We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
PLEASE READ BEFORE POSTING: Hello Forumites! In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non-MoneySaving matters are not permitted per the Forum rules. While we understand that mentioning house prices may sometimes be relevant to a user's specific MoneySaving situation, we ask that you please avoid veering into broad, general debates about the market, the economy and politics, as these can unfortunately lead to abusive or hateful behaviour. Threads that are found to have derailed into wider discussions may be removed. Users who repeatedly disregard this may have their Forum account banned. Please also avoid posting personally identifiable information, including links to your own online property listing which may reveal your address. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Taken to Court for “unauthorized occupation”… but I don’t even live there ?! Help !
Comments
-
missbiggles1 wrote: »Nobody mentioned benefit fraud.
I believe the original tenant was claiming Housing Benefits (the thread has got to long to scroll through)
Either way, if it wasnt, the OP still isnt subject to any fraud investigation (or certainly not been charged with one yet)0 -
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.
I think you've misunderstood my post.
I never said that the OP has committed 'benefit fraud'
Perhaps I should have written Social housing tenancy fraud is being tackled aggressively - which it is.
Those involved in unlawful subletting go to great lengths to prevent discovery. There are clearly costs involved investigating this.
The exemplary damages are not really based on any loss. They are exactly what they are designed for. To punish and deter.
"Exemplary damages are essentially different from ordinary damages. The object of damages in the usual sense of the term is to compensate. The object of exemplary damages is to punish and deter...Exemplary damages can properly be awarded whenever it is necessary to teach a wrongdoer that tort does not pay. Lord Devlin.0 -
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
Oh but they will, believe me!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
If you are serious about surrendering the flat then forget about the hostel. Hand the keys back to the council officer directly, along with a signed and dated letter saying you hereby surrender the keys to their property and are no longer in occupation, and get confirmation in writing that they have received the keys and letter. In the meantime I suggest staying put whilst you look for somewhere else, change the front door lock in case the tenant's family try to get in, and for goodness' sake start paying the equivalent of rent on that card NOW so the arrears don't get any bigger.could I ask for a reduction of the charges on the ground that I am actually cooperating to give them the flat back?
If you stand up in court and ask for a discount on the grounds that you've handed the keys back you'll be doing yourself no favours at all. You just sound like a money-grabbing chancer. You need to think differently. If you make contact with the council, keep communicating with them, emphasise that you are actively seeking a new home, make the required 'rent' payments on the card from now on, cooperate fully and make sure to show up and speak in court (especially if the other defendants don't turn up, which is quite likely), I would say both the council and the magistrate will be more likely to view you as the only reasonable person out of the three defendants and - this is the important bit - as a result they may be inclined to believe you when you say you've been paying rent to the tenant's family in good faith because you misunderstood the situation, and could they please therefore consider your request that they seek your share of the damages from the tenant instead. Surely that's the discount for good behaviour you should really be aiming for?
Even if you hand the keys back before the hearing, make sure you still attend court. It's the only chance you have of stopping the council being awarded the full amount of damages (an amount now in excess of £2400, and increasing every week) against you, and you're going to need every scrap of evidence you can find to prove to the court that you've been paying rent to the tenant's family since December. You also need to make sure that the council's legal costs are not awarded against you, as that could cost you thousands more.0 -
I think you've misunderstood my post.
I never said that the OP has committed 'benefit fraud'
Perhaps I should have written Social housing tenancy fraud is being tackled aggressively - which it is.
Those involved in unlawful subletting go to great lengths to prevent discovery. There are clearly costs involved investigating this.
The exemplary damages are not really based on any loss. They are exactly what they are designed for. To punish and deter.
"Exemplary damages are essentially different from ordinary damages. The object of damages in the usual sense of the term is to compensate. The object of exemplary damages is to punish and deter...Exemplary damages can properly be awarded whenever it is necessary to teach a wrongdoer that tort does not pay. Lord Devlin.
It's commonly referred to as the same as it's all often linked.
Happy to concede that minor point, so social housing tenancy fraud.
The council do pursue tenants who are involved in this. Their tenants. Not the people who get the sublet property. Usually these are used by the council to help detect the fraud commited by their tenants.
Even if isolated cases of the sub tenant being pursued are on the rise. The OP is not currently being pursued for this through the courts.
There are no claimed of exemplary damages (your explanation will be handy to anyone who doesnt know what this is.)
The damages being sought are for unauthorised use of the property, which in this case have been estimated as a loss of £145 pw, rather than punitive damages of £145.
To be honest either way, whether punitive or loss based. They are pursuing a set figure. Which they will likely get. I think the argument is pointless.0 -
HereBeDragons wrote: »Oh but they will, believe me!
If you are serious about surrendering the flat then forget about the hostel. Hand the keys back to the council officer directly, along with a signed and dated letter saying you hereby surrender the keys to their property and are no longer in occupation, and get confirmation in writing that they have received the keys and letter. In the meantime I suggest staying put whilst you look for somewhere else, change the front door lock in case the tenant's family try to get in, and for goodness' sake start paying the equivalent of rent on that card NOW so the arrears don't get any bigger.
Ask away. But I fail to see how giving back a flat you have absolutely no right to be occupying magically reduces the financial loss the council has suffered due to the lack of rent they have received since December.
