Eviction court fees

Comms69

How can you not have house insurance??!!...

Michpalms

I do have insurance but just not the level of cover that pays missed rental payments and court fees.

Comms69

Michpalms wrote: »

I do have insurance but just not the level of cover that pays missed rental payments and court fees.

Oh I see, I thought you meant not enough to cover arson. Which I would rectify today, whether a threat had been made or not.

Flossied

Hi I’ve recently gone through similar action but the judge actually wrote on the court order that I should keep all the deposit, on top of the arrears, so maybe check the wording written on the order of possession about what you’ve been awarded.

If taking him to court was £325 and issueing a warrant for possession was £121 (in my case!) I’m assuming the deposit may not cover much after arrears.

saajan_12

Michpalms wrote: »

No it doesn't mention court fees, definitely one to add for the future ��only financial loss or expenditure as a result of breach.

Does your contract state they must leave if you serve them valid notice that expires or a court grants a possession order though? They have breached that term, so the court fees are a financial loss as a result of breach. So I think you can legitimately deduct them from deposit.

Comms69

saajan_12 wrote: »

Does your contract state they must leave if you serve them valid notice that expires or a court grants a possession order though? They have breached that term, so the court fees are a financial loss as a result of breach. So I think you can legitimately deduct them from deposit.

Such a clause would be invalid.

Whether you can deduct costs from the deposit or not is largely irrelevant. If the tenant doesn’t pay they get a CCJ.

saajan_12

Comms69 wrote: »

Such a clause would be invalid.

Absolutely not. Thats the entire basis for eviction court costs to be awarded against the tenant: while tenancy law doesn't force a tenant to leave by the expiry of a landlord's notice, they have (usually) contractually agreed to and so the LL can claim costs of enforcing this ie court costs.

Comms69 wrote: »

Whether you can deduct costs from the deposit or not is largely irrelevant. If the tenant doesn’t pay they get a CCJ.

Deducting from the deposit or not is entirely relevant, getting a CCJ is not directly helpful to the damaged party unless they can collect on it. Deducting from deposit is by far the cheapest and quickest way do to this.
If LL can deduct -> they get the £x for court costs
If LL can't deduct -> spend more money enforcing a CCJ which will often result in no recovery.

Comms69

saajan_12 wrote: »

Absolutely not. Thats the entire basis for eviction court costs to be awarded against the tenant: while tenancy law doesn't force a tenant to leave by the expiry of a landlord's notice, they have (usually) contractually agreed to and so the LL can claim costs of enforcing this ie court costs.



Deducting from the deposit or not is entirely relevant, getting a CCJ is not directly helpful to the damaged party unless they can collect on it. Deducting from deposit is by far the cheapest and quickest way do to this.
If LL can deduct -> they get the £x for court costs
If LL can't deduct -> spend more money enforcing a CCJ which will often result in no recovery.

Court costs are often awarded against a losing party, except in certain cases, and the contract has nothing to do with this.

Contractual clauses can not override the law and therefore these clauses are invalid and legally don’t exist.

Most tenants would rather pay than have a CCJ.

martindow

If there is a shortfall I would make a claim and if this ends up with the ex-tenant getting a CCJ because they don't pay, so be it. You probably won't get your money but it will make it harder for this person to mess other landlords around in the future - a CCJ will make most landlords think twice about offering a tenancy.