DD is in a joint contract with two flatmates, both of which were her friends. In March out of the blue one of them - let's call her Alice - claimed she had vacated the premises and stopped paying bills. DD and the other flatmate argued that the bills were fixed monthly but the third flatmate did not care so DD and her flatmate shared it amongst themselves. The rent for March was paid. In previous emails, she had asked the landlord to allow her to pay less rent as she was covering rent for two places in the same town.
It came to light a few days ago that Alice had only partially paid rent for April and a small amount for May. Since Alice had insisted she pay the landlord directly from April, DD and her flatmate were unaware until the landlord emailed them. He told them he would be contacting guarantors or deducting from the deposit.
The two girls emailed Alice and asked why she was now withholding rent and reminded her of avenues for financial support they had recommended when Alice claimed she had financial hardship. I In response, Alice claimed they had not engaged in the tenancy replacement process enough. The reasons she had cited was the criteria and the lack of availability to conduct viewings. The girls had stated they would like to live with another student, early 20s to mid 20s and female. Alice had ignored this and sent them male professionals in their 30s and insisted to the landlord that since these prospects fit the objective criteria he should ignore the other's preferences and rent to them which he ignored. Moreover, in the beginning, when Alice had a cold she asked the girls if they could conduct viewings to which they obliged since they were available however after that she had emailed them asking for their schedules so she could book in viewings for them to conduct. The girls said they were away, occupied and could not do viewings with 30 minutes notice but Alice would not accept it.
Now, Alice is claiming the arrears is all their faults. The girls know that they are on a joint and several contract so would like to avoid a CCJ and would pay up if Alice does not by the deadline using hardship funds. However they are seeking to be reimbursed. Would this be likely given the circumstances? Alice claims she and her guarantor are unable to pay since her parent's home country is in conflict. We know if this is true and the girls win a MCOL judgement? she will get a CCJ but how likely is this? Also when raising a MCOL would it be best to do it after the tenancy has ended to ascertain the total debt.