Managing Agent leasehold Property 4th Court Claim same issue.

[BlurredFX]

I have also got the info I require from the Land Registry. It shows all the info as I would expect it and confirms the change or Landlord midway through 2011 (completed Jan 2012) - which is when the new LL sent a letter saying taht they (the current management setup who took my to Court) has nothing to do with the old LL and nothing to do with the new LL - and that the arrangement is unenforceable!! That's from the LL! They are happy to perhaps formalise the arrangement they say, but that HAS NOT happened.

 

Hope people are still following this lot!?!? It's needlessly complex!

[andydd]

Hi.

 

Well, their POC's look rather shoddy and unproffesional. What info. followed next ?. Did they the ellaborate on the very brief POC's

 

What happened to Cases 1 & 2 ? (One was paid by Mortgage company and the other discontinued ?)

 

Andy

[BlurredFX]

Hi.

 

Well, their POC's look rather shoddy and unproffesional. What info. followed next ?. Did they the ellaborate on the very brief POC's

 

Nope, that's it. There was no further info.

 

What happened to Cases 1 & 2 ? (One was paid by Mortgage company and the other discontinued ?)

 

Andy

 

Correct - ish. I defended the first claim (2009), and we went through hearings and everything, had the case stayed for informal resolution, they restored the case, then withdrew it claiming I had paid - that's where that whole story is.

 

The second case, in 2011, the went for the whole lot again, including the amount they had previously stated to the Court that I had paid, while I was sick. They they, by means unknown, obtained the funds from the mortgage company.

 

Is this making it clear??? I accept it is not straight forward, but their antics leave me flabbergasted!!

 

Blurred:)

[andydd]

Yep clear. Sorry for asking questions again, just getting it clear in my head.

 

Its a pity you didnt get in earlier with a Summary Judgment application to put an end to this nonsense early (and get some costs), although it appears that at your set aside hearing this was going to happen untill you mention about getting money back, the Judge then made it clear it would go ahead thus giving you the chance of a counterclaim to get back the money paid by the mortgage company.

 

Have we discussed transfereing it to an LVT ?, although not 100% sure if this would be desirable, most of the aspects could/should be dealt with a CC but of course LVT's have juridstiction over service charges.

 

Anyway, seems pretty clear now. You just need something along the lines of:-

 

0. The claim is the same as the first claim, this was discontinued onxx/xx/xx, the claimant has not sought permission to relitigate as required by CPR 38.7 and the claim should be struck out as an abuse of process.

 

1. The lease shows that it is a contract between LL (Landlord on lease) and LH (leaseholder on lease).

 

2.The title deed from the land registry show that the residue of the lease was assigned to LL on xx/xx/xx

 

3. The claimant is not the landlord refered to in the title deed and has no right to collect service charges or ground rent.

 

5. Alternatively/additionally, the Claimant is a a management agent who is not party to the lease and therefore has no right to the alleged debt.

 

6. Alternatively/additionally, the management agent employed by the LL is Urban***** (as the letters sent to you show) and not the Claimant.

 

7. Alternatively (Getting a bit picky here), but I believe all the insurance was in fact invalid as it was under the wrong name (as the letters show) and therefore isnt payable, as technically the building was uninsured, (The letter also raises other doubts why it may be invalid)

 

8. The service charge demands did not comply with S21B of The landlord & Tenant Act 1985 and therefore I am using my right to withold payment, should valid demands be re-issued then any costs incurred 18 months prior are unrecoverable due to S20B of the landlord and tenant act (Although be aware S20B(2) does give them a possible 'get out' depending on what demands they have previously sent you).

 

8a. The Service Charge demands did not contain the name and address of the (correct current) Landlord as required by S47/S48 of The landlord & tenant act 1987 (http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1987/31) *A YOU NEED TO LOOK AT THE DEMANDS AND SEE WHETHER THIS IS THE CASE

 

9. Administration Charges are not payable as there is no provison within the lease allowing such charges *YOU NEED TO CONFIRM HIS IS THE CASE

 

10. Alternatively, Administration Charges are not payable as as the demands for payment did not come accompanied by the Administration Charges - Summary of Rights as required by Schedule 11 of The Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002 (http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2002/15/schedule/11)

 

Counterclaim.

