Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • This is a ridiculous situation.  The lender has made so many stupid errors of judgement.  I refuse to bow down and willingly 'pay' for their mistakes.  I really want to put this behind me and move on.  I can't yet. 
    • Peter McCormack says he has secured a 15-year lease on the club's Bedford ground.View the full article
    • ae - i have no funds to appoint lawyers.   My point about most caggers getting lost is simply due to so many layers of legal issues that is bound to confuse.  
    • Lenders have a legal obligation to sell the property for the best price they can get. If they feel the offer is low they won't sell it, because it's likely the borrower will say the same.   Yes.  But every interested buyer was offering within a range - based on local market sales evidence.  Shelter site says a lender is not allowed to wait for the market to improve. Why serve a dilapidations notice? If it's in the terms of the lease to maintain the property to a good standard, then serve an S146 notice instead as it's a clear breach of the lease.   The dilapidations notice was a legal first step.  Freeholders have to give time to leaseholders to remedy.  Lender lawyers advised the property was going to be sold and the new buyer would undertake the work.  Their missive came shortly before contracts were given to buyer.  The buyer lawyer and freehold lawyers were then in contact.  The issue of dilapidations remedy was discussed..  But then lender reneged.  There was a few months where neither I nor freeholders were sure what was going on.  Then suddenly demolition works started.   Before one issues a s146 one has to issue a LBA.  That is eventually what happened. ...legal battle took 3y to resolve. Again, order them to revert it as they didn't have permission to do the works, or else serve an S146 notice for breach of the lease   A s146 was served.  It took 3y but the parties came to a settlement.   (They couldn't revert as they had ripped out irreplaceable historical features). The lease has already been extended once so they have no right to another extension. It seems pretty easy to just get the lawyer to say no and stick by those terms as the law is on your side there.  That's not the case   One can ask for another extension.  In this instance the freeholders eventually agreed with a proviso for the receiver not to serve another. You wouldn't vary a lease through a lease extension.  Correct.  But receiver lawyer was an idiot.   He made so many errors.  No idea why the receiver instructed him?  He used to work for lender lawyers. I belatedly discovered he was sacked for dishonesty and fined a huge sum by the sra  (though kept his licence).  He eventually joined another firm and the receiver bizarrely chose him to handle the extension.  Again he messed up - which is why the matter still hasn't been properly concluded.   In reality, its quite clear the lender/ receiver were just trying to overwhelm me (as trustee and leaseholder) with work (and costs) due to so many legal  issues.  Also they tried to twist things (as lawyers sometimes do).  They tried to create a situation where the freeholders would get a wasted costs order - the intent was to bankrupt the freeholders so they could grab the fh that way.   That didn't happen.  They are still trying though.  They owe the freeholders legal costs (s60) and are refusing to pay.  They are trying to get the freeholders to refer the matter to the tribunal - simply to incur more costs (the freeholders don't want and cant's afford to incur)  Enfranchisement isn't something that can be "voided", it's in the Leasehold Reform Act 1967 that leaseholders have the right to.... The property does not qualify under 67 Act.  Their notice was invalid and voided. B petition was struck out. So this is dealt with then.  That action was dealt with yes.   But they then issued a new claim out of a different random court - which I'm still dealing with alone.  This is where I have issues with my old lawyer. He failed to read important legal docs  (which I kept emailing and asking if he was dealing with) and  also didn't deal with something crucial I pointed out.  This lawyer had the lender in a corner and he did not act. Evidence shows lender and receiver strategy had been ....  Redact and scan said evidence up for others to look at?   I could.  But the evidence is clear cut.  Receiver email to lender and lender lawyer: "our strategy for many months  has been for ceo to get the property".  A lender is not allowed to influence the receivership.   They clearly were.  And the law firm were complicit.  The same firm representing the lender and the ceo in his personal capacity - conflict of interest?   I  also have evidence of the lender trying to pay a buyer to walk.  I was never supposed to know about this.  But I was given copies of messages from the receiver "I need to see you face to face, these things are best not put in writing".  No need to divulge all here.  But in hindsight it's clear the lender/ receiver tried - via 2 meetings - to get rid of this buyer (pay large £s) to clear the path for the ceo.   One thing I need to clarify - if a receiver tells a lender to do - or not to do - something should the lender comply? 
    • Why ask for advice if you think it's too complex for the forum members to understand? You'd be better engaging a lawyer. Make sure he has understood all the implications. Stick with his advice. If it doesn't conform to your preconceived opinion then pause and consider whether maybe he's right.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

return of deposit


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6084 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Hiya,

