HELP! Son's L/lady got repo court date!

neverdespairgirl

Treadmill wrote: »

Do mortgage companys write to the occupier ? I don't think so. Tut Tut for tampering with someone elses post.

Yes. As standard, they write two letters, one to the named mortgage people, one to "The Occupier" at the address. If the mortgage holders are living there, then they get both.

MoneySavingSpender

I hope your son has started to look for alternative accomodation.

When did he take out the tenancy?

I assume it's an AST and his deposit is held in a scheme right now.

Shame about the timing, if it'a a standing order then chances are it's too late to stop the standing order going through on Monday.

What efforts has your son made to contact the Landlord?

Has he called Shelter? What advice did they give?

ruggedtoast

If the court grant a repo then the AST isnt worth the paper its written on.

floss2

MoneySavingSpender wrote: »

I hope your son has started to look for alternative accomodation. Yes...as we type

When did he take out the tenancy? 21 June...4 weeks ago

I assume it's an AST and his deposit is held in a scheme right now. Yes - at least they won't have that problem

Shame about the timing, if it'a a standing order then chances are it's too late to stop the standing order going through on Monday. No S/O set up as yet, they're paying by transfer on Monday (21st)

What efforts has your son made to contact the Landlord? Can't get hold of her ATM :rolleyes: But has got agents trying her too

Has he called Shelter? What advice did they give? Yes, "Pay rent, contact lender"

I'm also puzzled by the reference to the legal firm who drew up their contract, did the tenants arrange for the tenancy agreement to be drawn up? That's very unusual.

Sorry, I meant their guarantor's documents...but they're checking that advice out.

Thanks for your quick responses guys I've passed on the advice & we're just playing a waiting game now. Explains why she was a bit twitchy before htey signed & was desparate for them not to back out though.

MoneySavingSpender

I would do my very best to put a stop to that payment going through on Monday... despite the above advice saying the LL still technically owns the place and is owed rent etc (being a landlord myself, LL's who renege on tenants like this just give the rest of us a bad name tbh)

As for your last comment about the LL being "twitchy" may I be arrogant enough to assume we have learned to trust our instincts now?

Also I wonder if the land registry check (£3 online)before taking up the tenancy would of revealed anything about the mortgage on the place?

franklee

So the tenancy was only four weeks old when the repossession hearing letter arrived. This means the arrears etc. must have been going on for some time before the property was let to your son. So there is no consent to let and the landlord has been less than honest. In which case I'd stop paying rent and move asap.

PS It could be worse, here is a case where the property was let after the possession order was granted which just shows how vulnerable tenants are in these days of more repossessions. All tenants need to check for consent to let from the lender before taking a property - something for your son to do next time

http://landlordlaw.blogspot.com/2008/05/agents-letting-property-subject-to-re.html

MoneySavingSpender

franklee wrote: »

So the tenancy was only four weeks old when the repossession hearing letter arrived. This means the arrears etc. must have been going on for some time before the property was let to your son. So there is no consent to let and the landlord has been less than honest. In which case I'd stop paying rent and move asap.

PS It could be worse, here is a case where the property was let after the possession order was granted which just shows how vulnerable tenants are in these days of more repossessions. All tenants need to check for consent to let from the lender before taking a property - something for your son to do next time

http://landlordlaw.blogspot.com/2008/05/agents-letting-property-subject-to-re.html

Interesting link, how are tenants supposed to know whether or not a possession order exists on a property when signing a tenancy agreement indeed.., LA's presenting LL's with a simple sheet saying there isn't doesn't prove sweet FA...

I can't help but think the Land Registry should be kept up to date with such information so that it is available for potential tenants to check as LA's can be ignorant and LL's lie unfortunately.

It would be interesting to know what advice more experienced tenants or LL/LA's have to say about this.

franklee

MoneySavingSpender wrote: »

Interesting link, how are tenants supposed to know whether or not a possession order exists on a property when signing a tenancy agreement indeed.., LA's presenting LL's with a simple sheet saying there isn't doesn't prove sweet FA...

I can't help but think the Land Registry should be kept up to date with such information so that it is available for potential tenants to check as LA's can be ignorant and LL's lie unfortunately.

Well as I have been saying the tenant can ask for some proof of the lender's consent to let. I doubt a lender would give consent to let after they have been awarded a possession order. On moneybox they suggested the tenant write and ask the lender if there is consent, I don't know how practical that actually is but worth a shot if in any doubts. (Getting the lender from the land registry).

MoneySavingSpender wrote: »

It would be interesting to know what advice more experienced tenants or LL/LA's have to say about this.

Oh thanks

Florian_2

Hi I used to work in housing law and so know a bit about this. The letter your son received is called in the jargon a "Notice to Occupier". It is required by law when a mortgagee seeks possession of a property. Its purpose is to make anyone resident in the property, including tenants, aware that the property is subject to a claim for possession.

Sadly your son is in a rather vulnerable position. He will only retain his right to remain in residence if he is an "authorised" tenant. He is deemed authorised either if (1) his landlady had informed her mortgage company of the existence of the tenancy under the terms of a buy-to-let mortgage or (2) the tenancy existed prior to the inception of the mortgage. If either of these situations apply, and assuming that the mortgage company obtain an Order for Possession against the current landlady, the mortgage company would then assume the role of landlord. However, in all likelihood they would then seek to evict your son by way of landlord and tenant proceedings. Nevertheless, It seems highly unlikely, given that the tenancy is only four weeks old, that this is an authorised tenancy. Therefore the tenancy is deemed unlawful. Consequently, if an outright Order for Possession is made against the landlady your son and his friends are left high and dry.

Of course the landlady may convince the District Judge that she is able to maintain the mortgage and clear any arrears and thereby avoid an Order for Possession. She may well use the existence of your son's tenancy as evidence of her ability to pay. However, you now know that she has missed at the very least two mortgage instalments and is not exactly trustworthy. Also, if she does manage to convince the District Judge to make a Suspended Order for Possession and then defaults in the future, her mortgagee can obtain a Warrant for Possession without need of any further court hearing.

One positive is that there should be a bit of time for your son to find alternative accomodation. Assuming that the Notice to Occupier has just been received it will be at least a fortnight until the hearing.Following that it will be a minimum of 28 days, and in practice probably a couple of weeks more, before the bailiffs come knocking.

So, in short he should find a new flat as soon as he can and keep his money for funding that.

SquatNow

Can the tennant attend the repo hearing?

Just a thought... might be good if they could make their case.

judges are sometimes reasonable people, and might issue a repo date further away to give the tennants time to find somewhere else.

At a minimum attending the repo hearing will let the tennants know where they stand and give them a few days extra notice.