Case against former landlord?

G_M

lincroft1710 wrote: »

I think the consensus is "no, you don't"

This continues to be the concensus......

LL ignored all my requests to be reimbursed for the cost of the stolen items. I would like that back.

If you can prove the LL stole your items, then
a) the police can prosecute and
b) you could sue for the value of the items
The fact the police are not pursuing the matter suggests sufficient evidence is lacking. True - the burden of proof for a criminal conviction is higher than for a civil claim for damages ('beyond all reasonable doubt' Vs 'on the balance of probobilities'), but going on what you've posted here so far, you have no evidence at all that the LL was the thief.

Maybe I understated the condition of the wall but it truly was dangerous, it was as if the extension was separating itself from the original building and the LL had no intentions of fixing it. Fire alarms should have been provided, they ignored my request for them, a basic safety issue.
I guess this is catch 22 situation. I notified the council a month before I was leaving but apparently in my area this is not enough time for the council to act.

All true. Councils are very under-funded and stretched these days. Blame.... well, the Tories for cutting council funding? Labour for over-spending whilst in power? The banks for the financial crisis? Whatever - end result is lack of man-power.... But had you stayed, and pursued the matter, you might well have got improvements.

If I had notified them any earlier would the LL retaliated and made my life difficult whilst I was locked in my tenancy?

You'd have had the protection of The Deregulation Act 2015 (S33) which protects AST tenants if their tenancy either started, or was renewed, after 1/10/15 and they report repairing issues (via the correct process).

If the council had acted the LL would have at least been reprimanded but now?

More than 'reprimanded'. An Enforcement Notice could have been served on him, forcing him to make specified improvements.

Why should the LL get away with being willingly negligent? Will the council still keep a record?

I doubt it. Unless the next tenant takes action where you failed to, the LL will 'get away' with it.

HampshireH

How long ago was this?

I don't get posts like this. As someone who doesn't know you it reads as if you want compo but that you really need to move on in life & see the fact you are else where now as a bonus.

You chose not to deal with the issues whilst living there. Any judge you take whatever case you think you may have will ask why you stayed if life was so bad there with so many things consistently going wrong.

It won't be 10 minutes either and it won't be cheap. It will be a very time consuming, draining and could be costly experience. If you lose what next because going to court and losing face will be a lot harder to swallow.

HampshireH

Aside of sounding quite bitter it does sound like you have already made up your mind what you intend to do regardless of the advice others have given you (a presumption yes but based on your responses)

PDodd

I moved out of the property at the end of March.
As the council didn’t contact me in that time I thought there might be another avenue available before it was too late. Obviously now it seems this isn’t the case. The change to the common area and thefts only happened six weeks before the end of my tenancy by which time I was already looking for somewhere new to live.

LL isn’t a person per say but a local company, the company is listed as the LL on the tenancy agreement with several people to contact within the company for various queries.

I wasn’t given any notice by the LL that the common area’s use was to be changed it just happened one day. Previously the common area was private, secure and for tenants only. It was surrounded on all sides, there was no way in apart the entrance door which needed a key. The property goes up a hillside so although the window was open a small amount you would have needed to be eight foot tall to have been able to reach it. An object was not in its usual place, so I suppose they stood on it. I was also actually in the property at the time the items were taken. Since then I always kept the windows (even the upstairs one because of smoke) that faced the common area closed.

In regards to the stolen post. The letterbox for the flats was not on the front door of the individual flats but on the entrance door of the common area which you had to walk through to gain access to the flats. Two items I had ordered before the common area’s use was changed but were delivered after when the employees had use of it. They were small items that fit through the letterbox, a third item I had pre-ordered was dispatched later again put through the letterbox and subsequently stolen. After that I simply stopped ordering online whilst the post was not secure but new tenants had moved into the vacant flat during that period and had the same issue.

The Police were interested but it was not a simple case. There were around twenty employees who used the common area on a daily basis, anyone of them could have stolen the items and each of them denied it. Because no one was forthcoming and there was no CCTV the Police gave the LL a warning. That was when the postboxes were installed but no apology or reimbursement ever came from the LL.

HampshireH

Your LL isn't responsible to reimburse lost/allegedly stolen items. Ever. At all. That would be whomever allegedly stole it.

Anyway good luck with your legal case. Do update us on its success.

PDodd

Lost - Nothing was lost.
Allegedly stolen - You are aware it is a criminal offence to waste Police time?

Police said LL has a duty of care to tenants which includes protection from theft. LL allowed the employee/thief to have access to the property. Which is why the Police gave LL a warning, if the thefts continued there would have been further action. Only viable option for LL was to either remove employees access to common area or install postboxes. Police told me to contact them if anymore thefts occurred and said regrettably nothing could be done for the items that had already been stolen due to the lack of CCTV. But of course you know better than the Police….

AdrianC

Putting a postbox up for each flat protects against post being taken from just inside the front door of the building, before it's collected by the tenant.

It doesn't do the first thing about post being stolen from within a flat, through a window left open by the tenant...

The police have zero evidence as to who is responsible for the theft. If they did have, they'd be looking at a prosecution.

PDodd

That is exactly where the items of post were stolen from, so the postboxes were useful in that regard.

Again I was in the property when the items were taken off the window sill. Am I not allowed to open windows whilst I am inside my home? Should I have really been prepared for someone to take something from an open window that was eight foot off the ground? Considering that in my tenancy agreement it is stated the common area is for tenants only and no prior notice of its change was given.
But you are right the postboxes don’t protect from that kind of theft. I did keep the windows shut after the theft.

The Police did issue the LL with a warning.

Dorian1958

I have got a neighbour who is 6 feet 10 inches tall. Maybe he stood on his tiptoes and reached up to your 8 foot open window and stole from you? Should I report him to the police as a suspect for you, or do you want to move on?

davidmcn

PDodd wrote: »

Police said LL has a duty of care to tenants which includes protection from theft.

Hmm. I'm not sure that there is such a general duty of care, and if there is, it's a civil law matter. Which the average copper isn't going to know much about, as it's nothing to do with them.

Which is why the Police gave LL a warning, if the thefts continued there would have been further action.

What sorts of "warning" and "action"? Did they think the LL was committing a crime? If so, what?

But of course you know better than the Police….

I'd say the knowledge here about landlord and tenant law is rather better than that of the police, yes.