Please help re flat deposit

franklee

EagerLearner wrote:

Yeah he (newsagent) wasn't best pleased and thought it was a bit of a joke that she's asking them for cash when she owns the whole building and other properties too.

Oops! Don't suppose the newsagent will tell you the address she has given them would they, would be interesting to compare notes? Also do you or the newsagent know what car she drives? Only if ever you were in doubt she is living somewhere you could do worse than a look round to see if her car is parked near by. More chance of spotting that than her going in or out. Just in case she's still being evasive when you get to the cash collection stage. Every bit of evidence helps!

EagerLearner wrote:

Is this too much? I am planning to make 2 copies of all tomorrow.

Id' err on the side of taking it all even if it turns out you don't need it, you don't want to be caught short.

Mrs_pbradley936

Hi,

Take it all. Better to have and not need it than to need it and not have it.

EagerLearner

Hi all,

The newsagents rent the place via the letting agent, so they only have the latest c/o address. Off to work - will copy up all docs.

liz545

EagerLearner wrote:

What if she tries to claim cash problems in court - could she theoretically end up paying us tuppence a month from here to eternity???

If she wants to pay in installments, she has to apply for a varied order; this costs her money and will register a further black mark against her credit record. More info here: http://www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/infoabout/judgment/index.htm

dancingfairy

Good Luck with it all. We're all rooting (sp?) for you (still!!!). I really hope you get your money back and give some of the royalties of the novel of this to MSE won't you :rotfl: You will win and get your money back.

P.S I'll buy you a pint tomorrow what wouldyou like (sorry it's only virtual though) - maybe we shall all be having champagne tomorrow night on here!

hjb123

Good Luck for tomorrow.

Hope all goes well and let us know how you get on - you will be fine!

Voyager2002

No: this is simply incorrect! See below.

clutton wrote:

having a serviceable address on a contract is one thing - are we forgetting to focus on the point at issue here - EL - is going to court to get her deposit money back.

The court said she was in the right and ordered Mrs D to pay up. The money has not been paid. The claim is disputed. While the "address buisness" was important in the past - "Mrs Danvers" is now in court in person (hopefully).

The judge may well show no interest in the legality of the addresses on the AST - this is not the legal point he is there to look at.

If Mrs D is now contesting the court's earlier decision, (albeit on the grounds of non-delivery of documents) then the inventory is important - as this is the crux of the case.

EL says house is acceptably clean on handover.

Mrs D says it is not.

The judge will decide - and on balance your behavour EL has been absolutely impeccable - hopefully the judge will see that - but this is about LAW and not good/bad behaviour.

All the best girl, stay cool !!!

I'm sorry Clutton, but this hearing is not about the deposit issue: that was settled at an earlier hearing. This hearing is about whether or not that earlier judgement (in EL's favour) was correctly obtained. The view of the court is that if LL knew about the hearing but could not be bothered to attend, then tough. However, if she really did not know about the hearing and so had no opportunity to defend herself, then natural justice dictates that there should be another hearing so that her point can be presented to the court. So the hearing tomorrow (17th) will simply decide whether the judgement in EL's favour was valid or not. If judgement is "set aside" then there will have to another hearing to consider again how much (if anything) EL and LL owe each other. And the question of the address is key to determiing whether or not the earlier hearing was valid.

I speak from experience: a firm had obtained judgement against me in my absence, and I then applied for that judgement to be set aside. The hearing concerned the reasons why I did not attend the earlier hearing, and could not possibly have done so. Nothing about the actual case was discussed. Once judgement had been set aside a new date was set for another hearing to consider the actual debt.

The fact that LL, in her request for judgement to be set aside, talks about EL owing her more than the amount of the deposit, suggests that she does not understand what will happen at the hearing, which is a good sign.

zebulon

:eek: ooooooooooooooh

I thought it was all happening today!

what a disapointment

gelato_cat

Are any of them from the address she claims she is now at?

Suze

EagerLearner wrote:

- The 3 warning letters we sent in August, inc the returned envelopes from Royal Mail

RabbitMad

I would prepare youself for the worst - i.e the judgement gets set aside and that she will then be able to enter a defence and a counter claim.

Hopefully I am being pesermistic and the judgement shall be upheld, but I feel that the judge will want to give the defendant the ability to defend her case.

Also, don't be nervous, I sued a letting agent for a deposit about six years ago and the judge politely pointed out that I'd sued the wrong person. He just said we'll cross out the letting agents name and insert the landlord's and the whole process would start from the begining again.

good luck