Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

my LL shouldn't evict my downstairs neighbour

69 replies

Grrmum · 31/01/2015 08:14

I live in a house with a separate flat in the basement. The house is four floors and the flat is just half of the basement, so our rent is a lot more than his. The LL wants to sell the house (as one obviously) - the sale has been rumbling on for a while, with two sales falling through. Towards the end of the last sale he gave my downstairs neighbour 2 months notice to leave on January 4th. I thought this was bad because the xmas period is not good for flat hunting. So he had a miserable Christmas and didn't find a flat. We didn't get given notice (because he doesn't want to lose our rent).

So, January 4th comes and goes, my neighbour is in a right state because he is 70, not in great health, has no internet access, hasn't found anywhere. He has packed up lots of his stuff but he is still there, having nowhere else to go. LL came to visit him with his DSIS and they 'find' him a potential flat online, he said he didn't like it and didn't want to move there. So they said, right, you've known for ages the house was being sold, you've had plenty of time and you're not willing to look at the options we show you. They started legal action to evict him and have told him he could end up paying 2k in legal fees and have his possessions repossessed. He is now walking around like a wreck.

Then the second sale fell through at the last minute (after he gave downstairs neighbour notice) and now the flat is on the open market (the previous two were off-market so no viewings). We have been suffering 8-10 viewings a week which I know we don't have to allow, but I did because we have always got on well with the LL, even though he didn't have the common decency to ask us if we minded or offer a rent discount.

We haven't been given notice and our rent day is the 24th, so we'll be here until April 24th. The LL and his sister are very wealthy, very young (24 and 26) and this man is very old and very poor. Does anyone not agree that they could let him know he has another month under the new circumstances and withdraw all the threats? His rent cheque was returned uncashed this month.

OP posts:
expatinscotland · 31/01/2015 18:51

By all means help your neighbour, but stop indulging your fuckwit LL with their 8-10 viewings a week. You're not their to sell their fucking house and he's a twat for not asking/offering a discount.

LaLa5 · 31/01/2015 19:09

Your LL does sound like he's expecting a lot in terms of viewings!!! I would have felt completely uncomfortable asking my tenants to put up with that. We asked days in advance, let them pick the time and gave them a discount on the rent while the flat was on the market, to apologise for the inconvenience.

After it sold we bought them a present to say thank you for all their co-operation. The idea of cancelling your party or putting up with three hours of photo shoot is mad!

scott2609 · 31/01/2015 19:57

I've responded to your post on legal, but though I'd put it up here as well in case it's of use to any other posters- bit more traffic here.

scott2609 · 31/01/2015 19:57

I second calling Shelter- they have a Legal Aid contract and providing he qualifies financially for LA, he'll be able to get ongoing advice and representation from one of their advisers if they have capacity to take the case on. They're great though, and will seek somewhere else out to advise him if not. This will be particularly helpful if he make a homeless application, as local authorities are notoriously good at 'gatekeeping' and refusing assistance even where there would be a legal duty to re-house.

However, I hope I can offer some reassurance to you about this (I'm a legal adviser working specifically in this area of law, though not for Shelter).

Based on what you've described, he'll have an assured shorthold tenancy and you've already said he's on a rolling contract. The landlord must show that they have served him with two month's written notice of their intention to seek possession. This notice will be valid providing they have given at least two months notice and (depending on whether he moved in after 2007 or not) they protected any deposit paid in a government- backed scheme and served him with the basic prescribed information about where the deposit is registered etc within 30 days of receiving the money. No need any longer, on a rolling contract, for the notice seeking possession to end on a specific day of the month (after a case in 2013 changed this).

Landlord must get an outright order for possession from the county court, then a Warrant Of Possession (bailiff's warrant) in order to lawfully seek possession. All applications will be considered by a District Judge, either on paper or at a hearing, and unsurprisingly, if they notice any problems they're likely to dismiss outright, or arrange a hearing on the matter. Better if your neighbour has a legal adviser from Shelter to pick up on any problems nice and early though- can't always rely on the court, and mistakes do sometimes get overlooked, particularly on paper applications for possession.

Realistically, the landlord could accrue legal fees of £2000 but this is SO unlikely. For fees that high in a straight forward case like this, they would have to be hiring a barrister. It is a District Judge who decides whether the fees proposed by the claimant landlord are 'reasonable' and hiring a barrister, or even a senior solicitor, for this type of case would likely be considered completely disproportionate in the circumstances, so would be disallowed, not necessarily in full though.

If, however, there was a potential defence to the proceedings (for example, the notice is invalid, the deposit wasn't protected) then costs could be higher as there'd be at least one hearing at court. This doesn't mean he'd end up paying them all though. Shelter would be able to give advice upon consideration of his circumstances as to any likely defence, and could undertake court work if there was. They could dispute excessive legal costs.

If a landlord hires a solicitor to undertake the work for them, you'd usually expect to see the average possession case like this costing around £400- £600. He can request the court allows him to pay it by installment, but this will means he gets a CCJ, which will affect his credit rating, against his name.

The reason the landlord hasn't accepted rent (they've definitely had legal advice!) is because they don't want any potential defence raised that they've accepted money and inadvertently created a new tenancy for him. They can charge 'mesne (pronounced 'mean') profits' which would secure them on this though- a way to get their rent money from him without the argument re: creating another tenancy.

