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

princeofpounds

This is so weird.

I think GDB's advice to 'smooth things over' is kind of missing the point that the agents were threatening eviction from the first moment. The OP originally thought it was just an issue over access and offered to provide a key even before the dispute blew up and repeated that offer. In the circumstances that was pretty reasonable 'smooth' conduct.

Then when it transpired that the particular issue (whether valid or not) was fire safety regulations concening locks I'm sure that the OP would have been quite happy to change it to a thumb lock or whatever, but the LA took the stance that they didn't care about such 'smooth' reasonable conduct.

It's hard to see how the OP could have been any more fair towards the LA without literally bending over in submission. All the aggression has come from the LA; at no stage have they attempted to reach a solution.

Contact with the LL would probably shed a lot of light on this. If this was me, I'd be inclined to sit it out and resist until the situation with the LL personally becomes clear, but that's because I'd be able to deal with the uncertainty and incidental costs given my personal circumstance.

I'm still convinced the LA is in this for ulterior motives, but am surprised it has gone so far. I'd certainly wait for the court summons as the Sec 8 could be a bluff, and I repeat again - why would the LA use the Section 8 when they could be using a much more certain Sec 21 route mere weeks down the line? There is no logic to it, and it's not as if this is a non-paying tenant!

Again, I cannot conceive of why a landlord would want a 3 year, regular paying tenant out over a tiny little lock which the tenant would be quite happy to put into the correct configuration if only a reasonable discussion should be had.

Is the landlord not visitable in person?

jjlandlord

QuantumSuccess wrote: »

It would seem to me that the LA (or LL) want me out and this is just an excuse for them to get me out, perhaps?

Or they are just bluffing to force you to comply.
In any case, do you want to leave or not? To me that's what should dictate what you should do now.

QuantumSuccess wrote: »

But then it seems very odd indeed to serve this Section 8 notice instead of just refusing to extend my contract at the upcoming end of the AST....

That's because not "renewing" the fixed term does not mean you should vacate. It just means that the tenancy becomes periodic...

QuantumSuccess

I wrote to the LL first-class Recorded Delivery on Monday. I just tracked the letter. It's not even been delivered yet. Good old Royal Mail.......

RAS

jjlandlord wrote: »

Or they are just bluffing to force you to comply.
In any case, do you want to leave or not? To me that's what should dictate what you should do now.



That's because not "renewing" the fixed term does not mean you should vacate. It just means that the tenancy becomes periodic...

Well given how unlikely a successful court result would be for the section 8 termination, if I was the LA, I would have made sure a valid S21 was served as well.

But then, he does not seem the think straight.

InkZ

Sounds like they are bullies throwing their weight around to me, and their motive is probably just to display power over someone.

QuantumSuccess

RAS wrote: »

Well given how unlikely a successful court result would be for the section 8 termination, if I was the LA, I would have made sure a valid S21 was served as well.

But then, he does not seem the think straight.

You see this is the million dollar question. Even if he had served a Section 21 yesterday instead of the Section 8 then I would be GUARANTEED to be out within 2 months or whatever as my lease period would be expired anyway. I just don't understand why he hasn't served the Section 21 instead.

princeofpounds

Had a bit of a dig around on the issue, and even if the a judge did think that installing a lock was a sufficient breach of tenancy to warrant repossession (HIGHLY unlikely IMO)...

If the tenant were to show them that they have been trying to remedy the breach but could not engage in constructive discussion to find out what would be a suitable remedy then they would have a good case for a suspended possession order rather than a possession order.

A suspended possession order is designed precisely for cases where the tenant is trying to comply but for some reason out of their hands is unable to do so. If the conditions of the suspension are met then the possession order is not enforced.

I can't see how any lawyer would advise the LA that they have a sensible or winnable case here. Add to that the fact that the notice was accompanied by a letter not from a lawyer but the LA (making all sorts of incorrect statements) makes me think that there is a possibility there is no real legal advice here at all.

QuantumSuccess

InkZ wrote: »

Sounds like they are bullies throwing their weight around to me, and their motive is probably just to display power over someone.

I 100% believe this to be the case at the moment.

princeofpounds

QuantumSuccess wrote: »

You see this is the million dollar question. Even if he had served a Section 21 yesterday instead of the Section 8 then I would be GUARANTEED to be out within 2 months or whatever as my lease period would be expired anyway. I just don't understand why he hasn't served the Section 21 instead.

Indeed. That's part of why I'd be so tempted to see it through some more, but that's totally an individual choice no need to satisfy my intellectual curiosity!

QuantumSuccess

Here is the exact wording of the letter that came with the Section 8 notice. Please note the letter is signed by the maniac at the LA.

"You are being served this notice in the presence of a witness. As a requirement under the Housing Act 1988 we cannot commence proceedings until after [gives date 2 weeks away]. Once the notice has expired, we will have our appointed representative prepare the possession proceedings against you. At a later date there will be a hearing of your application at the County Court. You will be required to attend this hearing. We will be successful in obtaining an Order for Possession (as against a Suspended Order for Possession).

Our charges to you for preparing the S.8 Notice will be £30.00 plus VAT. For the County Court Summons and steps up until a possession order is granted we charge £600 plus VAT for enforcement with the bailiff we charge £60.00 plus VAT. Full proceedings will begin on {gives date 2 weeks away}, where a court date will be requested. You must be aware that you will be liable for your own disbursement costs, like court fees, our fees and enforcement fees.

Please note that a possession order will also result in a county court judgement made against you for any outstanding fees that you owe us and this will affect your credit rating, and will make it impossible for you to get credit anywhere until such time as the debt is repaid.

IMPORTANT NOTE

Once the proceedings begin, the process will not be stopped. Please contact me at your earliest convenience. It is always best to liase with us to avoid unnecessary action. We will need to make regular visits to your property in case you abscond without communicating your intent to leave."