LandLord Sold Garden Which Was Under Tenancy

doughnutmachine

So a basic summary of this thread is:

Man moves into flat with garden on a short term lease. He spends a lot of time improving garden. Landlord then decides to sell part of garden. The tenant is aggrieved.

To the OP, what do you hope to achieve by taking your landlord to court? It looks like the garden will be used for housing eventually, the most you can do is delay it a bit.

If you are after compensation you will be only awarded compensation for your actual loss. Since the tenancy is only monthly I doubt you will get anything....

imho the best thing you could do is tell your landlord you only moved into the flat because of the garden, then ask for a rent discount because it will be reduced in size.

grifferz

adrihd wrote: »

@Land reg: when you've got it, please let me know so I cam remove it to avoid spam

I don't think it's realistic to expect a representative of the land registry to be emailing you personally. Their personal messages are disabled for a reason. They already gave you their customer service email address, so I suggest you use that.

Land_Registry

grifferz wrote: »

I don't think it's realistic to expect a representative of the land registry to be emailing you personally. Their personal messages are disabled for a reason. They already gave you their customer service email address, so I suggest you use that.

grifferz - I removed the email address as no email arrived. We are keen to offer guidance where we can but in the same way as any other member of this forum.
Hopefully adrihd is close to an understanding of the registration details through the letting agent but I will continue to try and bring some clarity to that aspect.

A direct email may help, if only to understand the reality from a registration perspective, which based on other posts appears to be relevant to the extent of the tenancy

Note adrihd - the letting agent deals with the letting and not the legal ownership aspects as registered at Land Registry.

Cornucopia

doughnutmachine wrote: »

So a basic summary of this thread is:

Man moves into flat with garden on a short term lease. He spends a lot of time improving garden. Landlord then decides to sell part of garden. The tenant is aggrieved.

It seems to me to illustrate a bit more than that... Something along the lines of the law being the law, and not what one thinks/hopes/expects it will be.

adrihd

@doughnutmachine: What I'm looking to achieve is to mainly put the LL in front o the law to let them know that they did something wrong. People like this need to be kept on a straight and narrow path to avert them from taking liberties i.e. what's happened to me.

@Land Reg: Many thanks for the email, but I'm working on a borrowed laptop at the minute as my MacBook was sent to apple for repairs. I should get it back at some point today, if not tomorrow! As soon as I get it, I'll get all of the documents which I have access to on the land reg website.

An update to all:

Well things have escalated a bit, which was to be expected In short point form, here's what's happened:

1) i got served a conditional S.21.. conditional meaning that it will run until it's expiry date (2 months) and provided that there are no further 'anti social behaviour incidents' they won't act on it. Either way I've taken it as a S.21 and am in the process of getting another property. No bother there.

2) The Letting Agent met with me as they, in their own words, 'believe that every story has two sides' i.e. last weekends incidents where I called the police to keep the peace. Despite telling them my side of the story, they had the S.21 pre-written and in an envelope which I noticed as soon as they sat down.

3) I asked them to confirm in writing EVERYTHING said in the meeting, which they did, but the facts are horribly twisted in their favour. An example is:

Where I told them: I had to contact the police and have them attend twice as the builders threatened physical violence.

What they wrote: The police attended twice

or


Where I told them: I can't admit to being verbally abusive as I destinctly remember calling the builders 'Sir', and when the LL appeared calling her Ma'am. If there was verbal abuse, it was provoked out of me.

What they wrote: You admitted being verbally abusive to the builders....


Should I create a separate thread about this as I don't want to confuse matters. I personally think that this, the eviction and surrounding events, and the actual ownership and rights to the land are two separate issues.

ruggedtoast

Dude let it go. Just find somewhere else to live.

adrihd

ruggedtoast wrote: »

Dude let it go. Just find somewhere else to live.

I am finding somewhere to live, and no, I won't let it go. Too much has happened and for the first time, I'm going to stand my ground.

3 years of being harassed by the LL isn't just going to go away. Harassment has repercussions, some of which are causing issues in my personal life. The solicitor I've spoken to so far (30 min free consult) said this looks like 'constructive eviction'.

DRP

adrihd wrote: »

Where I told them: I had to contact the police and have them attend twice as the builders threatened physical violence.

What they wrote: The police attended twice

or


Where I told them: I can't admit to being verbally abusive as I destinctly remember calling the builders 'Sir', and when the LL appeared calling her Ma'am. If there was verbal abuse, it was provoked out of me.

What they wrote: You admitted being verbally abusive to the builders....

You should have written to them confirming what was said in the meeting. Clearly if you take this further, you must repsond to clarify in some way

ruggedtoast

The solicitor you spoke to will tell you whatever they think you want to hear in your free consultation to turn it into a paying one.

As a tenant you are always going to be on a losing wicket against your landlord. Your chances of any meaningful legal redress that you can afford are minute.

adrihd

DRP wrote: »

You should have written to them confirming what was said in the meeting. Clearly if you take this further, you must repsond to clarify in some way

The only confirmation I asked of them was that of what they said about the S.21 being conditional. I never asked for the contents of the meeting to be discussed.

I've spoken to various friends, family and contacts about this letter, the happenings etc... and am waiting for feedback before I write any letter to them. At this point in time, it's evident that they're constructively trying to evict me so I'm treading on eggshells at the moment and trying to deal with this in the correct manner (legally speaking).

I want it to be clear that I'm following rules and regulations to the letter of the law so in court, if it comes to that, I show as transparent.