MAJOR help needed... typical LA

Annabee

Would it be possible for Marlie to name and shame the agency involved? Or would that not be a good idea legally from MSE's point of view? (Don't see why though, as she is presumably just telling exactly what happened).

At least other MSE-ers in York could have a heads up about whether or not to use them in the future.

And I do see why she backed down in the end. Must be very hard to stay strong whilst getting NO support and backup from the Police/Council. The council person was a waste of space, tenants' rights officer? - huh! A disgraceful situation all round.

MacMickster

Annabee wrote: »

Would it be possible for Marlie to name and shame the agency involved? Or would that not be a good idea legally from MSE's point of view? (Don't see why though, as she is presumably just telling exactly what happened).

At least other MSE-ers in York could have a heads up about whether or not to use them in the future.

And I do see why she backed down in the end. Must be very hard to stay strong whilst getting NO support and backup from the Police/Council. The council person was a waste of space, tenants' rights officer? - huh! A disgraceful situation all round.

I second this. I doubt that any tenant would want to get involved with these shysters in the future if it could be avoided. I also hope that a few landlords in York would decide to drop them as agents.

Marlie. I have just read this whole thread and can't express how downright angry I feel that these pondlife feel that they have the right to treat you in this way.

I fully understand why you let them in. A doorstep confrontation is something which is easy for people to advocate from a keyboard elsewhere in the country, but not so easy to deal with as a woman on your own when you are still having to live there for a while longer. You should feel proud of the actions that you have taken to stand up to these scum.

I would love to see Martin Lewis actually take something like this up personally - maybe a TV show on tenants rights. This may help to prevent more people from being intimidated by people like these, or at least giving them the kind of knowledge about their rights that has been so lucidly shared by Ben in this thread.

ruggedtoast

marliepanda wrote: »

Hello!

Sorry for the delay in replying, but took my friend out for a sandwich and he helped me take some heavy boxes to the PO.

Firstly the 'boss' of the letting side came to talk to me. He said that he was sorry for the emails and that it was a conflict between the 'letting side' which I am the first priority of (I have been a fine tenant for 5 years) and the 'selling side' who I currently have issues with. I said I have issues with whoever is threatening to break into my house.

It was quite awkward as the guy who came to see me (without Des and whoever else) is the son of the man sending the harassing emails. I said I was extremely distressed by the emails, and I also stated that I had been reasonable with viewings and had allowed them in the previous Friday, and that my initial times I set out allowed for viewings every other Friday (ie this friday was an off week)

He said that he was surprised that the relationship had deteriorated to this point, and I said have you ever threatened to take someones door off. he said they were doing it at 4pm to an awol tenant who hadnt paid rent and they were concerned for the property. I said well I dont agree with that either but I am NOT an awol tenant and I have paid my rent!

Anyway after this discussion (held outside my home) I let him in for an inspection (stupid I know, but its very difficult in this situation ) I didnt 'let him off though' as he made comments such as 'whats on this carpet' and 'how do you find anything' I said I am moving, you cannot threaten me into coming round then expect me to keep it like a showhome! URGH.

Anyway I personally showed the viewers round. I did not let him in after the initial inspection. Yes I know I probably shouldnt have done this either but when Ive had very little back up from the police and the council its difficult. I made sure to point out that the reason my bike was in the bedroom is because the bike store keeps getting broken into!

Anyway I am sorry to those who wanted me to completely tell them where to go but I see now how little back up from anyone in authority that tenants get.

I have handed them a letter regarding viewings, stating who I do not want to deal with anymore and that all viewings must be expressly agreed to by myself. This was kindly editted for me by Ben and contains the relevant laws etc so hopefully this will be heeded. I have a copy for myself a witness to me handing over the copy.

Again, me being naive, but the man who came today was 'letting' whereas everyone I have spoken to so far has been selling. This shouldnt make a difference as they are partner companies, but that was 'one' of his explanations for the way it went down. He made some comment of how 'the relationship doesnt seem to be flowing normally' and I said that tends not to happen when you threaten to take someones door off.

Sounds like a reasonable outcome in the end then. They got a telling off, and you aren't worried about them breaking your door down anymore.

debrag

So they always intended to do the viewing then!

SavvyStudentSaver

Probably worth letting the TRO stand-in know about the viewing that you had to perform. Somehow I doubt this isn't the last incident you're going to have (which is absolutely dreadful to think), and if he knows the LA/EA's lying to him about why they want to come over, next time he's more likely to do his job properly.

I've read all of this with growing horror- and I feel a little sick having come to the conclusion, that the LA/EA got what they wanted pretty much. I don't think it's your fault in the slightest, but the fact that the police/person acting as TRO wouldn't uphold the actual law is just terrifying.

marliepanda

SavvyStudentSaver wrote: »

Probably worth letting the TRO stand-in know about the viewing that you had to perform. Somehow I doubt this isn't the last incident you're going to have (which is absolutely dreadful to think), and if he knows the LA/EA's lying to him about why they want to come over, next time he's more likely to do his job properly.

I've read all of this with growing horror- and I feel a little sick having come to the conclusion, that the LA/EA got what they wanted pretty much. I don't think it's your fault in the slightest, but the fact that the police/person acting as TRO wouldn't uphold the actual law is just terrifying.

I am going to call them on Monday and ask if they have an email for me to send everything to them.

Will obviously tell them about the 'inspeviewing' and that why do they say they needed to do an inspection when they were round last week as well as 5 times in the last 4 months.

As Ben said there seem to be different 'rules' around inspections and viewings so I am going to make things very clear tomorrow. It was very rushed yesterday as I only got in touch with the guy at around 11 I think and they were coming at 2, so if it wasnt such a short time frame I might have felt more confident Who knows.

Yorkie1

There's an email address for that office on the link I gave in post #211, although you may prefer to ring them and ask for a named person's email.

marliepanda

Thanks Yorkie.

Oh and as for naming and shaming, I shan't name them, but put it this way, they claim to be of distinction... make of that what you will

Yorkie1

Ah, yes .... !

motherofstudents

Oh, yes now we know who they are. Maybe we should all book viewings.