 

Due to the above , there were no service charges due and any amounts paid by the mortgage company should be refunded by the claimant, the case that gave Judgment in the claimants favour (and thus was sent to the Mortgage Company) has now be set aside and that the case actually an abuse of process and shouldnt have been started.

 

If they argue about 0 and say they discontinued coz you paid the you should argu:-

 

a) If it was paid why was the claim not agreed and they wrote to court saying payment had been made.

 

b) If this is the case then why are they chasing the same debt again (It would appear to me you COULD (but prob shouldnt) say Ive paid, look they agree.

 

c) If you paid why did they then get the money off the mortgage company (getting it twice !).

 

Ive attached a 'template' to use, this is from one of my claim for summary judgment, the layout may be useful and it includes some bits about discontinunace you can use.

 

Andy

[BlurredFX]

Yep clear. Sorry for asking questions again, just getting it clear in my head.

 

Ask away my friend! I am thinking that I should now be working on a concise rebuttal of their claim.

 

I also need to write about where the LL says that the current set up is unenforceable, and I am thinking I can do that by continuing the defence / skeleton argument I posted up a earlier.

 

And a schedule of the evidence I am submitting along with copies of the documents.

 

What else can I be working on?

[andydd]

Another person up late . Ive added more to my previous post.

 

Heres an LVT case which I'm not sure if its relevant by does show the LL as applicant (and they've also added the MA as co-applicant although not sure if that was needed, prob depends on lease).

 

http://www.lease-advice.org/decisions/8587pdf/2001-3000/2863.pdf

 

It would appear to me that thats who should be the claimant against you (the current LL/FH), even if there was a different FH/MA in the past, its only the current one who can take action, even if money was owed to an older FH coz any debts would be assigned to the new current FH.

 

I just can't see how T (management company) ever had the right to collect amounts, it was first set up when no FH was present, it wasnt an official RTM/RTE compoany, and was never employed by the FH (even if it was management agents whilst may collect charges & rents DONT have the right to enforce legal action UNLESS they are party to the lease (and this is not common).

 

And another thought to add to your defence, you could add that even if the amounts are deemed owing and payable, that you wish to transfer the case to an LVT to discuss the 'reasonableness' or amounts due, you could well argue that insurance is too high, etc..although I believe it wont have to come to that.

 

 

 

Andy

[BlurredFX]

WOW! That is something I was expecting to have to draw up, it's hard for me for some reason. Most things I can take to pretty easy, but this type of thing is different (I think it is the emotion of it being actually ME involved!)

 

I will read through it again now. Summary Judgemenet is not an option as I was near dead at the time and they knew I would fight it given half the chance. It's dragged on since 2009!

 

I will revert soon!

 

Blurred

[andydd]

When preparing my cases. I write all the basics first and then return to it now and again, making mall changes untill its all good and ready to go. Sometimes I have an ideo on the train or something and jump on my phone and tablet and make the changes, I have my important docs on skydrive and opendrive (online cloud services) so its easy to access and update the latest version.

 

Andy

[BlurredFX]

When preparing my cases. I write all the basics first and then return to it now and again, many small changes untill its all good and ready to go. Sometimes I have an ideo on the train or something and jump on my phone and tablet and make the changes, I have my important docs on skydrive and opendrive (online cloud services) so its easy to access and update the latest version.

 

Andy

 

Thanks for your support Andy! It's value is immense to be.

 

I have only recently bought an iPhone 3GS and that's because it was cheap! But I take your point, its about being prepared and having the right equipment. I hesitate with draft revisions, leaving two versions of the same things in. I need to be more decisive!

 

I think basically here I was getting confused, but that draft defence you've drafted above looks good. I was misssing the point where we need to address their POC first!! The defence looks good to me, but I have a few questions:

 

Should I also be drawing up a witness statement? I need somewhere to write about (and show a copy of) where the LL says it is unenforceable, and make sure the DJ sees it - because if the one person who might be able to enforce the agreement thinks it is unenforceable, then it's unenforceable - almost to the point where you have to ask why is a Judge involved at all!??!?!?

