URGENT advice needed. Letting agent threatening to change locks on my door

jjlandlord

silvercar wrote: »

In the very first post, you said that the LA would expect you to pay for the cost of removing the new lock, so you need to reach agreement on that or it will be a deposit deduction.

Yes.
Though again, assuming the lock does not break any safety regulation (which is being debated), and especially if OP has proof of the police recommendation and professional installation, it is an improvement which benefits the landlord and thus I am really not convinced that deductions would be upheld by court/adjudicators.

GDB2222

Cissi wrote: »

Having actually received the notice she states that it's Ground 12 (post #214).

She said ground 10 previously. I'm obviously not quite managing to keep up with all the twists and turns.


GDB2222, you seem determined to assign some sort of sinister motive to the OP, but frankly, from all the information posted here, I don't think she's done anything to deserve the bullying behaviour of the LA!

What I did say quite clearly right at the start of this thread was that the way to handle this was to be reasonable and smooth things over. The OP was then urged on by lots of people to take the LA to court, or some such nonsense. Now she's been landed with a notice to quit in 2 weeks, which she can fight in court if she wishes. She's also being landed with a large legal bill, which I have my doubts about. (She has to pay the cost of issuing proceedings and a set amount for solicitor's costs if a solicitor is in fact used by the LL. Anything else depends on the terms of the lease but is probably not enforceable.)

But the real point is that the gung ho contributors from before are not offering to pay the OP's legal costs nor to help her fight the case in court, etc.

jjlandlord

QuantumSuccess wrote: »

The notice itself is called SECTION 8. It specifies a "ground 12" and says I am in breach of my contract. At the top of the page it says NOTICE SEEKING POSSESSION OF A PROPERTY LET ON AN ASSURED SHORTHOLD TENANCY.

Beneath that it says:

NOTICE PURSUANT TO SECTION 8 HOUSING ACT 1988

It should be very similar to form no. 3 there (the official prescribed form) otherwise it is not valid: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1997/194/made

Of course, as you wish to leave ASAP, at this point and in any case you should rather use the notice to negotiate an early surrender.

Cissi

GDB2222 wrote: »

But the real point is that the gung ho contributors from before are not offering to pay the OP's legal costs nor to help her fight the case in court, etc.

...but neither has the OP acted in any "gung-ho" way or responded to the LA in an aggressive way (assuming of course that what we're told here is the full story). The LA seems to have worked themselves into an instant frenzy, not giving her time to even try to smooth things over with the LL or put things right.

As for the Ground 10/12 confusion, presumably the OP isn't a specialist in tenancy law (any more than I am) and you can hardly blame her for not getting all the details absolutely right when relaying the LA's rantings, until she actually received the relevant paperwork!

QuantumSuccess

jjlandlord wrote: »

It should be very similar to form no. 3 there (the official prescribed form) otherwise it is not valid: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1997/194/made

Of course, as you wish to leave ASAP, at this point and in any case you should rather use the notice to negotiate an early surrender.

I can leave in 4 weeks. (I have somewhere to go then). Should I offer to surrender the tenancy in 4 weeks then? They could still take me to court, but there would seem to be little point...

anselld

dodger1 wrote: »

The agent has said that they wont be renewing the tenancy agreement and nothing about eviction prior to the end of said agreement. I take it that is legal and no reason has to be given?

Thats correct for section 21, but at the time the question was "what does section 8entail?"

angrypirate

QuantumSuccess wrote: »

I can leave in 4 weeks. (I have somewhere to go then). Should I offer to surrender the tenancy in 4 weeks then? They could still take me to court, but there would seem to be little point...

Methinks they are calling your bluff. A quick google shows that grounds 9-17 are discretionary – the court will make the Order only if it is reasonable to do so. I suggest calling Shelter and asking them for advice.
Also do you have evidence that the police recommended that you install this second lock? In which case a court would probably throw this out. Does your section 8 detail what term in the contract you have broken?
Do you have the details for the protection of your deposit?

You said in a few posts previously you had written to your actual Landlord including a correspondance from the LA - have you heard back from the Landlord?

If it turns out that your deposit isnt protected id suggest writing a stern letter to the LA saying that you'll leave once you hit 10 weeks and that you would like details of the deposit protection scheme because you cant find the details anywhere. Remind him that without it the LL is liable for up to 3 times the deposit regardless of any damage to the property.

jjlandlord

angrypirate wrote: »

Methinks they are calling your bluff. A quick google shows that grounds 9-17 are discretionary – the court will make the Order only if it is reasonable to do so. I suggest calling Shelter and asking them for advice.
Also do you have evidence that the police recommended that you install this second lock? In which case a court would probably throw this out. Does your section 8 detail what term in the contract you have broken?

Absolutely. As mentioned previously, the chance to get an eviction on the ground that tenant has installed an extra lock following police advice are very, very small in my opinion (I won't say nil but I'm thinking so )

But again, as OP now seems resolute to leave ASAP, she should use that notice to offer to surrender the tenancy by proposing to do that in 4 weeks (date she put forward as suitable).
If landlord accepts all is good. If he refuses, I'd say that'd be tantamount to invalidating the notice in effect.

silvercar

If landlord accepts all is good. If he refuses, I'd say that'd be tantamount to invalidating the notice in effect.

Could the landlord say OP need to go at the two point in the notice or he wants OP to stay to the end of the fixed term?

I'm a bit confused TBH, at the start I thought that OP wanted to stay but wanted the LA to back off and leave her quiet enjoyment of the property, now (even with the lock of dubious status) she feels insecure and wants to leave??

There is now talk of the landlord's legal costs, the lock costs, and the costs of moving. Not sure what the OP wants to achieve here,

jjlandlord

silvercar wrote: »

Could the landlord say OP need to go at the two point in the notice or he wants OP to stay to the end of the fixed term?

OP has signed up for the fixed term so before it expires she can only offer to surrender the tenancy and the landlord is free to refuse, in which case she'd have to wait until the end of said fixed term (she could move earlier obviously but would still be liable for rent, etc. until then)