Guest caravanj Posted May 8, 2011 Report Share Posted May 8, 2011 I foolishly let a builder who was renovating my property, move in on the basis he would finish the work in lieu of rent after which time I would give him an AST subject to the usual checks etc. However he didn't do the work, changed the locks & prevented me from having any access to the property to get the work finished by another builder. Also he moved his son in without my knowledge or permission. Unfortunately I have two differing lots of legal advice which affect what I do next: 1: he isn't a tenant, he has a licence to occupy 2: he is a tenant without an AST Last week he was sent to prison for 2 years ( so he'll serve at least 1 year) & in theory the house will now be either unoccupied or occupied by his son who does not have any permission to be in the property. The eviction firm are going on the basis that he is a tenant since I allowed him into the property & we had an unwritten agreement that rent was paid by means of free work done by him. Although it's blindingly obvious that he can't either live in the house, do any of the agreed works or pay rent, I find that I still have to go through the ridiculous Section 21 eviction process & further more I'm advised that I cannot enter the property to check on it's condition or the tenant can sue me. One thing I've learned is that a landlord has absolutely no rights in law compared to those of a tenant, squatter, occupier or whatever you choose to call anyone in your property. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mortitia Posted May 9, 2011 Report Share Posted May 9, 2011 Hi Caravan J, Golden rule which I am sure you will stick to is never let anyone live in property without and AST. He was a tenant without an AST but with a verbal tenancy. Banged up tenant's son is a minor (under 18) and you could not have let to him legally anyway. However he is just over the age where social services should step in. Imprisioned ex tenant has indicated no tenancy so really all you need to do it go and remove son as he has no right to be there whatsoever. Suggest you take police officer/ social services person/ Barnardos or whatever happens in your area. If he is not there you can bag up stuff and put outside/change locks etc. (Would help if you could contact him first.) You do not need S21 to remove son but eviction firm will probably go on to the end to get max cash out of you. Agree weak judges are ruining the buy to let industry. Mortitia Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carryon Regardless Posted May 9, 2011 Report Share Posted May 9, 2011 Personally I wouldn't trust a verbal surrender by anyone, and certainly not a con. A change of desire by the 'prisoner' and you have very little to evidence surrender. My view is that even w/o contract the 2 of you have entered into an AST, and this still exists. Any T has the right to visitors and can give rights to occupy. The T has done for his son. As you are doing I would repossess through a S21 and progress to the court Bailiff clearing the house of occupants, unless you can be comfortable that the property has been demonstably abandoned. Now you are aware the T is inside service could be more complicated, I'm not sure of this scenario. BTW any claim for you entering the property may be valid but any financial award should be based on demonstrable losses. With a reliable witness and nothing disturbed I don't see what could be claimed for. Illegal entry may be another matter 'if' Mr Plod had interest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest caravanj Posted May 9, 2011 Report Share Posted May 9, 2011 Personally I wouldn't trust a verbal surrender by anyone, and certainly not a con. A change of desire by the 'prisoner' and you have very little to evidence surrender. My view is that even w/o contract the 2 of you have entered into an AST, and this still exists. Any T has the right to visitors and can give rights to occupy. The T has done for his son. As you are doing I would repossess through a S21 and progress to the court Bailiff clearing the house of occupants, unless you can be comfortable that the property has been demonstably abandoned. Now you are aware the T is inside service could be more complicated, I'm not sure of this scenario. BTW any claim for you entering the property may be valid but any financial award should be based on demonstrable losses. With a reliable witness and nothing disturbed I don't see what could be claimed for. Illegal entry may be another matter 'if' Mr Plod had interest. Thanks Cor, you've confirmed exactly what I'm going to do & yes if I go into the property it could be a nice little conviction for plod so I'm not taking the risk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest caravanj Posted May 9, 2011 Report Share Posted May 9, 2011 Hi Caravan J, Golden rule which I am sure you will stick to is never let anyone live in property without and AST. He was a tenant without an AST but with a verbal tenancy. Banged up tenant's son is a minor (under 18) and you could not have let to him legally anyway. However he is just over the age where social services should step in. Imprisioned ex tenant has indicated no tenancy so really all you need to do it go and remove son as he has no right to be there whatsoever. Suggest you take police officer/ social services person/ Barnardos or whatever happens in your area. If he is not there you can bag up stuff and put outside/change locks etc. (Would help if you could contact him first.) You do not need S21 to remove son but eviction firm will probably go on to the end to get max cash out of you. Agree weak judges are ruining the buy to let industry. Mortitia Yes I agree I shouldn't have let him in but in my defence he was the partner of my step-daughter's best mate & he came highly recommended & I was told that the work that he does do is good quality although I've not seen any of his work myself. I'm not going to accept his verbal surrender. If I repossess the property without a Section 21 court order it would render me liable for a criminal charge & law suit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest caravanj Posted May 9, 2011 Report Share Posted May 9, 2011 Now you are aware the T is inside service could be more complicated, I'm not sure of this scenario. Funnily enough it makes things easier because all documents which need to be served are logged by the prison discipline unit & then given to a named officer who signs that the document has been served on the prisoner. He can't hide in prison. