Tenant gave false reference, a criminal offence?

Gingernutty

If someone gave a false reference for a job, then the charge is "gaining pecuniary advantage by use of a false instrument" - it's a 'kind of' fraud.

I should think this is a similar thing - the tenant used a false document to gain a tenancy - good luck with whatever you decide to do.

bluesnake

arlee wrote: »

I am sure if I did that, my tenant will surely accuse me of threatening and harassment in return! He has done that before just because I wrote to him(kindly) for rents.

Sounds like he has played this game before. I would register with someone like https://www.arla.co.uk, and get their advice then remove him asap.

Beforehand, always phone the employer. Expect to speak to a secretary. Expect the secretary to know the persons name, or at least be able to look it up on email or find who his manager is.

Yorkie1

Gingernutty wrote: »

If someone gave a false reference for a job, then the charge is "gaining pecuniary advantage by use of a false instrument" - it's a 'kind of' fraud.

I should think this is a similar thing - the tenant used a false document to gain a tenancy - good luck with whatever you decide to do.

I think you're confusing 3 different offences there.

Obtaining a pecuniary advantage by deception was repealed a few years ago.

Making / using a false instrument is a valid offence but pecuniary advantage isn't a relevant element of the offence.

Fraud now replaces the pecuniary advantage / deception offence.

notts_phil

How did u landlord friend find out his ex remnant had committed fraud?

arlee

bluesnake wrote: »

Sounds like he has played this game before. I would register with someone like https://www.arla.co.uk, and get their advice then remove him asap.

Beforehand, always phone the employer. Expect to speak to a secretary. Expect the secretary to know the persons name, or at least be able to look it up on email or find who his manager is.

I am a member of the national landlord association, their advice is only use the rent arrear grounds 8, 10 and 11, leave the ground 17 as its more hassle to prove, but I don't really agree with it, as in this case I have already got confirmation from SRA that my tenant is not a registered solicitor and the firm doesn't exist at all.

arlee

poppysarah wrote: »

And why didn't you check it at the time?

Checked by a tenant referencing company, but they failed to spot it, now they refuse to do anything about it claiming no responsibility...
I am focusing on getting rid of the tenant first then will reason with this company.

jjlandlord

I agree with you, arlee.
In any case, it costs you nothing to add ground 17 in addition to the others.

Re. the referencing company: it seems obvious from your description that if they had indeed checked the reference they would had found out.
So to me this indicates that they did not carried out the checks that they were paid to do.

DVardysShadow

arlee wrote: »

Checked by a tenant referencing company, but they failed to spot it, now they refuse to do anything about it claiming no responsibility...
I am focusing on getting rid of the tenant first then will reason with this company.

I think you are right. The evidence seems to be virtually cut and dried that they did not check him out. Once he is out, you will know your losses. So a 2 part claim firstly the fee - because pants down, they did not do their job and secondly your losses.

On the fee, I would expect you to win, on the losses, I suspect you may find that your more recent losses will not be covered if he has been a tenant for 18 months. But it is worth making the full claim because it will be very damning for a referencing company to lose its fee because of an error like this. I would expect some negotiations for an out of court settlement.

arlee

Thanks for all...

Just wondered is there any solicitor out here can give some comments on the FRAUD as police insists that my tenant is not a fraud, unless I can prove he has gained something apart from the tenancy and caused losses (again except the unpaid rent) from his false representation.

clutton_2

he has obtained a tenancy by deception. You can claim your consequential losses against him in the small claims court. The police would have to prosecute him for deception. But this deception, and your losses are in the fine line between criminal-civil legislation and the hard-pressed police will always choose to say its a civil loss, therefore, a small claims court matter, unless it is a million pound deception !