Landlord in breach of human rights

zenech

In short
My friend lives since few years in a commercial property, 'art studios' in Leeds with other 100+ units, all occupied.
The agency of the landlord have all the tenants, mostly students or young artists, to sign a yearly contract that waives the rights of housing stating that it is forbidden to live in and in the case of breach of contract the tenant will be evicted.
Facts are that:
the agency KNOWS that people are living in (and it is provable interviewing tenants that spoke to the agent at the moment of stipulating the contract);
the rent applied is closer to residential than commercial, with unfair yearly increments;
the building has poor or no services for the community and a general lack of hygene (due to the commercial nature of the contracts);
the building presents all sorts of illegal connections, like water, wastewater messed up, electrical wires and leaks from ceilings;
some of the units have been made recently presumibly without the permit of the council;
tenants are forced to sign the above mention contract in which they waive all their rights.
My question is:
would it be possible in your opinion to humble down the agent legally without destroying the possibility of people to live in, restore their right to shelter, that is a human right, rather than be subjected to an abusive and bully contract, to the attitude of the agent (who's a gangster-blackmailer) and to rents that are closer to residential fares with no rights? How?
Cheers

mrginge

Please give us the address of this property

Arleen

zenech wrote: »

would it be possible in your opinion to humble down the agent legally without destroying the possibility of people to live in, restore their right to shelter, that is a human right, rather than be subjected to an abusive and bully contract, the blackmail of the agent and rents that are closer to residential fares? How?Cheers

No. If the place is not habitable then if gov will get involved people living there will have to go and live somewhere else (most likely).

zenech

not yet. we need to restore the rights of 100+ people, rather than have the situation be closed down, as it is possible just with a couple of phone calls

Arleen

zenech wrote: »

not yet. we need to restore the rights of 100+ people, rather than have the situation be closed down, as it is possible just with a couple of phone calls

Unless you have resources to house 100+ people, you won't be able to do that.

kinger101

Nobody has been forced to sign anything. If they had, the contracts would be invalid. If people choose to pay excessive amounts to live illegally in squalid conditions, that's their own business.

zenech

Ok thanks I get your point of view.
Can you tell me what are the responsibilities of the agent?
Can he keep on being a gangster, knowing people are living in but evicting them if they 'get caught'?
Surely my friend won't let his business survive if he has to move out for rent increasing.

Miss_Samantha

It isn't a human right to reside in commercial premises. What a cheek.

Cakeguts

The point is that these are commercial units that people should not be living in. It is down to the individual tenants to not live in these units. You rent the unit to run a business not to live in them. You cannot force an agent or a landlord to make rents possible for anyone to live in a commercial unit that they should not be living in. Your friend and the other 100 people need to move out and rent a residential property. What do you expect the agent to do? No one should be living in these units. The tenants have made a choice to ignore the rules of the leases and live in them. No one is going to make it easier for them to do that.

zenech

If people wouldn't live there the rent would be much cheaper. Who would rent a storage at the 3rd floor for 600-700 quid a month?
The agent is taking advantage of the economical situation of the people living there, and I tell you, he would deserve to have all the space emptied and squatted, and he prosecuted for some gangsterism.
It is going to happen, anyway..
But if he wasn't so greedy to expect a yearly increase and renewal of the contract and not so hypocrite to pretend strictly he doesnt know people living here in their face(which I think it can be a criminal offense related to spergiury in case of somebody getting hurt in the building), the benefit would be mutual, that would be allright to find a turn around to the law, letting this 100 people CHOOSE where to live (if they choose a rubbish bin, it's their choice). The agent should just fly down, being in the position of having a big advantage from an illegal situation.

GDB2222

What you are saying is that these are in reality residential units, which have been rented on what purport to be commercial leases.

You could bring a court case that, for example, your deposit has not been protected in one of the government schemes. You might win. Who knows?

This has nothing to do with human rights, btw.