tenancy ended by returning keys - advice requested

clutton_2

painsmith are well thought in the LL&T world...

""I think she got hung up on something called apportionment, when I think unreasonable behaviour might be more fruitful."


""if, and I know it's a big if I won I imagine I might be awarded costs.""

and if you lost you would have to pay their costs at £180 per hour...... plus court costs.......

let it go.....

some battles are not worth fighting

i think lawyers know more about legal defence than litigants in person.......

jakeyd

clutton wrote: »

painsmith are well thought in the LL&T world...

""I think she got hung up on something called apportionment, when I think unreasonable behaviour might be more fruitful."


""if, and I know it's a big if I won I imagine I might be awarded costs.""

and if you lost you would have to pay their costs at £180 per hour...... plus court costs.......

let it go.....

some battles are not worth fighting

i think lawyers know more about legal defence than litigants in person.......

I prefer to think of it as he who dares wins. The more I think about it, the more I'd like to see if you can really get away with lying (not misleading, not miscommunicating, but plain deliberately not telling the truth) in the eyes of the law. I'm well aware of how naive that sounds, but if all I invest is my own time, I'm willing to have lost that plus court costs at the end of the day.

clutton_2

""if all I invest is my own time""

AND the other sides costs if you lose..... dont go into this with rose-coloured glasses... you rarely get justice in the small claims court... its a game .... and truth often has no part to play - sadly....

jakeyd

clutton wrote: »

""if all I invest is my own time""

AND the other sides costs if you lose..... dont go into this with rose-coloured glasses... you rarely get justice in the small claims court... its a game .... and truth often has no part to play - sadly....

I beg to differ about small claims court - 10 years ago I was working for a company who refused to pay me for the notice period I gave them - took them to the small claims court and won everything I asked for, including back pay because they had tried not to pay me for bank holidays!

jakeyd

clutton wrote: »

""if all I invest is my own time""

AND the other sides costs if you lose..... dont go into this with rose-coloured glasses... you rarely get justice in the small claims court... its a game .... and truth often has no part to play - sadly....

Also I am assuming that costs are not always awarded - that's what you said earlier. So even if I lose I may well not have to pay costs. And this wouldn't apply to small claims court. I appreciate your advice and I wouldn't do anything rash but I feel if no one ever tries to correct injustice, nothing ever happens. If I lose in the small claims court, I can chalk it down to experience, but if I don't try I'll always wonder if I might have been able to prove something.

What are other people's experience of the small claims court?

jakeyd

This is very interesting. There is a case called Artworld Corporation v. Safaryan (2009). it's quite recent so perhaps some people here have not heard of it.

What it amounts to is a ruling that a LL acted in a way that proved a surrender by operation of the law took place,even though he claimed he didn't

you can see it at http://www.propertylawuk.net/ltsurrender.html (sorry I can't post links)

How this applies to my case is that the actions of the Agent, acting for the LL, in asking for surrender of keys, carrying out professional cleaning and check-out as required at end of tenancy could well amount to surrender by operation of the law.

They have already agreed now that they will pay the overpaid rent, and it is clear I had an agreement that the tenancy could end early if the LL made reasonable efforts to secure another tenant. Checking my emails, the agent has informed me that the LL gave them instructions which included him re-taking possession of the flat before another tenant arrived.

I think i have reasonable grounds for saying the tenancy ended when I agreed to surrender the keys, and that the LL did not keep to the terms of the agreement to end the tenancy which was contingent upon seeking new tenants.

