fake landlord, what do we do?

BitterAndTwisted

I have a suspicion that Messrs A and B are most probably related. In certain cultures assets and property, although registered to and mortgaged by a certain family-member, are often informally held in trust for the whole family. I'd be interested to hear Mr B's reaction when told that the property had been registered with agents by Mr A who then found tenants for someone other than the registered owner

Jowo_2

Fire_Fox wrote: »

..

Under normal circumstances your landlord (who can only be Mr. B as he owns the flat) would be legally responsible for returning your deposit and for the actions of his agent. ...

To be honest, my understanding is that ownership and being a landlord don't necessarily have to be the same thing - a mesne or intermediate landlord is legal.

Your suggestion for the OP to check if the agency belongs to a professional body is a good idea as they sometimes have a complaints procedure/code of ethics. Unfortunately, most agents resist belong to a professional body since their entry criteria includes a requirement o have indemnity insurance, protect clients money, that their staff are trained/qualified and other such things that agents don't like to have in place...

The landlordzone website tends to have housing solictors as members. They may be able to advise the OP if she should take her current landlord (Landlord to court for failing to protect the deposit, suing him for x3 the sum of the deposit, and instruct him that any dispute he has about the original deposit should be taken up separately and directly with Landlord A.

G_M

You might try taking Mr. B to the small claims court if you have a correct postal address for him,

I don't quite see what grounds there is for this? Mr B has now granted a valid tenancy (we assume!), and taken no deposit, so what would the OP be claiming?
Mr A, on the other hand, apparantly granted a tenancy he was not entitled to grant, and has disappeared with the deposit. However he did not sign a written tenancy nor receipt the deposit, so the paper trail is dependant on a) the agents linking OP to Mr A and b) rent payments to Mr A, which appear to have been cash (with/without receipt?). All in all pretty dodgy.

Hence my suggestion to use Mr B to get everything formalised and "I'd write to Mr B, who is your landlord now, asking which deposit scheme your deposit has been lodged with....As Mr A & B know each other, that should start an interesting discussion between them!"

Fire_Fox

G_M wrote: »

I don't quite see what grounds there is for this? Mr B has now granted a valid tenancy (we assume!), and taken no deposit, so what would the OP be claiming?
Mr A, on the other hand, apparantly granted a tenancy he was not entitled to grant, and has disappeared with the deposit. However he did not sign a written tenancy nor receipt the deposit, so the paper trail is dependant on a) the agents linking OP to Mr A and b) rent payments to Mr A, which appear to have been cash (with/without receipt?). All in all pretty dodgy.

Sorry typo, intended to say take Mr. A to court and get address from Mr. B Have now edited to make sense.

Fire_Fox

BitterAndTwisted wrote: »

I have a suspicion that Messrs A and B are most probably related. In certain cultures assets and property, although registered to and mortgaged by a certain family-member, are often informally held in trust for the whole family. I'd be interested to hear Mr B's reaction when told that the property had been registered with agents by Mr A who then found tenants for someone other than the registered owner

Maybe so, but one person cannot be held responsible for the actions of another adult simply because they may be related! If Mr. A acted without the consent of Mr. B then his actions are potentially fraudulent. IMO only if Mr. B consented to the subletting is he liable.

Jowo wrote: »

To be honest, my understanding is that ownership and being a landlord don't necessarily have to be the same thing - a mesne or intermediate landlord is legal.

Quite true, but the OP states that "After contacting Mr B, it became apparent that not only was he the actual landlord of the property, he didn't even know we'd moved in there!!!" which suggests to me this was not a legitimate case of subletting.

clairebear85

G_M wrote: »

Mr A, on the other hand, apparantly granted a tenancy he was not entitled to grant, and has disappeared with the deposit. However he did not sign a written tenancy nor receipt the deposit, so the paper trail is dependant on a) the agents linking OP to Mr A and b) rent payments to Mr A, which appear to have been cash (with/without receipt?). All in all pretty dodgy.

We did sign a tenancy agreement with Mr A, but he didn't give us a copy of it, he said he'd post us a copy but didn't.
We paid the first months rent in cash in advance, then by the time the rent payment was due to go out we'd realised who the real landlord was and we pay him by standing order every month.

clairebear85

I think I know which building Mr A lives in but not which flat. I might hang around there to get his postal address.
I spoke to community legal advice today and they say our case is with Mr A, as he lied to everyone in order to let the property and get the deposit from the estate agents.
By 6 month rolling contract I mean where after 6 months you just keep going on a month by month basis.

clairebear85

And thankyou for all this help and advice.

G_M

We did sign a tenancy agreement with Mr A, but he didn't give us a copy of it, he said he'd post us a copy but didn't.
We paid the first months rent in cash in advance, then by the time the rent payment was due to go out we'd realised who the real landlord was and we pay him by standing order every month.

This confirms my concerns about the paper trail - or rather lack of it. You have no contract signed by Mr A, no receipt for the deposit signed by Mr A, and paid cash on the only occassion you paid rent to Mr A (with/without receipt?).

The point is there is no written evidence to show a court that Mr A fraudulently rented you the property. It's your word against his.

By 6 month rolling contract I mean where after 6 months you just keep going on a month by month basis.

Not that it's really relevant to your problem, this is a 6 month fixed term AST. All ASTs become periodic (rolling) when (and only when) they expire, if the tenant remains and the fixed term is not renewed.

00ec25

this sounds like it is bordering upon theft by deception so you could report it to the police. However, as GM says, the lack of a paper trail will probably mean they have no interest or ability to action it