MAJOR help needed... typical LA

Yorkie1

propertyman wrote: »

And they are wrong; while the case was naturally about service charges, you cannot consider subsection 2 without subsection 4.

That also makes it applicable to any sums due under a tenancy whether demanded or not, the penalty being that until they comply, it is not due.

My reading of the legislation is that it is only the service charge element of the demand that is not due until the proper address is supplied / used.

See this thread for more.

DVardysShadow

marliepanda wrote: »

I googled the name of my landlady and it came up with one woman in York. (there were a couple elsewhere in the country)

I rang the business number of the person in question, she was initially very nice on the phone. I said that I believed she was my landlady and was I correct, and the tone changed very quickly to being very abrupt and stern and she simply said 'I don't have any tenanted properties' and then hung up.

So either it wasnt her and she was just annoyed to be bothered at work, or it was her and he was annoyed that a tenant had contacted her I have no idea.

I believe it was your landlady, guilty as hell about letting on a resi mortgage rather than BTL. I think she probably thought your were a tracing agency employed by her lender.

franklee

marliepanda wrote: »

I dont think she did, its a new build and I am almost certain I am the first occupier. But yeah I did used to get a tonne of post for her...

Well in that case getting the land registry entry will throw some light (online four quid, straightforward to do). If she has never lived where you are then her address on the land registry entry should be somewhere else ...

DVardysShadow wrote: »

I believe it was your landlady, guilty as hell about letting on a resi mortgage rather than BTL. I think she probably thought your were a tracing agency employed by her lender.

Yes. If she has cheated on the mortgage it would be worth knowing.

marliepanda

DVardysShadow wrote: »

I believe it was your landlady, guilty as hell about letting on a resi mortgage rather than BTL. I think she probably thought your were a tracing agency employed by her lender.

I did think 'tenanted properties' was a strange turn of phrase for a random wrong number lady to use... As I asked if she was a landlord you think she'd reply 'no I'm not a landlord'

Will get onto the land registry...

grey_lady

I'm not sure that it will help you if she has permission to lend or not, unless your considering blackmail?

What you need IMHO is a solicitors letter reminding them that you have the right to quiet enjoyment until you leave the property.

marliepanda

I reckon she probably does have consent but just didnt want to deal with me in any way. From what Ive been told by the LA she was the one pushing for the valuation when my grandad was in hospital and then subsequently died. That could of course be LA speak to pass the blame.

However what I am 100% sure of is the fact that she cant afford this without my rent, hence the panic to get in viewers (when a good 20% off asking price would do them a lot better...)

franklee

grey_lady wrote: »

I'm not sure that it will help you if she has permission to lend or not, unless your considering blackmail?

What you need IMHO is a solicitors letter reminding them that you have the right to quiet enjoyment until you leave the property.

I hardly think a polite request to a landlord to ask their agent to stop harassing a tenant is blackmail!

The problem is finding the landlord.

I think what landlords who hide behind their letting agents forget is that the landlord is responsible for their agent's actions, so it could well be the landlord who is prosecuted. Therefore I would expect any sane landlord to be pleased to be told what their agent is up to and be given a chance to intervene and call the agent off before any more laws are broken.

As for the consent to let, the tenant can write to the lender if they wish to let them know they were the tenant (and it is the tenant's business as unauthorised tenancies affect the tenant's security should there be a repossession).

Besides it is always useful to know if one is dealing with a cheat or fraudster or not.

I would not fancy paying a hundred quid or so for a solicitor's letter.

melancholly

grey_lady wrote: »

I'm not sure that it will help you if she has permission to lend or not, unless your considering blackmail?

In this situation, I'd be considering reporting them (if that's an option) once I'd moved out. Perhaps it would be viewed by some as petty, but after this much harassment, I'd seriously think about it. At the very least, the LL should know about the LA's behaviour. They may not be aware of this and it's the kind of information that any sane LL would want to know about.

elona

Even if landlord was not bothered about the threat to a female and their harassment of her- surely the idea of the property (distinguished or not) having the front door demolished would not be a good selling feature?

Found out who the LAs were by a bit of googling and glad they are not a company I have or am ever likely to use.

Annabee

Have there been any developments, Marlie?