Suing my Estate Agent

lovinituk

caela wrote: »

please can someone just answer my original question. I'm not being rude I just don't want this going off topic.

I think the best calculation in your situation would be...

2.5 x (no of months you were affected) x (monthly rent) x 0

The 2.5 is a multiplier used to increase the value accordingly for 'stress and hardship'.

Stick your figures through that and it should give you the figure you would get back.

chris_m

lovinituk wrote: »

I think the best calculation in your situation would be...

2.5 x (no of months you were affected) x (monthly rent) x 0

The 2.5 is a multiplier used to increase the value accordingly for 'stress and hardship'.
Stick your figures through that and it should give you the figure you would get back.

Even better, it'll give it as a nice round number too

Zorz_2

r1chscott wrote: »

The only person who can sue the agent is the LL. If (and I can't help but feel that it's a big if!) you are successful in suing the LL then the LL could decide to sue the agent for failing to pass on concerns etc. You have no contract with the agent therefore you have no form of redress, and indeed, nothing to redress.

Being pedantic for a moment, but this is incorrect. There are occasions where the agent can be liable to the tenant as well (Draycott v Hannells Letting Limited). If for instance the LA failed to confirm that the LL has consent to let, yet the tenancy agreement specifically mentions that (mine did, so I assume this may be a standard clause), the tenant can complain to the Property Ombudsman etc.

Now, back to the OP's issue. I'm not a lawyer, and not even watching Law & Order qualifies me as one, but I agree with other posters here that you don't really have a case. You could (and should) have involved Environmental Health while you were still living at the property.

lovinituk wrote: »

I think the best calculation in your situation would be...

2.5 x (no of months you were affected) x (monthly rent) x 0

Was that on purpose? :rotfl:

barnaby-bear

caela wrote: »

Oh and the contract was an AST for 1 year with £525 deposit, monthly rent of £425 and admin fee of £150. My boyfriend and I were the only tenants.

Can you use the source of legal advice you are using to sue your other landlord for harassment and dealing with your section 8: https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/3747425

Or the legal advisor dealing with the council tax court appearances: https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4067563

Is it the same property you were talking about 15months ago here: https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/3240798

:think:

olly300

Werdnal wrote: »

Did you ever report these things in writing - not a text, not an email, a letter, posted with proof - if you are planning a court case, texts and emails do not count as they can fail to arrive - only letters with proof are admissible, so I think you are on very shaky ground anyway.

That isn't actually true.

Texts and emails do count in court cases as evidence however if you want a judge to believe your side of the argument turning up with a copy of the letters you sent plus your pile of recorded signed-for/special delivery slips works wonders.

The rest of your points are correct the OP is in lalaland.

somethingcorporate

If you do not claim against the right party this would be dismissed out of hand.

Personally, 4 years is about 3 and a half years too late. If it was that bad I would be on the phone to the LA every day to sort it out and if they didn't would move out to a hotel and send them the bill. I rented a place that had a rat infestation we were not told about, we were moved out in a day and in a hotel for a number of weeks until it was sorted. The LL paid.

caela_2

Again, I give up with this site. Only one or two useful comments. Some people seriously need to learn to use the phrase 'I do not know'. So when I ask 'how do you work out compensation for stress' you need to think, 'do I know the answer to this?' Then you need to think that whilst you would love to felate your ego by having something to say, so that you can sound important, you need to hold back against that urge and realise you are just going to sound stupid. So, best say nothing at all when you don't know what you're talking about.

No lawyers on here, but people with enough conviction that they could be one. First start would be to read the particulars, go through the details... but that would mean actually paying attention and reading a post before putting in your uniformed opinions. I asked one simple question but people think they can come on here and make personal attacks. GROW UP. Get off this site and go to youtube where you can make your comments with other like-minded children who will happily entertain your trolling.

I'm over and out AGAIN for another unhelpful thread. This same topic came up on consumeractiongroup where they were actually helpful, wonder why

Goodnight fools I'm done with this.

racing_blue

In summary Caela you asked three questions:
1) can I get all of my rent back
2) can I get some of my rent back
3) how much can I claim for ill-health and distress

The consensus was:
1) no
2) unlikely
3) whatever you like.

If you can be really specific about the information you want, there are likely to be people on this site who could unwrap question 3 further. For instance, you could ask how courts decide personal injury settlements, or for examples of compensation posters have received for health problems when the fault lay elsewhere.

Although you didn't ask for it, one piece of advice you seem to be getting is that this will probably lead nowhere. Hard as it may be, the most productive option may be to drop this and look forward rather than back.

This is said with only good intention. RB.

googler

caela wrote: »

Again, I give up with this site. Only one or two useful comments. Some people seriously need to learn to use the phrase 'I do not know'. So when I ask 'how do you work out compensation for stress' you need to think, 'do I know the answer to this?' Then you need to think that whilst you would love to felate your ego by having something to say, so that you can sound important, you need to hold back against that urge and realise you are just going to sound stupid. So, best say nothing at all when you don't know what you're talking about.

Well, it's basically the same as any conversation in real life with a number of people. Without some serious force of personality, or a social standing above everyone else's, you CANNOT keep the conversation tied down to, or drag it back, once it's digressed, to the specific subject of your choice.

You start out asking about (composer) Bach, and before you know it, the conversation has progressed through associations and relationships to Prog Rock iin the 1990s, and try as you might, you can't drag the conversation back to the single thread that you want to discuss.......

NiallB

olly300 wrote: »

The rest of your points are correct the OP is in lalaland.

Ah, that changes everything. Lalaland is like Scotland, the law is different there...