If you stand up in court and ask for a discount on the grounds that you've handed the keys back you'll be doing yourself no favours at all. You just sound like a money-grabbing chancer. You need to think differently. If you make contact with the council, keep communicating with them, emphasise that you are actively seeking a new home, make the required 'rent' payments on the card from now on, cooperate fully and make sure to show up and speak in court (especially if the other defendants don't turn up, which is quite likely), I would say both the council and the magistrate will be more likely to view you as the only reasonable person out of the three defendants and - this is the important bit - as a result they may be inclined to believe you when you say you've been paying rent to the tenant's family in good faith because you misunderstood the situation, and could they please therefore consider your request that they seek your share of the damages from the tenant instead. Surely that's the discount for good behaviour you should really be aiming for?
Even if you hand the keys back before the hearing, make sure you still attend court. It's the only chance you have of stopping the council being awarded the full amount of damages (an amount now in excess of £2400, and increasing every week) against you, and you're going to need every scrap of evidence you can find to prove to the court that you've been paying rent to the tenant's family since December. You also need to make sure that the council's legal costs are not awarded against you, as that could cost you thousands more.
I see your point. Thank you. I am seeing sense now, this whole thing has clouded my judgment0 -
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'
Sorry, I disagree. What court action are they going to take against OP, save for seeking possession of the flat and payment of the unpaid 'rent'? I've been through this exact court process myself (as someone who genuinely did not realise I was renting a council property from a tenant subletting without consent) and just as in the OP's case I was named as the second defendant, whilst the tenant was the first defendant. There was no way I was prepared to go to court and give evidence against the tenant without the full support of the council, and I had lengthy correspondence with their specialist housing officer to clarify my legal position and make sure I understood what could happen as a result of the tenant subletting to me, and what charges I might be liable for.
All along, it was emphasised that it was the tenant in trouble, not me, and as long as I cooperated and paid the use and occupation charges (also referred to as damages for trespass) when the Notice to Quit to the tenant expired, a sum which by no coincidence was exactly equivalent to the rent due on the property from that time onwards, and as long as I surrendered the property by the repossession date set by the court, no further action could be taken against me. And indeed no further action did take place. The officer was so nice she even contacted the local police station to alert them to the fact that the tenant was highly likely to attempt an illegal eviction - which is exactly what happened. The police were of course useless when I called them during the attempted illegal eviction, but the officer really did her best to protect me as much as she could and make sure the tenant didn't regain possession of the flat before the hearing date.
Look at it from the council's point of view: if they get an unauthorised occupant to court to give evidence that the tenant no longer resides there and was subletting without permission, they will get their property back. Why would an unauthorised occupant agree to do that if the council was going to then take punitive action against them further down the line, when the tenant was the one who broke the rules? It doesn't make sense.In the end, 'Linda' will lose her flat and quite rightly so.0 -
HereBeDragons wrote: »Sorry, I disagree. What court action are they going to take against OP, save for seeking possession of the flat and payment of the unpaid 'rent'? I've been through this exact court process myself (as someone who genuinely did not realise I was renting a council property from a tenant subletting without consent) and just as in the OP's case I was named as the second defendant, whilst the tenant was the first defendant. There was no way I was prepared to go to court and give evidence against the tenant without the full support of the council, and I had lengthy correspondence with their specialist housing officer to clarify my legal position and make sure I understood what could happen as a result of the tenant subletting to me, and what charges I might be liable for.
All along, it was emphasised that it was the tenant in trouble, not me, and as long as I cooperated and paid the use and occupation charges (also referred to as damages for trespass) when the Notice to Quit to the tenant expired, a sum which by no coincidence was exactly equivalent to the rent due on the property from that time onwards, and as long as I surrendered the property by the repossession date set by the court, no further action could be taken against me. And indeed no further action did take place. The officer was so nice she even contacted the local police station to alert them to the fact that the tenant was highly likely to attempt an illegal eviction - which is exactly what happened. The police were of course useless when I called them during the attempted illegal eviction, but the officer really did her best to protect me as much as she could and make sure the tenant didn't regain possession of the flat before the hearing date.
Look at it from the council's point of view: if they get an unauthorised occupant to court to give evidence that the tenant no longer resides there and was subletting without permission, they will get their property back. Why would an unauthorised occupant agree to do that if the council was going to then take punitive action against them further down the line, when the tenant was the one who broke the rules? It doesn't make sense.
100% agreed. I honestly felt great when the flat I had lived in was returned to the council. There are so many people in desperate housing need in the UK, it makes me sick knowing that some of those with the rare privilege of having a council tenancy seek only to abuse it and profit from it.
Perfect.
And to clarify trespass is a tort law. - based upon loss.0 -
Perfect.
And to clarify trespass is a tort law. - based upon loss.
so have I committed trespass? it still falls under civil law, not criminal, I hope? could trespass be considered squatting?
Moving out on Sunday, if anyone has any recommendation for a dirt cheap hostel I started this thread:
[FONT="]https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/68622406#Comment_68622406[/FONT]0 -
so have I committed trespass? it still falls under civil law, not criminal, I hope? could trespass be considered squatting?
Moving out on Sunday, if anyone has any recommendation for a dirt cheap hostel I started this thread:
[FONT="]https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/68622406#Comment_68622406[/FONT]
Yes tresspass is civil law.
Squatting in a residential property is criminal, it doesnt require a court to have you removed, the police can just arrest you.0 -
Yes tresspass is civil law.
Squatting in a residential property is criminal, it doesnt require a court to have you removed, the police can just arrest you.
But just to clarify, I am not squatting, am I ?
what if the tenant can really nasty, as HereBeDragons pointed out, and they start saying I have squatted? even though yes, I do have the bank statements which prove I paid them0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply

Categories
- All Categories
- 352.1K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.5K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.2K Spending & Discounts
- 245.1K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.7K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.4K Life & Family
- 258.9K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards