Burglary at flat - Landlord/Agent liable?

Guest101

SJI85 wrote: »

I should also say that my landlord is a solicitor. A Director of a small local firm. I'm sure she'll have some expertise in the matter...

She might do. But since:
1: She's not acting in her capacity as a solicitor
2: She is under no obligation to be truthful with you


So actually she knows what she can and cant enforce, but has no problem making 'suggestions' to you


She also might not be a specialist in housing and tenancy laws....


It is speculation, admittedly. I only have my certainty that the back door was locked when I last checked it and I live alone (so no one else, beside the landlord, could have used it). Plus the burglary was very "clean", as if they knew the layout. If the door was locked this leaves forced entry (but with no or only subtle signs of forced entry), the agents left the door unlocked, or previous tenant.


If the poor locks and doors are not enough to show the landlord is liable and my case has no chance, than fair enough. What I am asking now is what have I got to lose by not paying the rent? From what I can see: -


1) Landlord/agent is more picky about other aspects of the property and could take even more from the deposit - a possibility but I don't see what they can find. If this happens then it happens.


2) Bad reference - not an issue as I will be living with my fianc!e and be a homeowner soon.


3) Eviction - Only have a few weeks of the tenancy left and can move into my fianc!e's tomorrow if necessary.






Sorry to hear about that. I hope your losses were not great. The embarrassment I felt at the time, and feeling I was wasting the officer's time. Only to then realise that forced entry can be subtle, not to mention previous tenants. I guess I'll never know.

I'm really not sure what to make of this thread

HappyMJ

If your landlord pursues you for non payment of rent you will have to pay court costs as well. If you are as poor as you say you are (not being able to afford to secure the door yourself) you won't be able to pay the judgement in 30 days and get a CCJ recorded against you. It's quite a risky move.

SJI85

HappyMJ wrote: »

If your landlord pursues you for non payment of rent you will have to pay court costs as well. If you are as poor as you say you are (not being able to afford to secure the door yourself) you won't be able to pay the judgement in 30 days and get a CCJ recorded against you. It's quite a risky move.

I am not poor now. As mentioned I started a decent job this minth so I can pay the costs if necceassary.

But woulsn't she just take it from the deposit rather than pursuing it through court? Assuming the DPS find in her favour?

Pixie5740

That depends if you've caused any damage to the property during the tenancy. Your deposit might not be enough to cover both arrears and damages.

When you move into your new home make sure you change the barrels of the locks and get some contents insurance.

SJI85

Guest101 wrote: »

I'm really not sure what to make of this thread

When I say she is a solucitor I do not mean that this will go on my favour or she can represent me. Far from it!

She is not a specialist in tennancy law. Personal litigation is her area....again I was not suggesting she could offer support.

HappyMJ

SJI85 wrote: »

I am not poor now. As mentioned I started a decent job this minth so I can pay the costs if necceassary.

But woulsn't she just take it from the deposit rather than pursuing it through court? Assuming the DPS find in her favour?

If you agree for the disputed amount to be offset against your deposit yes but then you are effectively not getting anything.

I thought your aim was to pay reduced rent and get the deposit returned in full so you could replace the lost goods.

The deposit is supposed to be for cleaning, damages and redecoration costs. The landlord could agree to return the deposit in full and pursue a claim for unpaid rent in court.

If you have clauses in your tenancy agreement charging you interest and fees on unpaid rent this could still become quite costly.

SJI85

Pixie5740 wrote: »

That depends if you've caused any damage to the property during the tenancy. Your deposit might not be enough to cover both arrears and damages.

When you move into your new home make sure you change the barrels of the locks and get some contents insurance.

Obviously but I am confident there is no damage. I have taken care of the flat and I am a good tenant. There is only a slight stain on the carpet of the bedroom which I will remove. Always had deposits returned in full in the past and do not see this property as being different.

My partner already lives there (with locks and burglar alarm) and I am aware I need contents insurance. That flat was the only property I have had where I have not had contents insurance. I mitigated my losses by keeping most valuable goods elsewhere. Despite what this thread might suggest I am security aware. I was just unable to do things like change the locks andvwas led to believe they had been changed.

thesaint

HappyMJ wrote: »

The deposit is supposed to be for cleaning, damages and redecoration costs. The landlord could agree to return the deposit in full and pursue a claim for unpaid rent in court.

Not sure if serious?

HappyMJ wrote: »

If you have clauses in your tenancy agreement charging you interest and fees on unpaid rent this could still become quite costly.

Interest is minimal, and "fees", well. Never happen.

SJI85

HappyMJ wrote: »

I thought your aim was to pay reduced rent and get the deposit returned in full so you could replace the lost goods.

The deposit is supposed to be for cleaning, damages and redecoration costs. The landlord could agree to return the deposit in full and pursue a claim for unpaid rent in court.

If you have clauses in your tenancy agreement charging you interest and fees on unpaid rent this could still become quite costly.[/ QUOTE]

I would like to pay reduced rent hope the landlord attempts to recover that rentvthrpugh the deposit. I will then wait and see the DPS' decision. If they find in my favour then great. If mot I am no worse off than I would have been.

There are no additional charges or intetest in my contract. I checked.

SnooksNJ

SJI85 wrote: »

I should also say that my landlord is a solicitor. A Director of a small local firm. I'm sure she'll have some expertise in the matter...





It is speculation, admittedly. I only have my certainty that the back door was locked when I last checked it and I live alone (so no one else, beside the landlord, could have used it). Plus the burglary was very "clean", as if they knew the layout. If the door was locked this leaves forced entry (but with no or only subtle signs of forced entry), the agents left the door unlocked, or previous tenant.

I thought most burglaries were "clean" because Burglars know that the playstation is located by the TV and jewellery is in the bedroom.