taking a Landlord to court for tenants actions

Yorkie1

bewilderedhelpneeded wrote: »

Short answer to your question - you have absolutely no grounds to sue the landlord of the property next door. No solicitor will take it on as you simply do not have a case against the landlord. If you chose to take it to court yourself ( would have to be small claims court) you would find yourself heavily out of pocket by time judge had informed you landlord did not have a case to answer and you had paid all of the landlords costs too. And going down the civil case route with court would mean you have to put a monetary value on your 'loss' and you havent lost anything! Its for environmental health/police to decide if crime has been committed and prosecute tenants on that basis. Quiet word to tenants by police might work once you have shown them your diary evidence if they decide its serious enough.

Without commenting on the rest of your post, the highlighted bits are mutually inaccurate.

If it has to be small claims court then each party bears their own costs.

G_M

Yorkie1 wrote: »

Without commenting on the rest of your post, the highlighted bits are mutually inaccurate.

If it has to be small claims court then each party bears their own costs.

Winner can claim some costs:
* court fees
* travel
* lost wages

but legal costs.

bewilderedhelpneeded

Yorkie1 wrote: »

Without commenting on the rest of your post, the highlighted bits are mutually inaccurate.

If it has to be small claims court then each party bears their own costs.

No you are incorrect - the winner can put in a claim for costs. I win a civil case that was taken out against me and I had my costs awarded. This was 3 months sgo.

neas

The OP sounds like a troll if you ask me.Very insulting to anyone who disagrees or says something don't like.


Key points

1.the wife calls him a child molester in an argument (most likely he is not..)
2.The landlord appears not to have a social responsibility.

3. From your attitude I think you are over reacting a bit. Yes it's annoying but he isn't a child molester and your family are safe..

digger65

Thanks all
i feel i have gotten what i need in terms of advice along with healthy dose of ridicule, bad vibes and latent aggression for asking whether LL's have a case to answer in terms of their neglect of responsibility "when they fail to act upon or investigate genuine complaints of other interested parties" (this, i feel is the important bit and has gotten a little lost)
i can genuinely relate to LL's not wishing to be held responsible for others actions, that is not really what i am trying to suggest here.

Unfortunately there seems to be a whole bunch of LL's who are relative amateurs and conduct their business accordingly:
In modern business it is not the crook who is to be feared most, it is the honest man who doesn't know what he is doing.

i feel it is probably these people who are most vocal in terms of opinion dressed up as fact...
As i say i wish only to find out where i stand legally, not to open up a debate, not that i am trying to suppress anyone's opinion, i just don't want to get into a fruitless debate as i am tired because my disgusting, inconsiderate, vile, violent, low life neighbours kept me up half the night while the LL cashes in their coin as his own and sleeps the sleep of the just.

Guest101

ok then legally, the LL has no case to answer, the tenants im unsure off, but based on what you have said there MAY be a limited case for the police and possibly environmental health to investigate.

You can do no more dirrectly, other than to keep a diary of incidents, and to keep your behaviour in check.

If you continue to hound the LL he may well take up a harrassment case against you, so be careful what you say or do.

moromir

digger65 wrote:

whether LL's have a case to answer in terms of their neglect of responsibility "when they fail to act upon or investigate genuine complaints of other interested parties" (this, i feel is the important bit and has gotten a little lost)
i can genuinely relate to LL's not wishing to be held responsible for others actions, that is not really what i am trying to suggest here.

Unfortunately there seems to be a whole bunch of LL's .....
i feel it is probably these people who are most vocal in terms of opinion dressed up as fact...

I'll be about the 10th person to say it (and not a landlord before you try and suggest I am to discredit my reply) but I'll say it anyway -

Your landlord has not neglected any of their responsibilities because such a responsibility towards you does not exist.

I keep seeing you say this buzz word "social responsibility" but as far as I'm aware theres no legal definition or standing of such a term. I think what you're getting at in plain English is - why isn't the landlord more morally concerned for you.

I feel for you, I really do but maybe the rent pays to put food on the table for his kids, maybe it pays for hospital treatment... far flung scenarios I know but sometimes people put their own problems before those of others.

If I was antisocial, my neighbour couldn't sue my mortgage lender until they repossessed me and I'm not sure why you think that a landlord is any different to a mortgage lender in this case.

Follow the good advice previously given about persuing the tenants via environmental health.

Werdnal

digger65 wrote: »

my disgusting, inconsiderate, vile, violent, low life neighbours

who are the ones causing the issue, responsible for it and ultimately the ones you should be looking to punish by following the advice given!

Thanks for posting your thanks - pity it was tempered with another rant about your obvious contempt (or is it perhaps jealousy) of landlords in general; many of whom have commented on this post and tried to guide you to a course of action which will get you results if you choose to listen.

I sincerely hope you follow the advice and get the authorities to take action against the TENANTS here, who after all at the guilty party in this situation.

Guest101

Ah the race card, the more it's played (as it clearly was in the case described), the more numbing effect it has. and the more genuine cses slip by...

digger65

Quizzical_Squirrel wrote: »

I was just remembering something that happened to a tenant friend of mine.

For a long time, he rented the top floor garret of a house divided into 3 flats.

One day, a family of foreign origin moved into the bottom flat.

When the middle flat came up for renewal, their extended family moved in.

When my friend clearly wasn't leaving and more of the family wanted the top flat, both sets of (related) tenants falsely accused him of racism. They invented a whole set of stories.

They complained to the landlord and he evicted my friend as soon as possible because the landlord was a decent man and was horrified by racism. No proof was needed and the family got what they wanted after all.

My conclusions relating to this thread are:

1) If you can't use racism, p**dos have the same (or greater) emotional leverage.

2) The landlord might accept the story, without proof, if he is told in a manner more in sorrow than in anger and not accept a renewal of the tenancy.

3) This won't happen in this case because the OP's vitriol seems to be directed at the landlord rather than the people actually causing the distress. There's another motive at work here which seeks to have the landlord punished rather than the tenants.

hi thankyou
no and you are probably right, i will try to get down from the angry tree before i speak with him
emotions do get the better of me when my families wellbeing is threatened so apologies to anyone i may have rattled along the way with my belligerence
and it is an open forum so i should expect some people to offer up an opinion i disagree with, (not sure how you argue a point without annoying the other party though..)
honestly thanks again everyone
no hard feelings eh..
D