 

I posted a thread at the beginning of this week but can't find where it went so am trying again. I moved into a house share last August and signed a lodgers agreement and gave the landlord £425 deposit. Originally the owner/landlord said he would be living in the property. However, when I moved in he'd got a 3rd lodger and said he'd decided not to live at the property. This May the 3rd lodger moved out leaving myself and one other person. In July we decided to get a flat together (the land lord used to come and go as he pleased and we got fed up with it). We gave him a months notice via text and left him a letter (we only had our address as a contact for him). A week later he rang and said he'd been away (a lie we're sure) and had only just received our notice. He was extremely annoyed and said we had to give him 2 months notice, we argued this and he said he would get back to us on the issue - he never did.

 

We had a feeling that we may have trouble getting our deposit back from the landlord so we sent him two letters asking if he could advise us when and how he would return our deposit. He did not reply. A week before we moved out I rang him and asked if he could let us know before we vacated if he planned to take any money from our deposit, so we had time to remedy any problems. He agreed. We didn't here from him and moved out leaving the keys to the propery under the bins (as requested by the landlord). The property was spotless when we left, cleaner than when we actually moved in.

 

Despite saying he would send our deposit within a week, we didn't receive it, and he would not answer our phone calls. We wrote 2 letters, and after the 3rd letter which threatened court action he forwarded us our deposit. Between us he'd deducted £310 (£100 for cleaning and £210 for dry cleaning the sofa). The house was cleaner when we moved out than when we moved in. The sofa covers had not been drycleaned when I moved in, in fact, I washed the sofa covers because they were dirty. I do not see how he can charge us £210 to have them dry cleaned. He only deducted £25 from a previous lodger's deposit and that was for a red wine stain she'd left on the carpet.

 

We've written to him saying that we believe his cleaning costs are unfair. He replied, saying he thought he was being more than reasonable, and that he believed the property had been left in a poor state (we took photos of the property the day we left). We sent a further letter saying we were unhappy with the cleaning costs but that we would contribute £26 towards cleaning the oven and £10 towards spot cleaning a small red pen mark on a cushion (I was responsible for it). As yet, we've not had a reply to our last letter.

 

Surely, as lodgers we cannot be expected to pay for the cleaning of a house when we were not the only people living there (especially as it was very clean when we moved out). The landlord works as a property surveyor and would often get work done on his house through his job (they obviously weren't aware of this). We suspect this is the case with the cleaning. It's likely he hasn't even paid for the cleaning which was carried out.

 

My friend works in property and he believes our contract is void as it was a lodgers contract but the landlord did not live on the property. He believes we could actually report him to trading standards. Is this the case? What should we do now? I am more than prepared to take him to court, just out of principle, what are my chances of getting my deposit back?

 

I would really appreciate any advice.

 

Thank you : )

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a quick question, did you sign an inventory when you entered the property.

Ex-Retail Manager who is happy to offer helpful advise in many consumer problems based on my retail experience. Any advise I do offer is my opinion and how I understand the law.

Link to post
Share on other sites

- No inventory, no deductions. There is no base condition of the property upon occupation with which to compare the condition upon vacating, so no damages can be upheld.

 

- It sounds VERY suss to me what they have done with regards lodgers and then full blown tenants. Sounds as if some kind of way to circumvent certain aspects of letting law, as lodgers have fewer rights. As well as potentially trying to avoid capital gains tax. However, I can almost guarantee you people like trading standards will have zero interest, and the people who should have interest(the housing dept of the local authority) almost certainly wont do anything anyway, so I wouldnt waste your time. Was his post still getting delivered to the property?

