We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
PLEASE READ BEFORE POSTING: Hello Forumites! In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non-MoneySaving matters are not permitted per the Forum rules. While we understand that mentioning house prices may sometimes be relevant to a user's specific MoneySaving situation, we ask that you please avoid veering into broad, general debates about the market, the economy and politics, as these can unfortunately lead to abusive or hateful behaviour. Threads that are found to have derailed into wider discussions may be removed. Users who repeatedly disregard this may have their Forum account banned. Please also avoid posting personally identifiable information, including links to your own online property listing which may reveal your address. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Landlord is serving an Accelerated Possession on s 21 after has withdraw a s 8 claim
Comments
-
If you are talking about me then yes, I am a woman.
"There are a couple having a room, two brothers sharing a room, the tenant involved having his room and equally another tenant having his own room.They are all sharing bathroom, toilet and kitchen.
I do not live at the address."0 -
I have forgotten to say that it is my landlord who has referred me to the letting agent that make me lose £800.0
-
I have seen a solicitor regarding this matter and he say that the section 21 remains valid due to The Localism Act 2011.
The solicitor has exactly said the following :
The Localism Act 2011 made amendments to the Housing Act regarding protected deposits and section 21 notices. A landlord is now able to issue a section 21 notice where the deposit was not protected, when the deposit has been returned to the tenant in full, as your landlord has done.
The section 21 notice was dated 25th March. The letter enclosing your deposit cheque is dated 25th March 2013 and the cheque itself is dated 24th March 2013.
The certificate of service (provided by landlord) of the section 21 notice deems the date of service to be 27th March.
Therefore your landlord has returned your deposit on the same day/before you were served with the section 21 notice, so the section 21 notice is valid.
Maybe this solicitor has already my landlord as client.
I am confused now. Can someone please clarify this to me?0 -
It would be a very dodgy act for a solicitor to takey ou on as a client if he was already acting for the landlord. Conflict of interest. He could be struck off.
If the deposit was returned before the S21 was served, then yes, the S21 is valid.0 -
If the deposit was returned before the S21 was served, then yes, the S21 is valid.
What is the case if the cheque for the deposit was received the same day or after the section notice (the envelopes for both documents are stamped on 25th March 2013).
The certificate of service provided by landlord say that "the date of service" is 27 March 2013 : I think this is wrong since the stamp on its envelope is dated 25 March 2013 (as for the cheque). Am I right?0 -
They are saying that they consider the notice was served on the 27th and that is the date for all legal purposes. If it was postmarked the 28th, you might have an issue but I can't see any court voiding a notice because it was received early.
First class mail is deemed served two days after posting. Posted on 25th = served on 27th. See http://www.moneyclaimsuk.co.uk/creditor-and-claimant-questions-and-answers/when-is-meant-by-deemed-served.aspx0 -
I certainly wouldn't have faxed the landlord to tell him his Sec 21 was invalid regarding the cheque, you should have taken a chance and gone to court as you have now allowed him to try and serve another. As also mentioned he is now getting advice form LZ as well and no doubt reading here.
Maybe as you are both in a stalemate as such you agree to leave after your exams ? You both get what you want then without inccurring any pressure or court costs0 -
What has the council said about the property? Should it be licenced as HMO or not?0
-
I certainly wouldn't have faxed the landlord to tell him his Sec 21 was invalid regarding the cheque, you should have taken a chance and gone to court as you have now allowed him to try and serve another. As also mentioned he is now getting advice form LZ as well and no doubt reading here.
He has not served another s 21 and if he does then it will be fine by me.
The issue remain with the same s21 notice but he is lying saying that I have certainly received the cheque before the notice.
Sorry to ask again, but if the section 21 notice was sent the same day that the cheque for the deposit has been sent is the notice then valid or invalid (knowing that it takes 5 working days to clear the cheque)?0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply

Categories
- All Categories
- 351.3K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.2K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 453.7K Spending & Discounts
- 244.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 599.5K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.1K Life & Family
- 257.8K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards