Please help re flat deposit

EagerLearner

irishjohn wrote:

Boy have I been hungry for news and looking forward to you coming back - totally agree with you on XMAS hols - done Canaries - twice, South Africa - twice, San Francisco - once, and Amsterdam twice - now I am home in Ireland taking care of elderly mum because I have a selfish pair of siblings who have never really bothered. And gusee what happens - this year my little bro (51 on Jan 1 ) and his cow of a wife decided to invite Mum for Xmas dinner - and of course i got an indirect invite (Mum - tell John he is very welcome to join us) but I stopped home on my own and had a lovely day pleasing myself - why should I go to them and be the entertainment!!

Anyway - great news on the court date, good job you went along. So she is using the address we located the details on is she? the little two bedroom terrace? Sounding like an asset rich cash poor being to me - and soon - asset rich cash poorer -

I wish the court would accept a petition signed by all of us - demanding hard labour !!

Thanks IrishJohn - nice to be missed even if the subject is such a lengthy saga! Sorry to hear about your siblings - seems like whenever bros and sis are around, someone always does more work than others, and they are clearly trying to rile you! Glad you didn't let it get to you and you enjoyed yourself - their dinner would prob have been a weird atmosphere anyway...

nrsql

Yep - sounds like she is appealing on the grounds that the original case wasn't notified and trying to get the judgement set aside.
I'm guessing that given that she still doesn't have a usable address (I believe you tried to use this c/o address and were told that you couldn't) that the case might be pretty short

The details were sent to this address and I didn't get them as this is my address.
That is a c/o address so cannot be used.
case dismissed.

Wouldn't rely on that though - go ahead as if you have to present everything again. Probably mentioning the case with the agent is a good idea - especially the thin ice bit.

Mrs_pbradley936

I would write to Court immediately and tell them that she deliberately withheld her address spite of having a legal obligation to provide an address for service of Notice. This is the reason that you were compelled to involve the Letting Agent in your original claim. The Landlady has only surfaced following the Court appearance by the Letting Agent on such and such date. You have already been award judgement and you feel that it should stand. I would also send a copy to the Letting Agent.

franklee

When you win on the 17th, as I'm sure you will, don't forget that you need to be very clear on how you are going to collect the money. So be sure to explain to the judge that the current address is the dodgy decorators and not the landladies address and ask him should you need to send the bailiffs round what address should you send them to. Hopefully the judge will make the landlady cough up her actual address only the bailiffs won't be able to seize possessions from dodgy decorator Gloria.

Once you get the landlady in court you need to cut off all her wriggle room!

Also if you can collect proof of the landladies residential address, such as from the electoral roll, then you can show her to have deliberately dodged the other ruling by lieing about her address.

:j

barnaby-bear

franklee wrote:

So be sure to explain to the judge that the current address is the dodgy decorators
:j

A fact that makes the "receipt" and deposit witholding fraudulent :T

Edna_Bucket_2

Correct.

Any chance of persuading a member of the local Constabulary to attend and take notes on the 17th?

(might be interesting to "let slip" to the LA, that you've had that thought, if you are still in touch with them )

prudryden

Fraud is probably one of the hardest activities to prove in court - ranking right up there with trying to prove someone was incompetent to make a will on the day and hour and minute the person wrote the will. Even the Inland Revenue loses almost all their cases of fraud.

EagerLearner

How about this:

We write following the request for Setting Aside Judgment, filed by the first Defendant on 15th December 2006.

The defendant has deliberately withheld her address despite having a legal obligation to provide an address for service of Notice, not a c/o address.

This is the reason that we were compelled to involve the Letting Agent in our original claim, as no servable address for the landlord had been provided.

We therefore filed the claim at the landlords’ real residential address after several weeks of our own research. Lewes Registry Office have confirmed this address, which we will be using as evidence to show that it was an active address where the defendant would have received the court notifications.

The alternative address we have only recently been provided with is a c/o address and could not have been used by us to serve notice.

Both the letting agent and landlord were fully aware of the court action, as once it had commenced, we received a letter on 11th September 2006 stating that the landlady wished to enter into negotiation, which we will also be using as evidence. We felt communication had been exhausted on our part and continued the court process.

After several months of pursuit, the Landlord has only surfaced following the Court appearance by the Letting Agent on 13th December 2006 in which we mentioned pursuing criminal charges against both parties and the judge stated the letting agents were on ‘thin ice’ – the landlady filed her counterclaim 48 hours later.

We have already been awarded judgment and we feel that it should stand on this basis.

barnaby-bear

EagerLearner wrote:

How about this:

We write following the request for Setting Aside Judgment, filed by the first Defendant on 15th December 2006.

The defendant has deliberately withheld her address despite having a legal obligation to provide an address for service of Notice, not a c/o address.

This is the reason that we were compelled to involve the Letting Agent in our original claim, as no servable address for the landlord had been provided.

We therefore filed the claim at the landlords’ real residential address after several weeks of our own research. Lewes Registry Office have confirmed this address, which we will be using as evidence to show that it was an active address where the defendant would have received the court notifications.

The alternative address we have only recently been provided with is a c/o address and could not have been used by us to serve notice.

Both the letting agent and landlord were fully aware of the court action, as once it had commenced, we received a letter on 11th September 2006 stating that the landlady wished to enter into negotiation, which we will also be using as evidence. We felt communication had been exhausted on our part and continued the court process.

After several months of pursuit, the Landlord has only surfaced following the Court appearance by the Letting Agent on 13th December 2006 in which we mentioned pursuing criminal charges against both parties and the judge stated the letting agents were on ‘thin ice’ – the landlady filed her counterclaim 48 hours later.

We have already been awarded judgment and we feel that it should stand on this basis.

Additionally we believe the address filed to be a c/o address and non-servable under .... insert the laws I quoted before.... , the address provided is identical to that provided as that of a decorator for one of the disputed receipts for which the deposit was witheld, a receipt lacking VAT details and other qualities of a bona fide receipt. A c/o address would be inadequate for pursuing the judgement. The letting agent was and still employed/contracted to act as the landlords agent and they were notified on mulitple occasions throughout proceedings resulting in limited response from the landlord.
(I think the fact this address is dodgy and in disputed receipt important)

Under .... law quote ... we were entitled to a servable address. This was requested via the LA on numerous ... insert evidence... occasions.

The landlord currently uses multiple names as demonstrated by.... ,

We believe the served address to still be valid because....

irnbru_2

EagerLearner wrote:

We write following the request for Setting Aside Judgment, filed by the first Defendant on 15th December 2006.

Won't you have to attend court for this?

If so, I would just say that commencment with the ending of your tenancy that you tried to resolve this via the LA/LL and then list the dates of contact noting the explicit requests for the LL's address. Summing that up with the declaration that the c/o address wasn't valid for the letting agreement, the SCC itself and is different to the contact address given by the LA with whom she still has business.

Finally, pointing out the sheer coincidence in the dates of the LA case and her reply to the court ... as an aside