 

The same letter also asks them to confirm that they are not collecting rent when my mortgage statement clearly shows they are! I need to put that in and refer to it somewhere.

 

I also need to DJ to be aware ( or I need to allude to) the fact they have lied in court.

 

I think I should start tinkering with that "skeleton argument" document I produces and turn it into a witness statement.

 

What do you reckon?

 

FX:)

[andydd]

The various statements required can be comfusing but imo you just need to issue a defence no need for skeleton argument or witness statement. As you are the sole lip the defence puts forward your views, there is no need for a witness statement unless you are going to get one from another person.

 

Ive only ever given one defence statement in, the freeholder put in defence written by solicitor and the director of the fh company put in witness statement but that didnt really add anything.

 

I think my post above is missing point 4 which should be spmething like : The LL acknowledges the current situation is inenforceable.

 

Then attach the neccasary docs and statute laws, landlord and tenant acts, etc.

 

Send photocopies of it all to court and other side and take originals to court (although ive never been asked to show them).

 

Andy

[BlurredFX]

what do you think of it so far? I perhaps need to add somewhere that he HAS claimed rent, even though the legitimate LL are still sending letters asking for it. Would'y hurt to put in there his previous abuses of process, not complying with Court Instruction etc etc, and I saw a few points in the Summary Judgement template that I will add in.

 

But the bulk of it is here. What do we all think?

 

In the Matter of

Claimant: Rogue Management Company -v-

Defendant:

 

1Qxxxxxx

 

DEFENCE

 

1. The claim is largely the same as claim 9DCxxxxx, as it seems based on the same basic tenets, but with some confusion regarding the actual start dates. Claim 9DCxxxxx was withdrawn in July 2010. Despite the Claimant informing the Court that 9DCxxxxx had been paid, in fact no payment was made by the Defendant to the Claimant, or anybody else in relation to that claim. As such, the claimant has not sought permission to re-litigate as required by CPR 38.7 and the claim should be struck out as an abuse of process.

 

2. The Lease shows a contract between Bxxxxxxx Dxxxxxxx Limited (The Original Landlord) and MR AND MRS AARDVARK who owned the Leasehold before the Defendant. This lease was subsequently purchased by the Defendant in Aug 2006 as shown in the Land Registry Document attached ref: xxxxxx.

 

3. The title deed from the Land Registry show that the remainder of the lease (approx 990 years) - was assigned to Goo Soooos Limited 20 January 2012,

 

4. The Claimant is not the Landlord referred to in the Title Deed, in the Lease, nor is he mentioned within the Lease and nor is he a party to it. None of the rights or responsibilities of the Landlord have been transferred to the Claimant. As such, the Claimant has no right to collect Service Charges or Ground Rent.

 

5. The Landlord (Goooo SooooS) in his letter regarding "my development" of the 11th January 2012 in realtionsto various matters about the building states "...although neither the previous freeholders and/or Gooo Goos are `clients of THE Claimant"'.

 

6. In the same letter as (5), Gooo Soooo also states "...Rogue Management Management Company Limited, who are not named in the Lease and technically therefore maintenance obligations are unenforceable against or by that company,..."

7. Additionally/alternatively the Management Agent employed by the Landlord (gooo Sooo) is UPP Property Management Limited, and not the Claimant.

 

8. Additionally/alternatively, the Defendant believes the insurance was in fact invalid, as described in the letter from Goooo Sooo to the Claimant on 11 Jan 2012, a copy of which was supplied by Gooo Sooo to the Defendant with Gooo Sooos letter of 15th February 2012. As technically the building is/was uninsured, the charge is invalid.

 

9. The Service Charge demands do not comply with s21(b) of The Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 and therefore the Defendant is using his right to withhold payment. Should any valid demands be issued then any costs incurred more than 18 months prior are unrecoverable due to s20(b) of the LTA.

 

10. The Service Charge demands did not contain the name and address of the Landlord as required by s47/s48 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1987

 

11. Administration Charges are not payable as there is no provision within the lease allowing such charges.

 

12. Alternatively, Administration Charges are not payable as the demands for payment did not come accompanied by the Administration Charges - Summary of Rights as required by Schedule 11 of The Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002

 

Cheers for your time and patience with this.

