Can I use statements and evidence of previous claim as new evidence in counterclaim?

Thomas3

arcon5 wrote: »

Not paying rent over a disputed claim whilst still living in the property is a terrible idea.

I'm a little confused, what's happened to your previous claim? For it's value, it would have been on the small claims track anyway wouldn't it?

While I was paying the rent, the landlord continued his harassment anyway and filed a section 21 in order to evict me (victimisation) : the way everything is unfairly delayed with my claim I prefer to have something upfront.

unholyangel

Thomas3 wrote: »

This is the problem since my original claim was due to an intimidating act from Landlord and because this last (seems to) used a solicitor, they have denied irrefutable evidence (despite of police report, etc) and the court is willing to reconsider my claim as small claim : this is the reason I would like in my counterclaim to ask the court to re-consider my claim as a criminal act by showing in the previous claim (landlord witness statements where he lied in order to minimize the case) exactly where the landlord lied comparatively to evidence provided at that time.

Maybe the best option will be to put my previous claim (that has been wrongly considered as a small claim by the court after the landlord provided false statements) as a new claim in my counterclaim this time highlighting more accurately each irrefutable evidence that prove/confirm my statements.

You cannot ask the court to reconsider your case as criminal. It has already been ruled as jurisdiction of the small claims court. Small claims cannot overturn any previous decisions made by other courts. There is a pecking order, and small claims is at the bottom. However rulings in small claims do not set a precedent - although they can be used to strengthen your case. Or do you mean that the police refused to put it through criminal track?

Why are you so sure you have a criminal case against your LL? Criminal cases have to be proven beyond all reasonable doubt. If the police/prosecution don't have enough to secure a conviction (especially if its his word against yours), then they're not going to waste taxpayers money trying for a prosecution they have no hope in hell of getting.

Its actually helped you by putting it through small claims as then the burden of proof is much lower and (as above) is on the balance of probabilities. You only have to prove that something probably happened. Not that it did beyond all reasonable doubt (like criminal).

As for the jacket, how old was it? How did he ruin it? Was there no possibility of it being saved? Despite your LL breaching his duty of care, you do have a statutory duty to mitigate your losses. If the jacket was years old.....you haven't lost a £500 jacket, you've lost a x year old jacket that was worth £500 when it was brand new.

And if this is the case (that jacket was old/could have been saved and you've with held its full value), you best save up now as you'll likely have court fees to pay soon.

Thomas3

andybird123 wrote: »

he didn't so much as recover it as didn't pay part of his rent, which is a dodgy position to be in, so both he and the land lord have active claims against each other, presumably the OP opened a small claim and the landlord has lodged a counter claim within the same process


if that is the case then it's one and the same case so the prior claim wouldn't even apply as it's the same claim

It is the case, however I will now make a counterclaim for Breach of quiet enjoyment of the property AND loss of amenity instead of just Breach of quiet enjoyment of the property.

Thomas3

unholyangel wrote: »

You cannot ask the court to reconsider your case as criminal. It has already been ruled as jurisdiction of the small claims court. Small claims cannot overturn any previous decisions made by other courts. There is a pecking order, and small claims is at the bottom. However rulings in small claims do not set a precedent - although they can be used to strengthen your case. Or do you mean that the police refused to put it through criminal track?

Why are you so sure you have a criminal case against your LL? Criminal cases have to be proven beyond all reasonable doubt. If the police/prosecution don't have enough to secure a conviction (especially if its his word against yours), then they're not going to waste taxpayers money trying for a prosecution they have no hope in hell of getting.

Its actually helped you by putting it through small claims as then the burden of proof is much lower and (as above) is on the balance of probabilities. You only have to prove that something probably happened. Not that it did beyond all reasonable doubt (like criminal).

As for the jacket, how old was it? How did he ruin it? Was there no possibility of it being saved? Despite your LL breaching his duty of care, you do have a statutory duty to mitigate your losses. If the jacket was years old.....you haven't lost a £500 jacket, you've lost a x year old jacket that was worth £500 when it was brand new.

And if this is the case (that jacket was old/could have been saved and you've with held its full value), you best save up now as you'll likely have court fees to pay soon.

I believe that normally Harassment is a criminal act. I bought my jacket about 6 months ago (in fact that was a gift from someone (we bought it together)) when it has been damaged and it cost me exactly at that €170. I deducted £150 from the rent for the jacket and one month rent of £350 at the moment. I will continues to deduct at least the minimum of my claim (£1500) from the rent.

As I stated above I will now make a new claim through the counterclaim (defence for claim of possession) for Breach of quiet enjoyment of the property AND loss of amenity instead of just Breach of quiet enjoyment of the property.

unholyangel

Thomas3 wrote: »

I believe that normally Harassment is a criminal act. I bought my jacket about 6 months ago (in fact that was a gift from someone (we bought it together)) when it has been damaged and it cost me exactly at that €170. I deducted £150 from the rent for the jacket and one month rent of £350 at the moment. I will continues to deduct at least the minimum of my claim (£1500) from the rent.

As I stated above I will now make a new claim through the counterclaim (defence for claim of possession) for Breach of quiet enjoyment of the property AND loss of amenity instead of just Breach of quiet enjoyment of the property.

I think you should slow down. You seem to be jumping from one thing to the next without actually researching or thinking things through.

The only thing you previously mentioned was the jacket. Why do you think the LL is due you £1500?

Have you put any of this in writing to your landlord? What are you paying for in your rent that he isn't providing/you've lost use of?

As for harassment.....its up to the CPS to decide if they want to prosecute. Harassment cases usually take months to build - sometimes longer. They also usually require you to keep a diary of the harassment and as much evidence as you can - do you have all this?

Thomas3

unholyangel wrote: »

The only thing you previously mentioned was the jacket. Why do you think the LL is due you £1500?

Have you put any of this in writing to your landlord? What are you paying for in your rent that he isn't providing/you've lost use of?

As for harassment.....its up to the CPS to decide if they want to prosecute. Harassment cases usually take months to build - sometimes longer. They also usually require you to keep a diary of the harassment and as much evidence as you can - do you have all this?

All this steps were done even with my previous claim : I wrote a witness statement of about 20 pages but landlord with the help of his solicitor denied most of facts despite of irrefutable evidence such as police report that stated that the landlord changed the locks without notice, threats by email from landlord, etc.

wealdroam

Thomas, where does the £1500 come from?

Thomas3

wealdroam wrote: »

Thomas, where does the £1500 come from?

Claim for damages for breach of quiet enjoyment that exceed £1500 but do not exceed £10,000.

molerat

I think you need to look for somewhere else to live because if LL has correctly issued a S8 on grounds 8 and / or 10 then you will be quite rightly out on your !!!!, you have put yourself in a very perilous situation with the added risk of a ccj which will put pay to you renting anywhere. You have a limited range of legitimate reasons for withholding rent and this is not one of them.

Thomas3

molerat wrote: »

I think you need to look for somewhere else to live because if LL has correctly issued a S8 on grounds 8 and / or 10 then you will be quite rightly out on your !!!!, you have put yourself in a very perilous situation with the added risk of a ccj which will put pay to you renting anywhere. You have a limited range of legitimate reasons for withholding rent and this is not one of them.

In addition, I am waiting that the landlord provide his true address according to Sections 47 and 48 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1987 (blog (dot) painsmith (dot) co.uk/2013/07/24/whose-address-sections-47-and-48-revisited/) as he was using since a year a solicitor address instead of his actual address [he has changed his address again a month ago without notice : I discovered the new address (solicitor address) on the claim for possession].