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest caravanj Posted May 12, 2011 Report Share Posted May 12, 2011 - Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jayne10 Posted July 24, 2011 Report Share Posted July 24, 2011 caravanj - it appears you were quick to let a builder who was well recommended and produced high quality work, that's certainly not cheap these days, live in the house. The builder repeatedly asked for a tenancy agreement knowing he was vulnerable without it. You repeatedly made excuses not to do this but continued to benefit from the work and materials provided by the builder. There surely had to come a point when this couldn't continue, and to my knowledge this was after a loft conversion, double glazing, new bathroom and boiler had been completed. If you had provided the tenancy agreement I believe your rent would have been covered and council tax whilst the builder was in prison. The son has tried and been unable to get any council tax, rent benefit due to not being on any AST. This is a horrible financial situation for a young man to be in. The fact that the builder is now in prison is a separate matter which you are loading your argument with. The builders original concerns have now been confirmed - that you feel you can just chuck him out as he is no longer of financial benefit. You also commenced work prior to a divorce settlement, again placing the builder in a tricky situation, when a very angry ex-mrscaravanj stormed through the house demanding to know what the builder was doing to 'her house'. In the event she left (without any violence) exclaiming the bathroom was 'breathtaking'. You've certainly had your money's worth. The laws governing letting are there to protect both landlord and tenant and as an ex government inspector you should be well aware of this. I believe you saw a financial opportunity and exploited it to the max until your poor (greedy) decision making backfired on you. Finally to respond to your points of 12 May - of course he needs fair notice to get another place to live, he's out in Dec (as you know) and it's a bit tricky getting another place whilst in prisonthe rent would have been covered (if only you had done the agreement)council tax would have been covered (if only you had done the agreement) and builder's son is paying (and struggling) the utility bills which you know you aren't liable for By your own admission your are vindicitive and you say you are happy to spend a lot of money to satisfy that - this is a lot of stress and heartache for everyone involved, oh why didn't you do a legal and proper agreement? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grampa Posted July 24, 2011 Report Share Posted July 24, 2011 Jayne you are incorrect, any housing benefit stops as soon as a person has been sentenced because it is classed as a change in circumstances but it can be claimed for up to 52 weeks if they are on remand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LLAW96 Posted July 24, 2011 Report Share Posted July 24, 2011 I am going to balanced in my reply to your post. In my veiw you have have granted a periodic shorthold assured tenancy. The fact that there is no written agreement works in favour of your occupier. The fact that he has moved in his son is of no consequence as he would have the right to quiet possession of the property which implies that he can quitely enjoy the property which includes letting family members live with him if he so desires. Having said this at best he has an assured shorthold tenancy (but see post) and in order to get possession you could serve your section 21 notice and seek to recover possession in the usual way or a section 8 notice using grounds 8.10 and 11 as grounds for possession. If there are any threats or destruction of property the the court rules allow you to apply for a quicker hearing date which in theory will mean that your situation will be resolved quicker. The housing benfit issues are a red hearing, you do not need a tenancy agreement to claim housing benefit you just need to explain the position. In usual circumstances housing benefit can be paid up to 52 weeks if you are in prison provided the sentence does not exceed 52 weeks (as it seems to here). In this case the alternative is to claim housing benefit under a caretaking agreement i.e the son makes the claim basis of his dads temporary absence, subject to his income the claim should be paid full stop. In relation to serving your notice and or claim for possession the court rules allow effective service through the prison's governor. Of more concern to me is the fact that your occupier has a defence under the rules of estopple, i.e he has acted to his detriment based on a promise you seem to have made in relation to the granting of a tenancy. Alternatively he has a claim under the rules of constructive/resulting trusts in that he seems to have undertaken some work to your property his argument would be that he has enhanced the value of your property and although he does not have a ground to occupy he should be compensated for the work he has done. Your best position in this matter is to seek to compromise the situation through discussion and negotiation. For starters the issue of homelessness can be resolved the son is 17 he is therefore a priority housing group, when being rehoused the council have to take into account his and anyone who is reasonably expected to live with him (ie dad) needs. Alternatively on dads release as an ex offender recently released from prison he is a priority housing group too and should be rehoused. You really do need proper professional advice in this matter as it has the potential to blow up in your face. Having said this, its just my opinion on the facts before me what do I know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grampa Posted July 24, 2011 Report Share Posted July 24, 2011 I forgot to add that while housing benefit can be claimed/still paid while on remand that is only if the person has the intention to return to the property. Though I agree with LAW that the 17 year old may be entitled to housing benefit he would only be entitled to shared room allowance