Landlord, Leaseholder, Tenant

ViolaLass

K.Burgoyne wrote: »

Has my landlord breached my statutory rights? Definitely.

Has my landlord broken any laws? Hundreds.

Just to throw a spanner in the works and let the other side know they haven't considered everything can I use... Yes.

I've given you the answers you wanted, happy now?

K.Burgoyne

Doozergirl reported as troll and post spoiler.

Violalass I can see you gave the questions much consideration.

Waits to see if anyone has anything of value to say...........

BitterAndTwisted

Need specialist legal advice? Get it from a professional and pay for it.

You're not going to get any help on here after being so completely objectionable.

haras_nosirrah

Original poster reported as a troll and for abuse against other posters. lets stop feeding the troll people. Suggest thread left now. If op is genuine no one on here can help him. He has legal advice already and therefore he should accept what a solicitor he is paying for says over normal people who are trying to help and getting abuse for it.

K.Burgoyne

B&T and H_N once again facts of the case not read once again abuse of a newbie.

I've come to the conclusion that no-one actually knows anything apart from trivia like rotten carpets and broken matresses, to be honest a 10 yr old could answer most questions on this part of MSE.

The repetitiveness of questions here seems to justify its existence when really a few sticky's would wipe the board of questions

But yes your right H_N I do enjoy verbal table tennis especially when I know the intellect of my opponents is far below my own and I am getting better advise on other websites and wanted to see if that intellect could be matched or bettered on here but sadly this section of HSE falls well short of the others.

haras_nosirrah

I am going to go against my own advice of not feeding the troll but here goes...

kburgoyne wrote: »

"if a tenant occupies land of his landlord "as a mere extension to the locus of his tenancy", the occupation is not deemed to be adverse (Lord Hastings v Saddler). However, he will be entitled to occupy the land until the end of his tenancy (Smirke v Lyndale Developments)."

What you need to realise is that you are asking normal people on a money saving website these questions. We are not lawyers. Many have attempted to help you by giving you advise and asking further questions to try to understand your situation better and are being told that we are asking stupid questions and that we are intellectually beneath you for not knowing the answer to your questions. The simple answer is that your landlord seems to have made a mistake, has admitted it and has told you to seek legal advice. This seems to me the thing you should do. We don't know what you will be entitled to as we are not your legal team.

You will have to give the other occupier the use of the drying area of the garden and the cupboards. That much is clear as it wasn't yours to have in the first place. You may get compensation for having to give it up but give it up you will. I don't know why giving up a cupboard and allowing someone to use a clothes dryer in the garden will result in your business failing and your dog being put down but there you go.

I fear if having a private garden and cupboards is something you cannot live without you will have to move house. Will probably get some compensation to help you on your way.

I don't know what other answers you want from people. If you want more specialised advice then pay for it.

In terms of your quip about everyone else being more stupid than you I find that incredibly offensive. What right do you have to ask for advice and then abuse everyone for not knowing the finer points of Lord Hastings v Sadler? Why should any of us spend time researching this for you when you are rude to regular posters who give up their time to help others? I myself have two degrees, am professionally qualified to give financial advice, have worked as a financial advisor for 5 years, own my own home and am a landlord so I am more than qualified to give advice to others on this and the mortgages board. I am not a solicitor and therefore do not know the finer points in law and can't be bothered to look it up for you. If you were getting the correct answers on other forums then firstly why are you asking here? and secondly I suggest you go back there.

neverdespairgirl

K.Burgoyne wrote: »

NDgirl what would I like? I think my question indicates firstly I would like my landlord to recieve some sort of penatly separate to any action taken by me. This landlord recieves millions of pounds of tax payers money for various schemes it has signed upto with the government and is regarded as one of largest social housing landlords in the South yet time and time again it's maladministration is quite astounding.

We will lose so much here and our dogs survival is seriously in question so the £500 comp offer is not acceptable,

I think it's a good idea for you to focus on your own position, and leave the overall punishing of the LL as a separate matter.

Have you considered asking if you can transfer your tenancy to another place, with its own garden? That might solve the dog issue?

Yorkie1

If you don't like the advice from one of the most helpful posters on here then I suggest you pay a solicitor.

G_M

The best advice came from haras_nosirrah in post number 26.

Sadly he then ignored his own advice!

K.Burgoyne

NDgirl thanks for the attempt. H_N hmm but you've still can't resist a troll? everyone esle since my last post reported for trolling again.

Ok read and learn.

I asked the question if below applies to my situation

"If a tenant occupies land of his landlord "as a mere extension to the locus of his tenancy", the occupation is not deemed to be adverse (Lord Hastings v Saddler). However, he will be entitled to occupy the land until the end of his tenancy (Smirke v Lyndale Developments). "

Answer from another of course not here lol

A, a freeholder, lets a flat to C and includes the garden. Later, and before C's tenancy expires, he lets another flat and the garden to B who is unaware that the garden has been let to C. C is entitled to possession as he was first in time. However, B still has a tenancy of the garden*, albeit not one entitling him to possession whilst C's tenancy continues. If B takes possession of the garden his possession cannot be adverse against either A or C. This is because for there to be adverse possession B must have the intention to adversely possess which he cannot have because he believes he is in possession by virtue of his tenancy. Indeed, the mere fact that he has a tenancy precludes him from claiming adverse possession. If C wants possession B has to give it to him. B has a claim against A.

(*It is possible for a landlord to grant more than one tenancy of the same property; the second in time is known as a concurrent tenancy.)

Can't you just see and feel the quality of the answer compared to the trols on here, go on trol away I'll let you have the last trol. I've got a bet with my m8 which one of you it will be lol bye