Estate Agent has emptied my flat

fairy_lights

Any update on this OP?

G_M

Art_Contrary wrote: »

Is that enforceable?! :eek:

Yes.

Normally these clauses reflect the terms of the owner/landlord's buildings insurance.

Unoccupied properties are more likely to be burgled. If there is a water leak, which goes undetected for some time, damage can be extensive. etc. So the LL's insurance will be invalidated if the property is left unoccupied for more than (typically) 45 days (or it may be 30, or 60.

so LL puts a corresponding clause in the tenancy agreement. Perfectly fair and enforcable,.

It may be that the insurance remains valid if the property is visted/checked once a week (or more/less frequently) and/or the water is turned off etc. If the T informs the LL they are going on holiday for 6 weeks, the LL can then ensure he complies with the insurance requirements.

mp3duck

anything new to update us with OP?

thesaint

The Police wouldn't be interested because there was no crime committed.
That much is clear. They have better things to do.

mp3duck

thesaint wrote: »

The Police wouldn't be interested because there was no crime committed.
That much is clear. They have better things to do.

Items have been taken and disposed off.. I'd say that is theft, and therefore a crime..Irrelevant how or why entry was gained..

fairy_lights

thesaint wrote: »

The Police wouldn't be interested because there was no crime committed.
That much is clear. They have better things to do.

How can stealing possessions from someones house not be a crime?

neneromanova

Just looking at unlawful eviction (hopefully you could class it as that) I found this case. http://www.brabners.com/blogs/housing-%26-regeneration/%C2%A31400-week-compensation-unlawful-eviction

Don't ask for a measly £800. you will need to replace these items so I would ask that they be replaced on a like for like basis so a new laptop of the same spec, amount of food, freezer etc. Then decide how important the sentimental things were to you. Mother toe nail clippings, not really important. Mothers wedding ring, passed down generations, irreplaceable (maybe find something like it for value).

Good Luck

davidmcn

mp3duck wrote: »

Items have been taken and disposed off.. I'd say that is theft, and therefore a crime..Irrelevant how or why entry was gained..

fairy_lights wrote: »

How can stealing possessions from someones house not be a crime?

Read the definition of "theft". This sounds more like a c!ck-up.

thesaint

mp3duck wrote: »

Items have been taken and disposed off.. I'd say that is theft, and therefore a crime..Irrelevant how or why entry was gained..

You'd say it was theft, and you'd be wrong.

There was also no illegal eviction. Please put away the pitchforks and deal with it sensibly.

densol_2

Simply taking someones property and then disposing of it doesn't necessarily amount to theft. Theft requires DISHONESTY. Now looking at the facts can dishonesty be established ? Well if it was just a bundle of clothes and some stuff in the freezer - the agent/cleaner would argue they believed the property " abandoned " and thus disposed of the items ( of course we have tenant rights breached which is different to a criminal offence )

However ...... Bearing in mind a lap top was left - the argument of abandonment is far far weaker and in fact the inference will be towards theft of the items. It's tantamount to " theft by finding " .... When people find things in the street - they " could " be abandoned like an old pair of shoes and the defence of abandonment raised, but if say a wallet and money found, abandonment is far less convincing and dishonesty comes into the equation.