due to his age so unless he can get a top up through the discretionary payment system you wont get much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LLAW96 Posted July 24, 2011 Report Share Posted July 24, 2011 As Discretionary Housing Benefit is paid via a central government grant which has to be returned if not spent by a local council they will utilise it especially if it prevents homelessness and them having to re-house as here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grampa Posted July 24, 2011 Report Share Posted July 24, 2011 That maybe so but if the council have spent it all for the year don't count on it. The council doesn't get any more until the next year. My council always seem to run out and and it doesnt matter if you have been granted a payment or not, if the pots empty you get diddly squat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest caravanj Posted August 19, 2011 Report Share Posted August 19, 2011 caravanj - it appears you were quick to let a builder who was well recommended and produced high quality work, that's certainly not cheap these days, live in the house. The builder repeatedly asked for a tenancy agreement knowing he was vulnerable without it. You repeatedly made excuses not to do this but continued to benefit from the work and materials provided by the builder. There surely had to come a point when this couldn't continue, and to my knowledge this was after a loft conversion, double glazing, new bathroom and boiler had been completed. If you had provided the tenancy agreement I believe your rent would have been covered and council tax whilst the builder was in prison. The son has tried and been unable to get any council tax, rent benefit due to not being on any AST. This is a horrible financial situation for a young man to be in. The fact that the builder is now in prison is a separate matter which you are loading your argument with. The builders original concerns have now been confirmed - that you feel you can just chuck him out as he is no longer of financial benefit. You also commenced work prior to a divorce settlement, again placing the builder in a tricky situation, when a very angry ex-mrscaravanj stormed through the house demanding to know what the builder was doing to 'her house'. In the event she left (without any violence) exclaiming the bathroom was 'breathtaking'. You've certainly had your money's worth. The laws governing letting are there to protect both landlord and tenant and as an ex government inspector you should be well aware of this. I believe you saw a financial opportunity and exploited it to the max until your poor (greedy) decision making backfired on you. Finally to respond to your points of 12 May - of course he needs fair notice to get another place to live, he's out in Dec (as you know) and it's a bit tricky getting another place whilst in prisonthe rent would have been covered (if only you had done the agreement)council tax would have been covered (if only you had done the agreement) and builder's son is paying (and struggling) the utility bills which you know you aren't liable for By your own admission your are vindicitive and you say you are happy to spend a lot of money to satisfy that - this is a lot of stress and heartache for everyone involved, oh why didn't you do a legal and proper agreement? You seem to know more about what's happened than I do! Yes I can be vindictive but not in The Jeremy Kyle Show manner that you infer. Any action taken against the T will be done via the courts & in accordance with the relevant legal advice, some of which I have already taken & which is not cheap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest caravanj Posted September 19, 2011 Report Share Posted September 19, 2011 caravanj - it appears you were quick to let a builder who was well recommended and produced high quality work, that's certainly not cheap these days, live in the house. The builder repeatedly asked for a tenancy agreement knowing he was vulnerable without it. You repeatedly made excuses not to do this but continued to benefit from the work and materials provided by the builder. There surely had to come a point when this couldn't continue, and to my knowledge this was after a loft conversion, double glazing, new bathroom and boiler had been completed. I didn't realise that a new boiler had been fitted since the existing 3 year-old boiler was repaired on the 28th March 2011 according to the invoice from my gas fitter. Nor did I realise that a loft conversion had been done so just for good measure I've notified your post to the building control officer who'll be having a look to ensure that the relevant planning permissions, party wall permissions etc. were obtained before the work was done & that it complies with the building regulations. Also he'll check whether or not the new boiler installation & any electrical work in the bathroom has the appropriate Gas Safe & Part P certification. I will also be submitting copies of the bank transfers for labour & the materials purchased invoices from the builders merchants, paid by me in respect of the building work, to HMRC since I'll need to claim it back from any future profit I might make. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest caravanj Posted October 15, 2011 Report Share Posted October 15, 2011 I didn't realise that a new boiler had been fitted since the existing 3 year-old boiler was repaired on the 28th March 2011 according to the invoice from my gas fitter. Nor did I realise that a loft conversion had been done so just for good measure I've notified your post to the building control officer who'll be having a look to ensure that the relevant planning permissions, party wall permissions etc. were obtained before the work was done & that it complies with the building regulations. Also he'll check whether or not the new boiler installation & any electrical work in the bathroom has the appropriate Gas Safe & Part P certification. I will also be submitting copies of the bank transfers for labour & the materials purchased invoices from the builders merchants, paid by me in respect of the building work, to HMRC since I'll need to claim it back from any future profit I might make. Went to court on the 5th September & I was represented by a top eviction advocate who did a very professional job. The T was given 14 days to