 

Just spotted a discrepancy in lta1985/1987 - but are we OK to use either? I believe so.

 

Also, what about putting in there somewhere about going to an LVT, so should it really start going the wrong way, I can request transfer to LVT from determination on what is reasonable?

 

MaybeI should also put in there a part about the fact I share the Landlord concerns about the proper management of the Lease, given the evidence that they are not happy (in a letter) and also that i have a letter from Claimant saying, almost literally "there's not enough money to pay for new windows so we're not getting new windows." Though perhaps I should just put considering such drivel in my costs and produce it when the DJ asks for it!!!

 

Or is this getting too far away from simply defending their POC? Yer... I think I am doing that again!

 

How have I done with your good work Andydd? Have I polished it enough?

 

I will have to go through and reference some documents that I will be submitting as evidence as well, but that doesn't need to go up here I don't think.

 

Thanks,

 

FX:)

[DonkeyB]

I’m not sure that Point 1 above is valid. If they withdrew the claim before judgment, I don’t think there is any abuse of process in restarting a new claim. I’m assuming they withdrew, rather than discontinued? There’s a difference.

 

Have a look at this case.

 

http://www.boyesturner.com/news-article.html?id=1646

[BlurredFX]

I’m not sure that Point 1 above is valid. If they withdrew the claim before judgment, I don’t think there is any abuse of process in restarting a new claim. I’m assuming they withdrew, rather than discontinued? There’s a difference.

 

Have a look at this case.

 

http://www.boyesturner.com/news-article.html?id=1646

 

What's the difference between withdrew and discontinued? I am not sure which they did - they lied to the Court and said I paid therefore the claim was "stopped". Withdrew or discontinued, I am unsure. They are lying to the Court either way.

 

I am unsure if I should leave it in or not? Even if it is not strictly relevant, I don't think there is much harm in the DJ seeing it, but obviously I would like to know the difference.

 

I;m off to do some work on my Counterclaim.

 

Cheers

Edited February 11, 2013 by BlurredFX
wasnt finished, is now

[BlurredFX]

I’m not sure that Point 1 above is valid. If they withdrew the claim before judgment, I don’t think there is any abuse of process in restarting a new claim. I’m assuming they withdrew, rather than discontinued? There’s a difference.

 

Have a look at this case.

 

http://www.boyesturner.com/news-article.html?id=1646

 

DonkeyB,

 

From the link you put up, the following seems to apply, as I did defend the case.

 

“A claimant who discontinues a claim needs the permission of the court to make another claim against the same defendant if-

(a) he discontinued the claim after the defendant filed a defence; and

(b) the other claim arises out of facts which are the same or substantially the same as those relating to the discontinued claim.”

 

However, I see what you mean with the interpretation of the law. I am still unsure if my case was discontinued, or withdrawn. Whatever the default option is when a defendant pays the claim I suppose?!?! But it is clear the Claimant is playing silly beggars and I am a LiP.

 

"He concluded that the difference between the two was that under Part 38.7 the onus lies upon the applicant to show that there should be permission to bring the new claim whereas under Part 3.4(2)(b) the onus was on the defendant to show that the new claim is an abuse of process. Arnold J cited Lord Bingham in the case of Johnson v Gore Wood in relation to Henderson v Henderson abuse of process:"

 

On that basis, it is down to me to show that they are abusing the process. Which I am doing????? I tried to get the claim struck out ast time, and the DJ was going to go for it until he realised that payents had been made by my Mortgage co and therefore i had to issue a defence and Counterclaim.

 

They also refer to Henderson v Henderson and this seems relevant

 

"That is to adopt too dogmatic an approach to what should in my opinion be a broad, merits-based judgment which takes account of the public and private interests involved and also takes account of all the facts of the case, focusing attention on the crucial question whether, in all the circumstances, a party is misusing or abusing the process of the court by seeking to raise before it the issue which could have been raised before.”

 

On that basis, I am hoping the DJ sees it fr what it is and acts accordingly! What do you think DonkeyB? I am not arguing for the sake of it, I want to get the right answer - that is where the victory is!! I'd rather be wrong on here than wrong i the Courtroom! How does that play with you?

