Evict a rogue Landlord - Shelter...

RuthnJasper

sinbad182 wrote: »

You misunderstood my post tbs624 - I wasnt having a go at any Landlords, I was making a quip regarding the substantial number of tenants out there who use the law to take the !!!! out of long suffering DECENT LL's through non payment, refusal to vacate, damaging with intent etc. Maybe a campaign against them AND dodgy LL's would clean the rental market up somewhat!

For every rogue LL, there is an irresponsible, unreliable, or outright malicious tenant.

I agree. I do my best to be a good tenant to my housing association. It does annoy me when I see certain of my neighbours openly taking the p*ss, however. Sinbad is right; there are good and bad on BOTH sides. But I do think Shelter's campaign is very worthwhile; good luck to them.

theartfullodger

http://www.landlordzone.co.uk/news/shabby-hmo-landlord-must-pay-33000

A landlord must pay nearly £33,000 in fines and costs for running a shabby house in multiple occupation (HMO) with poor fire safety putting the lives of tenants at risk.
.
Sarah Goldsmith, 42, was found guilty of several HMO management rules at Watford Magistrates Court.

lynzpower

Just browsing as you do, digging up an old thread from the past.

oh look, disgraced tory joins ukip. http://moderngov.cheshireeast.gov.uk/ecminutes/mgUserInfo.aspx?UID=458

Well i never

vw100

Shelter do a fab job, however they also advise tenants on their rights such as not paying rent, and have to get a court order for eviction which can take months, and the landlord has to take the brunt of this. It seems unfair shelter hammers landlords, yet don't let out a whisper over rouge tenants from hell!

Pixie5740

Shelter don't advice tenants not to pay rent. They might, if a tenant has exhausted all other routes to getting a repair carried out, advise the tenant to deduct the cost of the repair from the rent but they don't tell people not to pay their rent.

theartfullodger

A landlord has been told to hand over £280,000 after a judge made a confiscation order under the Proceeds of Crime Act.

http://www.islingtontribune.com/news/2014/nov/holloway-landlord-handed-%C2%A3280k-fine-over-rents-illegal-housing


Well done Islington council!

theartfullodger

http://www.heraldseries.co.uk/news/11586156.Pensioner_landlord_convicted_of_benefit_fraud/

A PENSIONER has been convicted of fraudulently claiming thousands in benefits despite owning four houses.

Richard Denby, of Moorlands, Benson, near Wallingford, was found guilty of five counts of making false statements with a view to obtaining benefits between March 2000 and March 2008.
..etc etc etc...

Denby will return to Oxford Crown Court to be sentenced on November 28

theartfullodger

Camden Council says that private landlords should be licensed - but was taken to court itself after leaving two tenants in flats riddled with damp and mould

The Town Hall has apologised after a judge ordered the Council to carry out more than £20,000 of “urgent” work fixing damp, mould and mice infestations in council-owned properties after it was taken to court by tenants.

http://www.camdennewjournal.com/mouldy-flats

Well done that Judge!

Cheers!

theartfullodger

Southwark council found to have unlawfully evicted their tenant etc etc
http://nearlylegal.co.uk/blog/2014/10/unlawful-eviction/
&
https://civillitigationbrief.wordpress.com/2014/10/14/lies-evidence-disclosure-and-procedure-aa-v-london-borough-of-southwark-considered/

(1) The eviction was unlawful and an abuse of process both because the warrant was issued without the prior permission of the court and in the manner in which it was executed.

(2) The various officers of the defendant conspired to evict the claimant by unlawful means, to seize and destroy his possessions by unlawful means and to cause him harm and loss be evicting him of his possessions by unlawful means. This conspiracy was subsequently covered up by a further conspiracy which gave rise to abuse of process in the subsequent court proceedings and to a continuing deprivation of the claimant’s enjoyment of his tenancy and loss of his possessions.

(3) Three officers exercised their powers as public officers in relation to a local authority secure tenancy for an improper motive with the intention of harming the claimant by having him evicted when there were no reasonable grounds for his eviction and by arranging for his possessions to be seized and destroyed unlawfully.

(4) The claimant had, as a result of these facts, also been caused loss by the negligence of the defendant, by its breach of his right to the quiet enjoyment of his tenancy and as a result of the lack of respect shown to his private life by the defendant.

(5) The claimant was entitled to substantial damages that extended to special or general damages, aggravated and exemplary damages and damages for breach of contract and for the various torts he had been subject to and for equitable remuneration for the lost work stored on his hard drives, discs and memory sticks and for his lost photographs as well as a remedy for the loss of his tenancy on a basis still to be determined.

The council have now decided not to appeal but

Southwark's Housing and Communities Strategic Director has chosen to publicly announce that the judgment was 'unjust' and 'clearly wrong'

IANAL but does that not sound a little like contempt ??

jjlandlord

theartfullodger wrote: »

IANAL but does that not sound a little like contempt ??

No.
This is still (mostly) a free country and people can express opinions.