Section 13 after section 21 - going to tribunal?

Rollinghills

We have an extremely unreasonable landlord - please advise!

-November: we reported a penetrating damp and condensation damp issue in the bedroom. Builder was going to come but cancelled
-January: landlord wanted to re-inspect. Became totally unreasonable accusing us of causing the mould due to house being too cold (18 deg), the curtain too long (came with the house), there should be no furniture against external walls (!!!) clutter on the floor (2 yr old toys) causing condensation etc. Threatened us with eviction and increased rent. Indeed sent us a section 21 but we didn't sign for it (recorded letter came through the mail box)
-February: sent us another section 21 (dated 19 february, 2 month notice) AND a section 13 (dated 20 february) asking for 210 more rent per month for that last month of tenancy (1 month notice), currently 960 so big increase.
Clearly both eviction and rent increase are a retaliatory tactic as he doesn't need the flat and we've lived there for 5 years now.

Now I know he invalidated his section 21 by sending section 13 but we do actually want to move (in the process of buying a house) so not bothered. But I sure as hell don't want to pay him more after all the grief he has caused us.

We already had the council health and safety team inspect and they confirmed the mould is not our fault. The landlord is known to them due to previous damp issue in the house (downstairs flat). According to the council last june he hired a damp specialist who covered the render with a damp-proof coating. This probably made it worse! There must be water getting into the wall from the chimney stack (watermarks are on chimney breast) or the roof and now due to the damp-proof coating they moisture can only escape into the house.

So back to rent, I don't want to pay 200 more even for 1 month as he has been so unreasonable. What are my options? Should I refer it to the Rent Increase Tribunal bearing in mind we probably will no longer be here where the hearing happens? The rent he's asking for may be market rate if the flat was in good condition but not as it is I don't think and not due to our fault.

silvercar

Part of the section 13 notice should contain the details of how to appeal and the timescales. You need to follow this or you will have been deemed to accept the rent increase.

theartfullodger

Why do you think a s13 invalidates s21? I'd be surprised.

Landlord is giving you very strong hints he wants you out: Even if s21 is invalid - for whatever reason - even the most stupid landlord will eventually get s21 right & evict you:

Find somewhere else & move, for your own sake.

Was a deposit paid, was it protected with 30 days & has the Prescribed information been served?? (If no to either s21 v probably invalid)

jjlandlord

Rollinghills wrote: »

Now I know he invalidated his section 21 by sending section 13 but we do actually want to move (in the process of buying a house) so not bothered.

Why would it invalidate the s.21 notice?

Rollinghills

As I said we are in the process of buying a house, hopefully we'll be able to move before the section 21 expires or soon after. I still think section 13 invalidates section 21 but it would only matter if our purchase falls through.

As for the deposit, yes and no. It was all properly done last time we renewed with a fixed term. After that it went periodic and we didn't receive anything. I actually thought deposit wasn't protected but turns out it was, it just stayed protected when it went periodic. Prescribed information should still be served. There was a case like this won in Birmingham county court but unless I get a no win no fee solicitor I wouldn't bother. The case was Gardner v McCusker. Anyone can recommend such a solicitor I could hire?

Rollinghills

It could be seen as the landlord being happy for the tenant to stay on a new periodic tenancy with increased rent.
It could also be seen as tenant harassment after section 21 is issued which is a criminal offence. Either way I think if it went to court the landlord would not be in a strong position to argue, I might be wrong.

jjlandlord

Rollinghills wrote: »

I still think section 13 invalidates section 21 but it would only matter if our purchase falls through.

Well, it doesn't.

Rollinghills wrote: »

Anyone can recommend such a solicitor I could hire?

Johnny Cochran was the best. Too bad he passed.

Rollinghills

jjlandlord wrote: »

Well, it doesn't.



Johnny Cochran was the best. Too bad he passed.

Very helpful thanks

Pixie5740

Rollinghills wrote: »

It could be seen as the landlord being happy for the tenant to stay on a new periodic tenancy with increased rent.

No it doesn't.

If you don't agree with the proposed rent increase then appeal it even if you think you'll be out of the property by the time it takes effect.

Rollinghills wrote: »

It could also be seen as tenant harassment after section 21 is issued which is a criminal offence. Either way I think if it went to court the landlord would not be in a strong position to argue, I might be wrong.

Issuing a Section 13 after a Section 21 is in no way harassment. It's you who would get laughed out of court for that one.

It sounds like this is a horrible place to live. Once you've exchanged serve your own notice, or if the purchase falls through serve your own notice and find somewhere else to rent.

Pixie5740

Also, suing because the PI was not re-issued at the start of the SPT is fairly straightforward and doesn't require a solicitor.

Edit: It's getting him to pay up that might be the tricky part.

Rollinghills

Anyone can recommend a helpful forum for tenants? No I guess not.