 

Thanks one and all once again!

 

Blurred:)

[DonkeyB]

I think your arguments are sound, but it’s worth getting these issues sorted. If you get the nuances wrong, it proves wriggle room.

 

I am wondering if, as you defended, a proper notice of discontinuation is required? It may be worth asking the court to clarify the basis on which the case stopped –*is there any chance it was simply stayed?

 

I’m a bit vague on the differences between withdrawing and discontinuance (yes, I know, Catholics withdraw...) – hopefully someone else knows more about it? Otherwise I’ll try and do some research later.

[BlurredFX]

I think your arguments are sound, but it’s worth getting these issues sorted. If you get the nuances wrong, it proves wriggle room.

Tell me about it. Cost me five and a half grand back in 2007 when I made a mistake, spoke over the DJ (i know i know) and he decided that as I had made a small mistake, my application was wrong, and that was that. Perfectly legit application for a set-aside knocked back. Nightmare, but it taught me a lesson. Also a lesson in making sure you get more than one person to view a thread! anyway, I digress. The matter still churns my stomach. It's not the five grand, it's the CCJ thats a pain in the neck!!

 

I am wondering if, as you defended, a proper notice of discontinuation is required? It may be worth asking the court to clarify the basis on which the case stopped –*is there any chance it was simply stayed?

The DJ at the last hearing (in Jan, where the Judgement as set aside) informed me that the Claimant informed the Court that I had paid. End of. It was not stayed, we had been though all of that!

 

I’m a bit vague on the differences between withdrawing and discontinuance (yes, I know, Catholics withdraw...) – hopefully someone else knows more about it? Otherwise I’ll try and do some research later.

This has to be submitted to the Court and Claimant by 4pm on the 13th, so it has to go in the post tomorrow, or possibly hand deliver on Wednesday, but not if I can help it. Accordingly, don't go investing loads of time in it as it might be cademic by that point!

 

Thanks once again, can't stress that enough!

 

Blurred:)

[andydd]

Hi.

 

It would help if you had the docs from the first case, what did they claimant say, and what did the court say ?.

 

If they continue with the argument and say you paid then the case would be settled...so how can they be chasing the same debt again !! (So maybe I wouldnt mention whether you paid or not, if they insist you did then you gain lots of money (in theory) and the second case is abuse of process coz they are chasing amounts that have already been paid if they dont follow this path then it is abuse of process re: cpr 38.7..you win both ways.

 

It would appear that if the Judge is certain that you paid or they said you did then the first case is marked as settled and not discontinued, BUt as above..you have defence for both..they are both abuse of process..but for different reasons. Use both arguments in your defence ! I believe itis acceptable to use contradictory statemenmt if second one is started , "Alternatively".

 

I dont believe there is any difference between withdrawn and discontinued, and I believe the abuse of process part id correct, its the bit where they didnt ask permission to start another claim based on same facts...but despite their dubiousness I wouldn't add any other accusations of wrong doing, it would just sound like name-calling.

 

Yes..there is a difference between L&T Acts 1985 and 1987 !...1985 Act contains most of the relevant laws but 1987 act contains s47/s48 stuff.

 

Double check the stuff I said....

 

Administration Charges .. ARE they payable under lease ? (remember we/I havnt seen it)

 

Are demands invalid ? (I/we havnt seen these)... for reasons in s21b and s47/s48 (I have a feeling that even if LL name & address is on,..,its prob the wrong one)

[BlurredFX]

Hi.

 

It would help if you had the docs from the first case, what did they claimant say, and what did the court say ?.

 

Basically, they said nowt, I was forced to submit an embarrassed defence. They had nothing. Went to hearing, DJ said produce your paperwork, but as you ain't the LL, you will not get forfeiture! He said that verbally. The DJ seemingly liked the way I had conducted myself. I was dazed and confused at the time, didn't know where it had come from. Hence I asked him to flesh out his claim, and he couldn't.

 

I submitted all the docs pretty much from the first case in my application to have the Judgement set-aside.