7 years in retail customer service

 

Expertise in letting and rental law for 6 years

 

By trade - I'm an IT engineer working in the housing sector.

 

Please note that any posts made by myself are for information only and should not and must not be taken as correct or factual. If in doubt, consult with a solicitor or other person of equal legal standing.

 

Please click the star if I have helped!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, thank u so much for your reply. Yes, the landlord was getting all his post sent to the address. This was one of the reasons we decided to move out because we never new when he was coming around to get his mail. The landlord was in financial trouble, and extrememly 'put out' when we said we were moving out. I'm sure this is why he has kept such a large proportion of our deposit. What do you think we should do next?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sue him :) simple as.

7 years in retail customer service

 

Expertise in letting and rental law for 6 years

 

By trade - I'm an IT engineer working in the housing sector.

 

Please note that any posts made by myself are for information only and should not and must not be taken as correct or factual. If in doubt, consult with a solicitor or other person of equal legal standing.

 

Please click the star if I have helped!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi there

 

I agree that you have a case to sue him but you cant get blood out of a stone. If he is in financial difficulty then will he have the money to pay you. You could end up with having to pay your legal costs.

 

I think I would look into this further. Take all steps before taking legal action. Talk to trading standards and the housing authority and MAKE them listen to you. People should not be allowed to get away with this.

 

It may be that you wont get your deposit back but it will stop him behaving this way in the future.

 

Kind regards

Gemspan

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is not a matter for trading standards by the way.

7 years in retail customer service

 

Expertise in letting and rental law for 6 years

 

By trade - I'm an IT engineer working in the housing sector.

 

Please note that any posts made by myself are for information only and should not and must not be taken as correct or factual. If in doubt, consult with a solicitor or other person of equal legal standing.

 

Please click the star if I have helped!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't want to have to go to court and that is a last resort. However, I am really annoyed because I know he had no right to keep our money. He has recently rented out the entire property for £1200 a month, so hopefully his financial situation has imrpoved since we moved out. Why is this not a matter for trading standards? I am still tempted to 'threaten' him with going to trading standards. I'm sure he was trying to dodge tax. He isn't very clever and it may frighten him to think we will take the issue to trading standards.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well to be more exact, why IS it an issue for trading standards? It is not in their jurisdiction. This is what the local housing departments are for.

7 years in retail customer service

 

Expertise in letting and rental law for 6 years

 

By trade - I'm an IT engineer working in the housing sector.

 

Please note that any posts made by myself are for information only and should not and must not be taken as correct or factual. If in doubt, consult with a solicitor or other person of equal legal standing.

 

Please click the star if I have helped!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I really don't know how any of these agencies work. Am desperate and just want my money back. If the landlord was trying to 'fiddle' the system and avoid pay capital gains tax, surely there must be an agency who would be interested. Or should I forget about reporting him and just take him to small claims court? We haven't yet had a reply to our last letter. He has 8 days left to reply.

Link to post
Share on other sites

kelgre,in reply to your posts and in my view being totally blunt with you:

 

1. You could go to the private tenant's officer employed by your local council.This service is free but I cannot see what you would gain apart from "letting out some steam".

 

2.What is the point of going to the tax authorities? - What do you know about your landlord's tax affairs? And again what has this got to do with resolving your dispute?If you were to go down this route you would be doing it out of malice and it would not benefit your particular case at all.

 

3.In conclusion, cut the chase and sue the b******!

 

Anyway,I hope you find this information useful.

 

If you have any questions,just ask.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, he has your money and is refusing to give it back, take him to the small claims court... or at least write to him outlining everything you intend to do and your view of the legal position, and how it would be much easier if he just gave you your money back now, and then if he's still keeping your money start the small claims procedure.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

well done mate, seems stupid to go through all that hassle but at least you got your money back

Ex-Retail Manager who is happy to offer helpful advise in many consumer problems based on my retail experience. Any advise I do offer is my opinion and how I understand the law.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...