Taken to Court for “unauthorized occupation”… but I don’t even live there ?! Help !

Guest101

Marktheshark wrote: »

The fraud team are employed by the council, they wont have issued a CCJ claim without making sure the case is watertight.
They know he has been living there and they will have evidence, where do you think the CID officers who retire at 50 go work ?
Places like this and they will have made very sure they can prove the case.
The evidence bundle will be a foot thick.

Normally yes. But in this case the fraud is committed by 'Linda', not the OP.

Once it's clear she's outside the jurisdiction, any such investigation woul dbe called off. There's not enough damages to recover to cover the cost.

I doubt the investigators are just sat around waiting for this 1 case.

karakus

[FONT=&quot]Ok, thank you[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Regarding my previous question, who shall I book a meeting with? Specialist council officer, CAB or Shelter?[/FONT]

Guest101

karakus wrote: »

[FONT=&quot]Ok, thank you[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Regarding my previous question, who shall I book a meeting with? Specialist council officer, CAB or Shelter?[/FONT]

CAB

Then either council or solicitor

karakus

ruggedtoast wrote: »

I also suspect that you stopped paying rent yourself to anyone in December. It would be better if you were honest about that, at least to the court.

I have paid the rent to the mothers account up to the end of June, I won't be foolish to pay the next one

HereBeDragons_2

karakus wrote: »

I see but in the statement it says arrears but in the letters in the bundle it says "damages for use and occupation" (in they specify they are in NO WAY to be considered rent)

so what are they??

They are damages for use and occupation of the property, for a defined period. They are more than likely equal to the amount of rent the council should have received from their tenant over that time, which hasn't been paid. This is a financial loss they have suffered so they are seeking that money as part of the proceedings.

Did you not read my post explaining this?

If you don't start paying use and occupation charges now - again, they can't call it rent, as that implies a tenancy exists between you and them, which it doesn't - then expect the council to amend this figure to an up-to-date amount of 'rent' arrears, on the hearing date.

The best outcome I think you can hope for is that the rent arrears/use and occupation damages is split equally between you and the other unauthorised occupant named on the papers, because as far as the magistrate/judge will be concerned you were both unauthorised occupants from the time to Notice to Quit expired, so you are both liable for this sum. Don't expect any of these damages to be awarded against the tenant, because the council have shown that the tenant has not been resident in the property since the Notice to Quit expired.

If - and it's a big if - you can persuade the judge that you continued to pay rent to the tenant's agent/family in the genuine belief that the situation was being sorted out, they might decide that the tenant should pay your share of these damages, because there is a clear association between the tenant and the tenant's agent, and you have proved that the agent received that money from you. I really wouldn't count on that happening though, because as others have said here - your story is full of holes and you haven't been fully honest with people on this thread. You were served papers some time ago regarding your unauthorised use and occupation of the property and were given a card onto which you should have started paying 'rent', in return for your use and occupation of the flat. You haven't done that, nor have you attempted to discuss it with the council. You don't exactly come across as the innocent victim of a scam.

You haven't broken any laws here, nor has the tenant - this is a civil matter not a criminal one. In court, you will be given the chance to put your version of events forward. Don't even think of trying to pull the wool over the judge/magistrate's eyes - they will see right through any lies and will throw the book at you. If they establish that the other unauthorised occupant left the property in February, be prepared for most of the damages to be awarded against you.

Are the council seeking legal costs in this case? If so, argue strongly that the tenant is liable for these, not you.

A word of warning: when dishonest council tenants subletting without permission find out they are about to lose their golden goose things can turn nasty very quickly. Once you stop paying rent to the tenant's family they may attempt to illegally evict you because if they can get you out of the flat they can claim in court that the tenant has returned to the property. If I were you I'd contact the housing officer handling the case asap, as they will be well aware that an illegal eviction is likely, and if you make it clear that you want to cooperate and give them the property back they will do their best to help protect you from being thrown onto the street. In my case the council put notices visible inside the front door to prevent the tenant breaking in with the help of a locksmith, and that's exactly what the tenant tried to do very shortly afterwards. This may be about to turn into a lot more than just a financial nightmare for you.

karakus

Thanks, HereBeDragons

"Are the council seeking legal costs in this case? If so, argue strongly that the tenant is liable for these, not you."

yes they are

Linda and her family aren't aware I have emailed the council officer already so hopefully they won't turn nasty... at least not yet

I am planning to go to a hostel asap, get a receipt from the hostel and post it to the Council to prove I left

could I ask for a reduction of the charges on the ground that I am actually cooperating to give them the flat back?

NYM

Social housing fraud is being tackled aggressively and they will not just let the OP pay up and disappear. They will bring court action against him and any other 'sub tenant'

Exemplary damages are designed to 'punish and deter' others from doing what the OP did
The LA don't need to prove a loss.

In the end, 'Linda' will lose her flat and quite rightly so.

getmore4less

Have you not talked to anyone about this since the paperwork started coming in, a friend someone at work?

Guest101

NYM wrote: »

Social housing fraud is being tackled aggressively and they will not just let the OP pay up and disappear. They will bring court action against him and any other 'sub tenant'

Exemplary damages are designed to 'punish and deter' others from doing what the OP did
The LA don't need to prove a loss.

In the end, 'Linda' will lose her flat and quite rightly so.

1: The OP isnt commiting 'benefit fraud' as it's commonly known. He has no contract with the council. So he cannot have fraudulantly claimed anything from the council. - The reason is obvious, this is being heard at the county court, rather than as a criminal matter of fraud.

2 The local authority must prove a loss, which is why they are claiming damages for the use of. And not punitive damages. As is clearly described by the OP.

missbiggles1

Guest101 wrote: »

1: The OP isnt commiting 'benefit fraud' as it's commonly known. He has no contract with the council. So he cannot have fraudulantly claimed anything from the council. - The reason is obvious, this is being heard at the county court, rather than as a criminal matter of fraud.

2 The local authority must prove a loss, which is why they are claiming damages for the use of. And not punitive damages. As is clearly described by the OP.

Nobody mentioned benefit fraud.