 

 

If they continue with the argument and say you paid then the case would be settled...so how can they be chasing the same debt again !! (So maybe I wouldnt mention whether you paid or not, if they insist you did then you gain lots of money (in theory) and the second case is abuse of process coz they are chasing amounts that have already been paid if they dont follow this path then it is abuse of process re: cpr 38.7..you win both ways.

 

I have already told the DJ that I have not paid it, and I doubt he is about to fall for that one, and neither are they. It;s just something else for them to throw a spanner in the works with.

 

At one point during the hearing he was going to strike their claim out from the beginning to the end of the first claim to the end, as I had apparently paid it, leaving with the balance to pay from 2009 or something. Either way the DJ is right on it, sadly.

 

It would appear that if the Judge is certain that you paid or they said you did then the first case is marked as settled and not discontinued, BUt as above..you have defence for both..they are both abuse of process..but for different reasons. Use both arguments in your defence ! I believe itis acceptable to use contradictory statemenmt if second one is started , "Alternatively".

 

I dont believe there is any difference between withdrawn and discontinued, and I believe the abuse of process part id correct, its the bit where they didnt ask permission to start another claim based on same facts...but despite their dubiousness I wouldn't add any other accusations of wrong doing, it would just sound like name-calling.

 

I would tend to agree, they have been idiot enough!! That is a problem I have always had with this case - getting people to take it seriously what the Claimant has actually done!! It's beyond a joke. People think I am the one with a screw loose!

 

Yes..there is a difference between L&T Acts 1985 and 1987 !...1985 Act contains most of the relevant laws but 1987 act contains s47/s48 stuff.

 

Double check the stuff I said....

 

Administration Charges .. ARE they payable under lease ? (remember we/I havnt seen it)

 

Are demands invalid ? (I/we havnt seen these)... for reasons in s21b and s47/s48 (I have a feeling that even if LL name & address is on,..,its prob the wrong one)

 

I will double check the 85/87 stuff. Admin charges - I can't find anywhere in the Lease. If they are there, and of they are entitled to it, it's still cause for a transfer to LVT isn't it? To determine the reasonableness etc., of charges and the like. If it gets that far my defence is in trouble anyway. I think I will leave it to them to point out the location of any entitlement to charges to the DJ.

 

The demands are invalid. For a start there is no 10pt rights sheet. It's there, but in a very small siz guessing size 7 but it fits onto 1 A4 sheet. Until 2010 there was no name of any freeholder or landlord or anything on there. It was just an invoice that could have come from anyone, hence I didn't pay it. Since 2010 they have started putting on that "for purposes of the whatever, the LL is the "friendly society"" - the one that was set up in the LL absence and is bringing the action against me.

 

The only thing they did produce when asked was a letter (dates 2003 or 2004) from Director of Friendly Society to LL's solicitor asking them to start the process - but there is nothing after that, and from recollection it doesn't say what process. Might as well have been a letter from me saying I had taken it over!?!? They have been ordered to produce documents, but they have failed.

 

How are we doing? I will go and check some of that stuff. My Counterclaim is looking very short, but then I suppose it's quite simple really they took they money they are not entitled to and it needs to be repaid.

 

I can see the DJ asking for evidence that they took it, and I will have to show them a mortgage statement as there is nothing else. I did get a letter from Mortgage Co saying they were paying it and if I had an issue with it, take it up with "Friendly Society". I appreciate I could do with that piece of paper, butI will have to request it off the mortgage company if the DJ decides he wants to see it. My mail ended up everywhere while I was hospitalised.

 

Cheers for the continued support,

 

FX

[BlurredFX]

I've added the following in case the DJ thinks I am trying some sort of subterfuge!

 

5. The change in Landlord in early 2012 has no bearing on this Defence, as the Claimant has never been entitled to claim Service Charges, by the original Landlord (Bee Dee) or by the new Landlord as of 2012, Gooo Sooos.

[andydd]

Hi.

 

It would be very useful to know exactly why first claim was 'ended', perhaps you could ask at court when you hand in docs ?

 

If it was settled, then surely it doesnt matter whether you told judge you paid or not, its there in black and white SETTLED..therefore you must of paid. You then could argue why are they bringing the second claim its exactly the same as the first and theyve already admitted you paid and court thinks so too.

