Help... Notice of eviction

silvercar

franklee wrote:

As you have only been in the property two months it is clear that your landlord let the property to you long after he knew the lender was aiming for repossession. Personally I think that is vile and it is about time the law was changed to stop this.

I agree, though I guess the landlords only hope of keeping up with the payments was to let the property. Unfair on the tenant though.

franklee wrote:

As the landlord obviously did not have permission to let, how could he with the repossession so advanced,..

Unsure on this. The OP is the third tenant in the property apparently, so it could easily be that the landlord does have permission to let, in which case the property would either be sold after the AST has finished or with the property tenanted.

This is why it is very important for the OP to contact the lender (directly) and find out if the landlord had a BTL mortgage or permission to let. In any case it would be worthwhile to inform the lender that there is a tenant in the property.

I was watching (online) a property auction from Allsops last week. There were sadly many repossessions. Some were being sold with vacant possession but there were a surprising number being sold with tenants on recent ASTs.

Guy_Montag

Have you called shelter?

Or do you have household insurance, did you tick the box asking for legal cover?


I can't believe that after a possession order is issued the tenancy agreement still counts, but given the state of British tenancy laws, it probably does.

xxlittlemissxx

Guy_Montag wrote: »

Have you called shelter?

Or do you have household insurance, did you tick the box asking for legal cover?


I can't believe that after a possession order is issued the tenancy agreement still counts, but given the state of British tenancy laws, it probably does.

Yeh I tried to call shelter over the weekend but it was just constantly busy.

I know that's what I thought, but apparently if he's not in the wrong, and it is just a big mistake then it counts!

We only have contents insurance, not sure whats included as the other half did all that!

Guy_Montag

xxlittlemissxx wrote: »

Yeh I tried to call shelter over the weekend but it was just constantly busy.

I know that's what I thought, but apparently if he's not in the wrong, and it is just a big mistake then it counts!

We only have contents insurance, not sure whats included as the other half did all that!

Check tonight, you may have legal cover with your contents insurance, there's normally a box that you tick.

Keep trying Shelter this week, they may have more people on during the week.

Have you called the bailiffs? Do you have a number for them? Has there been anything from the mortgagee's lawyers?

Try these guys too for legal advice:
http://www.clsdirect.org.uk/index.jsp

BobProperty

xxlittlemissxx wrote: »

.... We have asked for something in writing as proof that they bailiffs are not going to be coming.....

Phone the court. That's where you will get the answer. What they say goes.

silvercar wrote: »

.....This is why it is very important for the OP to contact the lender (directly) and find out if the landlord had a BTL mortgage or permission to let. In any case it would be worthwhile to inform the lender that there is a tenant in the property......

They won't talk to you. You aren't anything to do with their contract with the landlord, so privacy and DPA and all that. They might note the detail that there is a tenant in the property but they certainly won't tell you what the agreement is between them and the landlord.

I agree with other posts too, no way the landlord is only 1 month in arrears, that isn't ground for possession so no court would have given it.

silvercar

bobproperty wrote:

They won't talk to you. You aren't anything to do with their contract with the landlord, so privacy and DPA and all that. They might note the detail that there is a tenant in the property but they certainly won't tell you what the agreement is between them and the landlord.

Interesting, they can write to a tenant but can't talk to them. I would have thought that they would be able to say whether they acknowledge OP as a tenant of the property.

There were definitely properties at auction last week with tenants on recent ASTs. The lenders must have informed the tenants that the property had been repossessed; that the rent should be paid to the lender/ receiver; that the property was being auctioned.

Somewhere in the small print of BTL mortgage agreements there must be a clause allowing for basic information to be given to the tenant in the event of repossession and the lender must have the power to inform the tenant if they acknowledge their right to live there under the AST.

xxlittlemissxx

I did try and speak to the lender yesterday, but as you guys said, they wouldnt talk to me.

The name of the bailiff is on the notice but not their number. I have considered ringing the courts and seeing if I can get a number off of them, but the bailiff can only be contact between 9-11am so due to work it is unlikely i am going to get a chance to contact him at those times!

Perhaps I will try the courts this afternoon and see what they say.

franklee

clutton wrote: »

franklkee - what on earth is the point in even considering suing someone who cannot pay his mortgage - he has no money - why bother ? - it will only cost the OP time, money and heartache - its best to move on with life and find somewhere better. and i know its not fair - who ever said life was meant to be ?

As Guy_Montag said. I would consider getting a charge put on the landlord's own home. He may also have equity in other BTL properties.

Just because someone doesn't have ready cash doesn't mean they've no assets. Of course he may have mortgaged everything up to the hilt but I'd make enquiries anyway.

Landlord's homes are at risk if they behave like xxlittlemissxx's one has.

silvercar wrote: »

Unsure on this. The OP is the third tenant in the property apparently, so it could easily be that the landlord does have permission to let, in which case the property would either be sold after the AST has finished or with the property tenanted.

No lender is going to give permission to let AFTER the court process for repossession is well underway. The landlord may have had permission in the past but I'd bet the repossession court hearing withdrew that. It must have been some time ago for the bailiffs to be due in less than two weeks.

BobProperty

silvercar wrote: »

Interesting, they can write to a tenant but can't talk to them. I would have thought that they would be able to say whether they acknowledge OP as a tenant of the property.....

If it is a BTL and the lender knows it, they might write to the tenant as a matter of course if they are going to repossess the place. The court will write anyway. Besides, you'd look a pratt in front of the judge if he spots it's a BTL, asks about the tenants and the lender hasn't done anything about them.
As to acknowledging the tenant, why do they need to? It's back to the contract being between landlord and lender. Yes, they expect there to be a tenant because it's a BTL. Who they are is between the Landlord and Tenant. The lender's only concern is the lender / landlord situation.

silvercar

I just thought a decent lender might have the courtesy to say to the tenant either "we are repossessing and you have to leave" or " we are repossessing but you may remain until the AST end date".