Our tenants have done a runner!!!!!!!!!!

prudryden

clutton wrote:

i think that the OFT has deemed "no smokers" and "no pets" as unfair terms of contract - not that it has been tested in law yet - whatever happened to freedom of choice ?

Hi Cl,
Correct. The OFT has given the "no pets" obligation as "an exampble of POTENTIALLY unreasonable prohibition". They further say "We are unlikely to object to a term prohibiting the keeping of pets that could harm the property, affect subsequent tenants or be a nuisance to other residents." Dogs and Cats would certainly be considered reasonable exclusions (perhaps excluding Guide Dogs) as it is a requirement that they be socialized, obedient, and extremely well trained.

Evidently, a goldfish is OK (as long as he doesn't grow up into a porpoise)

Didn't see anything on smoking. And with the Govt. views on smoking, I doubt that would be considered unfair to put into the contract "no smokers"
source: Guidance on unfair terms in tenancy agreements - September 2005

prudryden

clutton wrote:

there was a case where the tenant had been sent to prison, and reclaimed his house when released, the landlord took it to court and lost !!!!


there was another case where the tenants refused the landlord entry to do the legally compulsory CORGI gas inspection, and the landlord took it to court and lost !!!!

Interesting!! Would you happen to know the name of these cases (name vs. name) and the court? Or any web links referencing these cases?
Many thanks

clutton_2

sorry i dont, but, i have heard this from my professional landlords association, so, i have every confidence in its authenticity.

Sparky67

Can you not have access for the gas safety inspection as a term of the tenancy, then a refusal for reasonable access would be a breach of the tenancy terms...

BobProperty

Sparky67 wrote:

Can you not have access for the gas safety inspection as a term of the tenancy, then a refusal for reasonable access would be a breach of the tenancy terms...

So what next? You take them to court for a breach of the tenancy agreement, they counterclaim on the grounds of denial of "quiet enjoyment" and cite the previous case law, you lose and pay all the costs and possible damages.

Sparky67

I have a case on this at work but I'm at home at the moment and I can;t recall the specifics - I will try and look it up tomorrow and give further details, but I'm sure the landlords have fought back on this one at least...

.....to be continued!

Sparky67

black-saturn wrote:

But I thought they couldnt take possession until an eviction order had been placed?

I will check this out as well.

prudryden

Sparky67 wrote:

Can you not have access for the gas safety inspection as a term of the tenancy, then a refusal for reasonable access would be a breach of the tenancy terms...

Yes - You must give reasonable notice (24 hrs), after several more reasonable attempts, you are still unsuccessful, then the tenants are in breach of contract. Then you serve notice of possession.

The key is reasonable notification.
Try this. Read the bit under eviction:
http://www.harrow.gov.uk/ccm/cms-service/download/asset/?asset_id=361014

Tassotti

Back to the OP.

Were the keys posted back through the letterbox?

Other posters have mentioned the legal way of doing things, but sometimes, common sense has to prevail.

If it is obvious that the scumbags have gone and they owe you rent, take repossession, change the locks and readvertise for rent.

This happened to me in the past and I lost 10K so consider that you got off lightly.

Change managing agents and read LL Zone from back to front.

Good luck

Tass

Sparky67

prudryden wrote:

Interesting!! Would you happen to know the name of these cases (name vs. name) and the court? Or any web links referencing these cases?
Many thanks

I can't find a specific case on the gas inspection point, but the law is quite clear - the landlord cannot go in without the permission of the tenant, even if what he wants entry for is ultimately for the tenant's benefit! To force entry is at least a trespass and at worst a criminal offence.

Landlords remedies are either an injunction through the courts or possession proceedings for breach of a term of the tenancy. Even the tenant faces imprisonment for not allowing entry under an injunction, the landlord cannot force entry...

Another option is to get the local authority to serve an abatement notice under the Environmental Protection Act 1990 on the property - this is use where there is a statutory nuisance (ie a situation prejudicial to health and defined as something "injurious or likely to cause injury to health".) Argument follows that a house with unchecked gas appliances is a statutory nuisance. If the LA is sataisfied that a stat nuisance exists it can serve an abatement notice typically giving 14 days to comply with the terms (ie let us have access). If the period expires without a response an offence has been committed and the LA can apply for a warrant to force entry if need be!

PS please check out your position properly before relying on advice given here!

PPS re the OP - I think I did make the point that as long as the landlord had taken reasonable steps to confirm his belief the property was abandonded (ie an abandonment notice etc, then he could recover possession. He should keep evidence of this, just in case the tenant does pop out the woodwork claiming an illegal eviction! If he can show the court he had every reasonable belief the tenant had left (ie keys through letterbox/no rent paid/no furniture/ no response to abandonment notice/ neighbours confirmed they left at 2am in a transit van full of their furniture.... etc), he should be ok.