More than happy to give you further housing advice if you would like- but he must get proper advice. It is so important in these cases to have a legal professional consider his specific circumstances- I can only ever be general.

Grrmum · 31/01/2015 20:41

Thanks Scott for your very informative post. I am sure they served notice properly, and as our deposit is protected, I'm sure he did the same for neighbour. I'm going to contact shelter tomorrow.

You mention that notice for possession no longer needs to end on a specific day of the month. Can I just check, while i have you here, that the notice period still runs from the start of the rental period?

Many thanks

OP posts:
scott2609 · 01/02/2015 08:35

Not a problem at all, always happy to advise.

Providing your neighbour has had a fixed term tenancy which has come to an end (hence he's now on a rolling contract) then all your landlord must demonstrate is that he's served two month's written notice. It doesn't even have to state that it's under Section 21 of the Housing Act 1988, and it wouldn't have to run from the start of the rental period.

I'm sure you're not interested (it's one of the more boring cases we have to learn!) this changed because of a case called Spencer v Taylor:

nearlylegal.co.uk/blog/2014/07/spencer-v-taylor-section-21-news/

UncleT · 01/02/2015 08:41

Grrmum no, no confusion here. It seems you're confused about rhetoric, and have failed to spot that the faux-interrogative reaction was actually a complete dismissal of the relevance of karma in this equation. However, if you're still seriously confused then feel free to ask away.

Grrmum · 01/02/2015 09:26

I don't think karma is irrelevant in this equation. The reason I say this is because my AIBU was not about the legality of the situation, but about the morality. If they treat their tenants badly, their tenants will perhaps get an opportunity for comeback. You also missed the Grin after my comment - this is a common little trick people who don't have their head stuck up their ass use to denote a light-hearted comment. Here's another one for practice Grin

OP posts:
UncleT · 01/02/2015 16:21

Well that's where we differ. They can sell their place and should not be made to feel bad or labeled so because of it. Everyone knows the deal when they rent.

UncleT · 01/02/2015 18:12

And no, ignored doesn't mean the same as misses. Also, you seem mistaken about not having your head up your arse anyway, particularly as you seem to want to decide for people when and how they should or shouldn't sell their own property.

UncleT · 01/02/2015 18:12

*missed

Thymeout · 01/02/2015 19:56

There's a right and a wrong way of doing something. I agree with Scott that their behaviour towards the tenant borders on harassment.

If they had put him in touch with agencies (not agents) who could help him or offered to pay his removal costs, I would be more sympathetic to their predicament.

FreeWee · 01/02/2015 20:26

Grrmum I think you're my new favourite poster Wine Grin (...long day made me chuckle)

Legally lots of people know way more than me but yes morally speaking they are forcing a situation that they don't need to force. They don't want to be stuck with a sitting tenant but LLs forget their investments are people's homes. We've lived here 7 years (owned) & if we'd rented and been asked to leave we'd struggle in our local area to find something that meets our needs so well. He may need to consider wider areas but if he's not the sort to hop from house to house then he'll want to find a home he's comfortable in. A friend recently began renting for the first time in years starting looking end of November. Only moved in today as loads go quickly and Christmas is quiet. With a neighbour like you hopefully he'll be fine.

londonrach · 01/02/2015 20:43

Talk to shelter or cab. If notice has been given im afraid your poor neighbour has to leave. However you can refuse viewings. Always surprised people dont know this. 8 viewings per day. Thats awful!!!!!

MidniteScribbler · 01/02/2015 20:49

The landlord gave the tenant two months notice to leave. He's still there a month after that. That's been three months to find himself a new property and he still has taken no steps to do so. I'm not surprised the landlord is expecting to have a legal battle on his hands, the tenant looks like he has dug his heels in and has no intention to move.

And this is really none of your business. If the landlord is doing everything by the book, then you can't stop him from doing it. Just sort your own housing out, and let the landlord deal with the tenant. If you stick your nose in, you might find that the karma that you are so keen on works against you and you find yourself with a notice to leave before your new property is ready.

Grrmum · 01/02/2015 21:02

I think we should treat our fellow man with kindness and compassion and I aim to do this in life whatever the law says.

You could draw a parallel here with people who use legal loopholes to avoid paying their tax. They are not technically or legally wrong - are we wrong to criticise them?

OP posts:
ShebaRabbit · 01/02/2015 21:06

Hooray for good neighbours like you Grrmum, hopefully this man will find better accommodation with a decent LL who doesn't believe in threatening pensioners, its a pity he'll be losing such a good neighbour. Community is the hallmark of a civilised society.
I'm stunned at the aggressive support for property rights over an old man having some difficulty coming to terms with losing his home.

Thymeout · 02/02/2015 08:18

The tenant has already packed up some of his possessions. He is obviously not intending to dig his heels in and stay.

I think some of you are unrealistic about how easy it is to find alternative accommodation, especially over the Xmas period, when you are 70, on a limited income, and may not have the savings to shell out on exorbitant fees from estate agents.

Grrmum · 02/02/2015 12:02

Exactly Thymeout he has several friends looking on the internet for him and he is registered with all the agencies. He is desperate to go and live somewhere he can relax. I think he is shocked at what he will get for the same money.

OP posts:
New posts on this thread. Refresh page