Very strange tenant situation....

G_M

Murphybear wrote: »

Interesting point though. EH said it was a criminal offence
Shelter said it was either a criminal offence or a civil offence, it was up to the police
The police (Devon and Cornwall on this occasion) said it was a civil offence and they could not deal with it.

Actually it is both!

But enforcement of the criminal aspect falls to Trading Standards/EH I believe, not to the police, hence their poor understanding of the law in this area.

Murphybear

G_M wrote: »

Actually it is both!

But enforcement of the criminal aspect falls to Trading Standards/EH I believe, not to the police, hence their poor understanding of the law in this area.

Thanks for clarifying that. We were getting confused with seemingly conflicted information.

Naz2111

an update on this situation:

The Landlord has served a Section 8 Notice to Quit, citing grounds 10, 11 and 12.

They seem to have switched the electric back on. They are refusing to reinstate the broadband. The rental agreement clearly states that "unlimited broadband" is included in the rental price. The Landlord when queried on it said they are going to keep the broadband off due to the "arrears" regardless of whether this breaches the rental agreement or not.

Interesting attitude.

G_M

The continued removal of broadband, combined with the S8, is clearly a breach of the Protection from Eviction Act 1977 as previously advised.

What have Trading Standards/Private Tenancyy Officerr replied to you?

When the S8 goes to court, provided you can show evidence of having paid, there is no way the judge will evict. Even if you do NOT have evidence, judges don't like evicting via ground 12 unless the circumstances are extreme.

Naz2111

We've not yet spoken to the Private Tenancy Officer. Since the electric is now back on we thought the rest would be beyond the Private Tenancy Officer's remit.

But, having read through the entire rental agreement, it does clearly state that the broadband is included within the monthly rental price. There's no loophole, it absolutely says that the broadband, along with the fuel and water, is included. So I'm taken aback that this arrogant company are happy to confirm in writing that they are keeping the broadband off and don't care if it breaches the rental agreement. How would that stand up in court then?

The Direct Debit matter was referred to the Financial Ombudsman Service by my brother.
The response so far is that the tenant doesn't even have a relationship or contract with the third party collecting the Direct Debits and that given that the tenant has provided proof of payment, the burden is on the Landlord and/or the 3rd party to prove otherwise.

Again, the Landlord' attitude is "yeah, whatever. Here's your Notice to Quit."

It strikes me as an absolutely atrocious attitude. Particularly when a pretty lengthy track record of being a flawless tenant is taken into account.

G_M wrote: »

The continued removal of broadband, combined with the S8, is clearly a breach of the Protection from Eviction Act 1977[/URL] as previously advised.

What have Trading Standards/Private Tenancyy Officerr replied to you?

When the S8 goes to court, provided you can show evidence of having paid, there is no way the judge will evict. Even if you do NOT have evidence, judges don't like evicting via ground 12 unless the circumstances are extreme.

diggingdude

has anyone moved into a similar property there recently paying more rent? sounds like they want to get a tenant out regardless and replace with someone who will pay more?

Naz2111

The rents for all their properties seem to have suddenly gone up by around £100 to £400 per month for all new tenants

diggingdude wrote: »

has anyone moved into a similar property there recently paying more rent? sounds like they want to get a tenant out regardless and replace with someone who will pay more?

G_M

Naz2111 wrote: »

We've not yet spoken to the Private Tenancy Officer. Since the electric is now back on we thought the rest would be beyond the Private Tenancy Officer's remit.

But, having read through the entire rental agreement, it does clearly state that the broadband is included within the monthly rental price. .

It's not the breach of contract that makes it of potential relevance to Trading Standards/PRO, it's the illegal eviction as per the Act I quoted. Again

(3)If any person with intent to cause the residential occupier of any premises—

(a)to give up the occupation of the premises or any part thereof; or

(b)to refrain from exercising any right or pursuing any remedy in respect of the premises or part thereof;

does acts calculated to interfere with the peace or comfort of the residential occupier or members of his household, or persistently withdraws or withholds services reasonably required for the occupation of the premises as a residence, he shall be guilty of an offence.

The combination of the withdrawal of BB, + the S8 indicates a breach of the Act.