 

If its marked as discontinued then you havnt paid BUT you argue it's abuse of process to start claim again without permission (and perhaps point out that they appear to be devious to try and get around this).

 

Either way..you win..as far as I can see.

 

Perhaps don't actually say youve paid in defence, just point to fact it was SETTLED (if indeed it is marked as such), It would be abuse of process to start claim again for money which has already been paid.

 

I dont think they are throwing a spanner in the works for you, either you have paid or not, they appear to have messed things up for themselves not you.

 

Keep all stuff about no right for admin charges then, generally it is newer leases that allow admin and interest charges, older ones (typically written in legalese with no punctuation) often dont, they normally just have the standard S146 Forfeiture clause.

 

It would appear as you say that the demands are all invalid for a number of reasons, claimant isnt landlord, no right to debt, summary is invalid, no name of ACTUAL LL as per s47/s48.

 

Worth pointing out though that S21B and (I think) S47/S48 give you a right to WITHOLD, if you rely on these alone it may be hard to argue for a return of money already paid...but of course the oether arguments do (hopefully) show that nothing was payable at all.

 

Finally, add something at the end of the defence saying that IF the court decides the LL id correct, etc then you wish case to go to LVT, not to discuss the issue of IF its payable but to discuss the REASONABLENESS/AMOUNT (this could well be completely different arguments, is insurance too high, etc).

 

To summarize, would really help what court said about first case, settled, discontinued, ?..and also what claimant said (in writing).

 

Andy

[andydd]

Now if I was the Judge the first thing I'd say to the claimant is (if indeed there is proof that case is settled or it is marked as such at court or you have written confirmation) is.."EErr excuse me, youve already been paid why are you bringing this case, do you want paying twice ?".

 

Andy

[BlurredFX]

"EErr excuse me, youve already been paid why are you bringing this case, do you want paying twice ?".

 

Andy

 

The DJ is on to it, he is just going to take some convincing. At the hearing last time he said that in all his time he has nly ever seena handful of Service Charge disputes go the way of the Defendant. I said I understood, was confident of my case.

 

Once he decided to set aside instead of strike out the whole lot, he seemed to adjust his attitude, basically as he said "you ahave some understanding of Court procedure".

But it wasn't clear, this lot is, so fingers crossed.

 

I am just about to top and tail it the next few hours, put all the evidence with it, and get it sent off.

 

What do I send it with?? A copy of the set aside notice and date for submitting new documents?

 

Blurred:)

[andydd]

Well..strictly speaking you normally only need to get the defence in, you can send supporting docs later, no doubt the actual trial may be some time off..and of course you will want to see what evidence the claimant puts in and what he says.

 

The fact that many defendants don't win court claims is a bit sad, in LVT's I'd say that are succesful quite a lot, perhaps 40-50% of the time, it is clear than many (even big professional LL'S) either take the **** or dont know what they are doing, i suspect yours is a bit of both.

 

Andy

[BlurredFX]

I might as well get it all in today, gives me opportunity to go over it once the panic is ver and make sure it is right.

 

In all honesty, I think mine is down to a series of events, including the Managing Agentw ho has started the action buying out the company who originally managed the block - on a frielndly basis - and the new company is completely clueless. The way they have litigated is just a joke, and I have just spoken to the Director of Friendly Society, and he completely unaware that the Judgement has been set-aside and I am now asking for my money back. There is a metting tomorrow about possibly going RTM, but we've had two of these ver the past couple of years, and noothing happens.There is a part of me that thinks the company who have started this are a load of thieves - for example we used to get accounts showing a balance of £20k in the bank, and now the balance is virtually nil. I don't know, I really don't. However, eventually, i will get to the bottom of it. But as long as I am not paying, and I get my money back, there is a part of me that doesn't care - except the building is not starting to look shoddy but they cant decorate it as they "can't afford it". Same for the windows. Never mind that it says in the Lease that decorating should be done every so ften and all kinds that doesnt happen. Just a joke.

 

Anyway, the above it just background, so thanks for letting me vent. Back to getting this lot done. Got an hour to get it in the post!!!!

[BlurredFX]

SENT SPECIAL DELIVERY! That was close, but it always is for me, same since school!

 

Blurred:)