up trouble between the tenant and the LL, could this be to get them out of the house so generating more revenue for the LA when they find a new tenet and hit them with fees for everything?

[Lea_HTH]

I disagree.

Although you would have to prove detriment the statement was sent form one person to another. That alone means the statement has been published to a third party and even then it has caused emotional harm to you to some degree as you have received it in error.

 

My understanding on this area of law is limited however as it all changed in 2009 i Believe.

 

ALSO side note.

You do not have to belong to a minority to rightfully take offense to a racist or other discriminatory comment.

 

 

You're free to disagree, but you're wrong - on two counts.

 

1. The definition of 'published' doesn't mean what you appear to think it does, and the claimant must show 'serious harm'. There is no harm, let alone serious harm in this instance from what has been described.

 

2. The law changed in 2013 - quick google would have told you that.

 

I could go on, but it is not for me to teach a media law class here.

 

Prospect of success in court: nil.

 

Prospect of gaining an apology from the agent: reasonable.

[SabreSheep]

I think you will find I admitted my understanding in this area was sketchy at best and I try not to rely on Google for my legal knowledge

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-25551640

 

However does point this out

[jackieandwayne]

No the e-mail itself won't have any bearing on the extra 42 days, but I bet you a pound to a dollar the judge will grant it if asked, because it is one of the few things that they can do, and that e-mail demonstrates the sort of person before him asking for possession.

[Lea_HTH]

No the e-mail itself won't have any bearing on the extra 42 days, but I bet you a pound to a dollar the judge will grant it if asked, because it is one of the few things that they can do, and that e-mail demonstrates the sort of person before him asking for possession.

 

Exceptional hardship factors have to be exceptional - feeling hurt from an email is not exceptional and no judge is likely to find it so because he would not be able to justify it and would leave himself open to an appeal as he would be wrong in law.

 

The standard for exceptional hardship is high. I know people would rather believe the things that might make things better for them, but the reality is very different, and I don't think it helps people to think that something as minor as an email might reach the standard of 'exceptional' in a court of law.

[Lea_HTH]

I think you will find I admitted my understanding in this area was sketchy at best and I try not to rely on Google for my legal knowledge

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-25551640

 

However does point this out

 

You're not a lawyer, so using google would not be you relying on google for your 'legal knowledge' . It would be you checking something before you posted to 'advise' someone.

 

Your knowledge wasn't 'sketchy', it was wrong.

[jackieandwayne]

Oh Lea, really, being said tongue in cheek!! Of course they could ask for the 42 days extra, not BECAUSE of the e-mail, no, but just because they bloody can after being insulted like that! Think, William Wallace (bare bums being waved, yah boo sucks to you!). They will lose the property, of course, but I tell you if someone insulted me like that I'd thoroughly enjoy "crawling through the whole legal process," using every right I have, albeit few.

 

 

Not everyone would necessarily enjoy that sort of game, but there is a little sport to be had out of this sad situation, if a person fancied it! LOL.

[Lea_HTH]

Oh Lea, really, being said tongue in cheek!! Of course they could ask for the 42 days extra, not BECAUSE of the e-mail, no, but just because they bloody can after being insulted like that! Think, William Wallace (bare bums being waved, yah boo sucks to you!). They will lose the property, of course, but I tell you if someone insulted me like that I'd thoroughly enjoy "crawling through the whole legal process," using every right I have, albeit few.

 

 

Not everyone would necessarily enjoy that sort of game, but there is a little sport to be had out of this sad situation, if a person fancied it! LOL.

 

 

 

They could ask the judge to buy them an ice-cream because, due to exceptional hardship, they haven't had one this summer - but they're as likely to get that as they are to get extra time because of an email. :o)