quit by the 19th September & was ordered by the judge to pay my costs. Since he's still residing as a guest of HM Prison Service he couldn't quit so on the 20th September I notified the court bailiffs who were absolutely brilliant & executed a possession warrant on the 6th October. Needless to say there was no loft conversion or new boiler & items belonging to a former tenant & a brand new gas fire were missing so that will be reported to the police. There was a considerable amount of damage to the property including holes kicked through walls, smashed double glazing units, damaged new front door etc. There was also loads of rubbish & broken bed etc. left in the property. The back yard was full of rubbish which I reported to the council who asked me to have it removed by a waste removal firm since it could be a potential health / rat hazard. The state of the property, damage & rubbish was witnessed by the bailiff & the locksmith from the firm who had supplied the double glazing & who are having to replace it, plus it's all been logged & photographed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grampa Posted October 15, 2011 Report Share Posted October 15, 2011 Do you think you will be able to reclaim the costs of damages once you know the true cost?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest caravanj Posted October 15, 2011 Report Share Posted October 15, 2011 Do you think you will be able to reclaim the costs of damages once you know the true cost?? I very much doubt it but the T wrote to my eviction firm saying he'd contacted his legal team & was considering a length of stay & compensation for the works & the subsequent increase in the property value. He also said he'd got in with another landlord & that it might be in my best interests to sell them the property at a 'considerable discount' LOL!! I have to say that myself, my eviction firm & my advocate roared with laughter at the thought of a prisoner asking a judge for more time!! LOL!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OptionLettings.com Posted October 16, 2011 Report Share Posted October 16, 2011 WOW what a sorry tale. I wish you well now that you have the property back in your control and hope that you do not receive any reprisals on the 'T's release. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest caravanj Posted October 17, 2011 Report Share Posted October 17, 2011 WOW what a sorry tale. I wish you well now that you have the property back in your control and hope that you do not receive any reprisals on the 'T's release. Thanks for your good wishes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest caravanj Posted October 21, 2011 Report Share Posted October 21, 2011 The waste removal firm cleared all the rubbish yesterday & said the house would have been suitable for an episode of 'Grime Fighters', then to add insult to injury they suggested I get the property on the 'Cowboy Builders' programme!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richlist Posted October 21, 2011 Report Share Posted October 21, 2011 The waste removal firm cleared all the rubbish yesterday & said the house would have been suitable for an episode of 'Grime Fighters', then to add insult to injury they suggested I get the property on the 'Cowboy Builders' programme!! No doubt you thanked them for their comments & ideas. You then reminded them that it was you paying their wages and suggested that they do less looking & thinking about your problems whilst working faster & harder in order to reduce the costs of the clearance. If they had time to think about your problems they were obviously overcharging for the work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest caravanj Posted October 21, 2011 Report Share Posted October 21, 2011 The waste removal firm cleared all the rubbish yesterday & said the house would have been suitable for an episode of 'Grime Fighters', then to add insult to injury they suggested I get the property on the 'Cowboy Builders' programme!! No doubt you thanked them for their comments & ideas. You then reminded them that it was you paying their wages and suggested that they do less looking & thinking about your problems whilst working faster & harder in order to reduce the costs of the clearance. If they had time to think about your problems they were obviously overcharging for the work. They didn't have to think about the problem since it was blindingly self-evident, nor was it too difficult to carry bags & pass a 10 second comment at the same time. Also the waste removal cost less than I would have paid for a skip to do it myself which made it very cost-effective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richlist Posted October 21, 2011 Report Share Posted October 21, 2011 Keep working on that sense of humour......it'll all come right one day! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carryon Regardless Posted October 21, 2011 Report Share Posted October 21, 2011 See, touch, smell, hear, taste. I can't find this other sense, have I been short changed ? Is this other sense common ? Because I know not everyone has a common sense. Will it come to me ? Because I've been told to come to my senses, that means I'm short of more than one. Should it be shared, or can I keep it to myself if I get one ? What's the sense I'm easily confused ? Can you explain what is humour ? Why did people laugh at this ? Sister Mary Ann, who worked for a home health agency, was out making her rounds visiting homebound patients when she ran out of gas. As luck would have it, a Texaco Gasoline station was just a block away. She walked to the station to borrow a gas can and buy some gas. The attendant told her that the only gas can he owned had been loaned out, but she could wait until it was returned. Since Sister Mary Ann was on the way to see a patient, she decided not to wait and walked back to her car. She looked for something in her car that she could fill with gas and spotted the bedpan she was taking to the patient. Always resourceful, Sister Mary Ann carried the bedpan to the station,filled it with gasoline, and carried the full bedpan back to her car. As she was pouring the gas into her tank, two Baptists watched from across the street. One of them turned to the other and said, 'If it starts, I'm turning Catholic.'!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.