I'm feeling a bit more confident.

mjm3346

I am sorry to hear there has been an apparent misunderstanding about our attempts to re-let the property you were contracted to rent until May this year.
Unfortunately ZZZZ, whom you have had some correspondence with, was unaware that another partner QQQQ had been marketing the property as immediately available since January. As it transpired QQQQ’s efforts resulted in a new tenant being found just after ZZZZ became aware of the new letting date. Fortunately, the misunderstanding between yourself and ZZZZ did not delay a new tenant being found and, as I am sure you will agree, 3 months is a very reasonable time to take to re-let the property allowing for marketing, making all the necessary background checks on prospective tenants, drafting contracts etc (The DPA prevents me from disclosing their details but two sets of prospective tenants failed the checks which of course delayed matters and was outside our control as was a further delay caused by a person who backed out just before he was due to sign). My secretary is just typing up the file copies of the letters to prove this.
I look forward to dealing with you in the future and please recommend us to your friends.
Remember at Wolftons service is not just our aim it is our way of life.

They might not go that far but I would imagine they will argue taking around 3 months to re-let does not seem unreasonably excessive, 4 to 6 weeks would be pretty good so they don't need to struggle much to justify the time taken.

Good luck with the ***'s anyway

jakeyd

mjm3346 wrote: »

I am sorry to hear there has been an apparent misunderstanding about our attempts to re-let the property you were contracted to rent until May this year.
Unfortunately ZZZZ, whom you have had some correspondence with, was unaware that another partner QQQQ had been marketing the property as immediately available since January. As it transpired QQQQ’s efforts resulted in a new tenant being found just after ZZZZ became aware of the new letting date. Fortunately, the misunderstanding between yourself and ZZZZ did not delay a new tenant being found and, as I am sure you will agree, 3 months is a very reasonable time to take to re-let the property allowing for marketing, making all the necessary background checks on prospective tenants, drafting contracts etc (The DPA prevents me from disclosing their details but two sets of prospective tenants failed the checks which of course delayed matters and was outside our control as was a further delay caused by a person who backed out just before he was due to sign). My secretary is just typing up the file copies of the letters to prove this.
I look forward to dealing with you in the future and please recommend us to your friends.
Remember at Wolftons service is not just our aim it is our way of life.

They might not go that far but I would imagine they will argue taking around 3 months to re-let does not seem unreasonably excessive, 4 to 6 weeks would be pretty good so they don't need to struggle much to justify the time taken.

Good luck with the ***'s anyway

Thanks for your good wishes. It's the first time I've been on this forum, and it's been really heartening how people have responded to what is a really irritating situation with realistic and useful advice.

I'm sure they will try every trick they can - but the more they appear untrustworthy and contradictory I would hope the less chance of their evidence being believed.

MissMoneypenny

Did you have contents insurance on your last house and if you did, did you take out the optional extra of Legal Cover (sometimes called Family Cover) on that policy? It would have been about another £18 - £21 on your yearly contents policy.

If you did have Legal Cover, look on the policy booklet to see if they excluded 'taking action against or defending yourself, against a landlord". If they haven't, then phone your insurers and ask for a Legal Cover Claim Form. Once you get confirmation they will take your case, they will appoint a solicitor/barrister who specialises in housing law, to deal with this matter for you. Win or lose, all it will cost you will be the excess of your insurance policy. If the landlord loses, he will pay all your legal fees.

jakeyd

MissMoneypenny wrote: »

Did you have contents insurance on your last house and if you did, did you take out the optional extra of Legal Cover (sometimes called Family Cover) on that policy? It would have been about another £18 - £21 on your yearly contents policy.

If you did have Legal Cover, look on the policy booklet to see if they excluded 'taking action against or defending yourself, against a landlord". If they haven't, then phone your insurers and ask for a Legal Cover Claim Form. Once you get confirmation they will take your case, they will appoint a solicitor/barrister who specialises in housing law, to deal with this matter for you. Win or lose, all it will cost you will be the excess of your insurance policy. If the landlord loses, he will pay all your legal fees.

Unfortunately not. Anyone know of any good solicitors' firms who I might contact to see if they might be interested. I contacted Pain Smith who were very dismissive. I know it sounds arrogant but my previous dealings with solicitors have not convinced me that they do a better job than a committed, intelligent and tenacious person with the time on their hands to deal with their own case.