Guarantor and possible documents forged with advice from letting agency

silvercar

ed1su wrote: »

The tenant 1st defendant fell ill where the doctor ordered them to leave university and had 2 operation.. According to them the university said it's special circumstances.. the tenant wasn't given the tenancy agreement. So when the returned the keys and agency wanted full rent. The tenant asked for agreement but wasn't given. According to the tenant the university advised them not to pay.. I have no idea.

The tenant had operation had to leave university.. wasn't fit to work.. So they had no money. The tenant is well now and started studying at a different university had to change the course.

"Special circumstances" is a term universities use to assist students in being eligible for extra years of grants & loans should they return to study at a later date. Without this loans are restricted to the length of your first course plus on year. Being granted "special circumstances" should give you access to student loans as if you hadn't studied previously.

It is not connected to landlords and tenancies.

ed1su

Silvercar

I've no idea personally about tenant or their circumstances. Also what documents they have for the hearing.

Financially I don't think/believe can pay 2k or they will pay. I suppose if courts decides then they will have no choice.

silvercar

ed1su wrote: »

Silvercar

I've no idea personally about tenant or their circumstances. Also what documents they have for the hearing.

Financially I don't think/believe can pay 2k or they will pay. I suppose if courts decides then they will have no choice.

£5 a week for 400 weeks if the court accepts they have no money.

anselld

ed1su wrote: »

Silvercar

I've no idea personally about tenant or their circumstances. Also what documents they have for the hearing.

Financially I don't think/believe can pay 2k or they will pay. I suppose if courts decides then they will have no choice.

Out of interest, why did you act as Guarantor for someone you don't know personally or their circumstances? Or rather, why were you named as guarantor even if you did not finally sign?

ed1su

anselld wrote: »

Out of interest, why did you act as Guarantor for someone you don't know personally or their circumstances? Or rather, why were you named as guarantor even if you did not finally sign?

.A relative... Tenant father brought the application papers and the hw requested to be a guarantor. So G kinda was put on spot. So foolishly filled them in. Then had G doubts so when it came to going with them to sign the contracts G didn't go...

Ed1su

silvercar

ed1su wrote: »

.A relative... Tenant father brought the application papers and the hw requested to be a guarantor. So G kinda was put on spot. So foolishly filled them in. Then had G doubts so when it came to going with them to sign the contracts G didn't go...

Ed1su

In the most recent student tenancies of our kids, we have signed online using some digital signatory software that the letting agent has. Apparently that is becoming more common, given that students needing tenancies are studying away from home and generally parents won't travel to student town just to sign agreements. Means everything can be completed quickly without relying on snail mail.
A few clicks and you are signed up. Easier for someone to click on your behalf without forging signatures with real ink.

thequant

ed1su wrote: »

The tenant 1st defendant fell ill where the doctor ordered them to leave university and had 2 operation.. According to them the university said it's special circumstances.. the tenant wasn't given the tenancy agreement. So when the returned the keys and agency wanted full rent. The tenant asked for agreement but wasn't given. According to the tenant the university advised them not to pay.. I have no idea.

The tenant had operation had to leave university.. wasn't fit to work.. So they had no money. The tenant is well now and started studying at a different university had to change the course.

In terms of a defence, that is all irrelevant. What was their defence ? Assuming they haven't denied the existence of the contract and it's terms. It's likely they will lose. You I feel are safe (going on info given so far).


First rule of defending a case, neither admit or deny liability till you see the other sides hand. In the case of documents not being supplied, you can claim an embarrassed defence.


Keep us updated with this, would like to see how this pans out. As I'm unfamiliar of how the system works in this instance, where one is "Guilty", the other not, but they are both on the same claim.

silvercar

Keep us updated with this, would like to see how this pans out. As I'm unfamiliar of how the system works in this instance, where one is "Guilty", the other not, but they are both on the same claim.

Interesting point.

I suspect the judge will find for the plaintiff in the sum of XXX, leaving the plaintiff to pursue for the debt through the court. But maybe I have been watching too much TV.

This is a civil court, not criminal, so I doubt they would be anything as dramatic as a cry of "guilty" and the defendant handcuffed and marched away.

Marktheshark

Documents can be served on defendants at court if your "bundle" is unsealed.
This is why you see briefs and barristers carrying documents in bundles sealed with red rope or string.
That signifies a sealed evidence bundle and is then opened in front of the judge.
Solicitors will take advantage of defendants without sealed bundles and throw documents on to their bundle.

Tie your bundle off, red signifies a seal, same with postage, a red wax seal signifies sealed document.

Seal your evidence, even some red wool will do and leave any documents served at court on the floor/ chair or where ever the brief throws them, walk in, await the judge to swear court in and then open your bundle in the court by opening the seal.

ed1su

Thequant


No They havn't denied the contract but are saying that they were not given tenancy agreement. They been requesting one from letting agency ever since but are not providing one. Not if they made this request in writing.


They also says that the letting agency have not send them any documents for the hearing. So no idea what they are planning on doing.


The Guarantor has been trying to get hold of documents using Data protection Act but not been successful. They are waiting for an outcome from information commission office, who did state last week that they will provide their decision end of this week. They were suppose to be contacting letting agency to see if they will provide the requested documents regarding to guarantor.


I will keep you updated. Need to send a letter off to the court of not receiving any documents from letting agency.


I sent my recorded delivery and they have been signed for.


Ed1su

thequant wrote: »

In terms of a defence, that is all irrelevant. What was their defence ? Assuming they haven't denied the existence of the contract and it's terms. It's likely they will lose. You I feel are safe (going on info given so far).


First rule of defending a case, neither admit or deny liability till you see the other sides hand. In the case of documents not being supplied, you can claim an embarrassed defence.


Keep us updated with this, would like to see how this pans out. As I'm unfamiliar of how the system works in this instance, where one is "Guilty", the other not, but they are both on the same claim.